Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Rotorheads
Reload this Page >

The future of UK SAR, post SAR-H

Rotorheads A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss the things that affect them

The future of UK SAR, post SAR-H

Old 21st Feb 2013, 14:15
  #1181 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Omnipresent
Posts: 401
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Devil

Sounds like a high turnover of staff in ARCCK is proving problematic. No other MoD involvement.
Hedski is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2013, 14:51
  #1182 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: An ATC centre this side of the moon.
Posts: 1,160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Question.....once the deal is done and all SAR civvy operator will ARCC still be a military facility and carry out tasking as present. I had heard that the plan maybe to relocate to Swanick as have D&D.
fisbangwollop is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2013, 15:47
  #1183 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 10,270
Received 602 Likes on 262 Posts
Fis - yes I have heard that plan rumoured as well - however, there is an 'all your eggs in one basket' argument that goes against that as a plan, NATS, D and D and ARCCK all in one place - it only takes one JCB to cut through the power/comms and you are in trouble.

The ARCCK has a standby facility at the moment just in case and I presume that NATS and D and D have similar contingency plans (or business continuity plans in management-speak) - but blobbing everything up usually only appeals to bean-counters.

The ARCCK is something else the MCA have coveted - it is only 10 years or so ago that they wanted it co-located with the MRCC at Falmouth.

Will the future ARCCK be manned by military or civilian staff? If there is no requirement for mil in front-line SAR then possibly not - that begs the question of who will take on that job. The MCA don't pay their watch managers a lot of money and across the country they are a variable breed - some excellent, some less so.

One could argue that such a national facility, responsible for tasking of all SAR aeronautical assets, should be staffed with well paid and motivated, highly trained and experienced people but we will have to see what actually happens. It is to easy to view the ARCCK as a glorified call-centre which is what the MCA are likely to do given their current plan for reducing local expertise around the country.

Hedski - without more specific info I can't ask questions to give you an answer. I know the ARCCK don't deliberately f888 people about so there has to be an operational reason. Was it night in the mountains tasking? Given the current lack of NVG on civsar, that might be a possible reason for tasking a mil asset over a civ one?
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2013, 18:02
  #1184 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Inverness-shire, Ross-shire
Posts: 1,445
Received 16 Likes on 12 Posts
One of the factors in the future of the ARCC is whether the Royal Air Force will take the wider view of its role of protecting the British people, similar to what might be found in several neighbouring territories, or resist the draw of post-imperialist 21st century ideas like homeland defence and security and just sit on its hands waiting for the next trip to the desert.
jimf671 is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2013, 18:39
  #1185 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 3,680
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
My take on it (no-one else's):
All plans surrounding the ARCC will be suspended until after the scottish referendum. Makes sense.
Secondly IF the plan, then, is to move it (most likely), it will certainly move to MCA head office in Southampton and civilianise it. It is too much an odd ball to be left out there in siberia andrun by the mil. Get rid
Thomas coupling is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2013, 22:49
  #1186 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Inverness-shire, Ross-shire
Posts: 1,445
Received 16 Likes on 12 Posts
Joint working and resilience should be the guiding principles. We could go beyond the Norwegian JRCC model and collaborate across all of these islands regardless of EU member state borders. Operations where the border is almost meaningless, already happen. JRCC in Kinloss, Falmouth and Shannon for instance, staffed by air force/corps, coastguard, police and ambulance, is a possible model.

What do you think TC? Not very British?
jimf671 is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2013, 07:24
  #1187 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 10,270
Received 602 Likes on 262 Posts
Trying to get all the emergency services to talk to each other to provide the best and most expeditious response to a situation has long been the holy grail of contingency planners.

But, whilst it works very well once a Silver or Gold control room is established for a major incident, it doesn't work that brilliantly for run of the mill day to day tasks - mainly because of turf-wars, protocols and politics.
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2013, 07:34
  #1188 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Aarhus
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thumbs up

AW189 beats EC175 in UK SAR contest | Helihub - the Helicopter Industry Data Source
meanttobe is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2013, 09:16
  #1189 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 10,270
Received 602 Likes on 262 Posts
No surprise there then - so much for competition.
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2013, 11:19
  #1190 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: U.K.
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
there was a competition and the 189 won.....simples
Spanish Waltzer is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2013, 11:59
  #1191 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 10,270
Received 602 Likes on 262 Posts
But it wasn't the aircraft that won the competition it was the politics - AW played their favourite card which had nothing to do with the quality of the product and everything to do with empty promises.
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2013, 14:03
  #1192 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Inverness-shire, Ross-shire
Posts: 1,445
Received 16 Likes on 12 Posts
I am sensing a different approach. A large contract lasting many years in recessionary times is a risk management game. The main contract changes the game in a vital way: neither the contract nor the number of bases force two aircraft per base. So it's about one a/c per base plus spare aircraft dedicated to the contract. The S-92 is proven technology with plenty hours including SAR service. Neither the AW189 nor its competitor, the EC175, have operational hours and only a handful of prototypes exist, so they are unproven. Expect more spare aircraft in Lot 2. If the AW189 has more proven technology in vital aspects of the design: job done.
jimf671 is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2013, 18:59
  #1193 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 10,270
Received 602 Likes on 262 Posts
Best to ask the existing S92 flights if they need 2 ac per flight or could they manage with one plus a floating spare. If you go for a spare option then you also need to generate a floating crew to position it when required, assuming your crews are pared down to the minimum required to comply with the EU working time directive.

I can see that scheduled servicing is an easy thing to factor in but not having a full time second ac leaves you open to missing availability KPIs in the event of a non-scheduled problem.

Last edited by [email protected]; 22nd Feb 2013 at 18:59.
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2013, 10:27
  #1194 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
See what happens in Ireland with 5 aircraft covering 4 bases?

If you go for a spare option then you also need to generate a floating crew to position it when required, assuming your crews are pared down to the minimum required to comply with the EU working time directive.
People usually willing to pop in for a bit of OT when something needs re-positioning (another perk for you post-MilSAR ) assuming the WTD allows.

Last edited by Flounder; 23rd Feb 2013 at 10:30.
Flounder is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2013, 11:43
  #1195 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 147
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The future of UK SAR, post SAR-H

Jim and crab.
Please start looking for the positives and stop just looking for negatives.

From an article that that was posted only 3 pages back from the FT and a quote from AW.

AgustaWestland is gearing up for production of the first civilian helicopter designed and built in Britain for more than 30 years as the government weighs two bids to privatise its search and rescue service that would both employ about 10 of the company’s aircraft.

I'm not a maths professor but I'm pretty sure the 10 aircraft at 5 lot 2 bases equals 2 aircraft per base. Just smile a bit more guys! ;-)
snakepit is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2013, 11:55
  #1196 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: England
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 1 Post
You're on the wrong thread, Snake. This is the one where Jim and Crab tell us we'll all be doooomed. Wrong aircraft, wrong maker, wrong price, wrong paymaster, wrong Govt department, wrong politics, wrong uniforms, wrong radar, wrong training, wrong base locations, wrong tasking organisation. Please don't let the daylight in.

Last edited by Manchester; 23rd Feb 2013 at 12:02.
Manchester is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2013, 12:01
  #1197 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 147
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The future of UK SAR, post SAR-H

Nice one Manc you made me laugh
snakepit is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2013, 12:48
  #1198 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Cornwall
Age: 75
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Manc and Snake

Of course I smile a wry smile but most of all I sigh a sigh of frustration as all the heat generated by Crab and Jim is a tiny and meaningless tattoo on the backside of a general public that could care less. Nobody can see it and nobody cares.

It wont surprise me if, in 5 years time, the headlines are about how on earth can we afford the luxury of so many SAR assets that sit around all day drinking coffee and planning their next one hour of (waste of time) training. Burning up Jet A1 that costs a fortune and to what end?

The ignorant ones will be crying foul and asking why do they need training, can't we find people who are already trained. If they can't remember how to do their job from one day to the next then they can't be much good can they?

Shortage of cash can turn the average fair-minded public spirited and generous man in the street into a boorish and ignorant self-interested critic of all public spending that can in any way be considered an unnecessary luxury.

The future is not going to offer a comfortable ride.

G.
Geoffersincornwall is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2013, 13:53
  #1199 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: England
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 1 Post
I'm sorry Geoffers old chap - it's your age. I remember your father had the same wry smile and dissapointment over you and your plans. It happens every generation. It's called progress
Manchester is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2013, 14:29
  #1200 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Inverness-shire, Ross-shire
Posts: 1,445
Received 16 Likes on 12 Posts
Snake. I am hoping that this is a place where there are people with a lot of experience who understand most of the issues and where it's possible to come for a view on some of the fine detail that still needs attention. Of course, I expect people to mercilessly take the p155 a lot of the time but I'm an MR guy and a RAF guy so that's not new territory.

10 aircraft? Possible. Not likely. I am expecting a number between 7 and 10 that will probably have been thrashed out with the DfT several months ago.

AW are bu115h1tting, on the basis the bit of HM Gov that supports industry and the bit that buys SAR helicopter services are not able to communicate with each other. AW know what they are doing. They've been at it for decades.
jimf671 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.