Hedski

CAA FOI's fly with SAR crews as part of their inspection visits. They revalidate the TRI/TRE's separately. Oversight is present and has been since the first dedicated civ SAR unit in Manston in the 70's. Does that answer the question?

onesquaremetre

It would do if they had recent and extensive SAR experience and were able to check the performance of the aircrewmen.

jimf671

From bigglesbutler:
Do you think BB might know what he's talking about?

212man

He does (and still flies regularly with a SAR unit)

HeliComparator

Bristow also has its own Global Standards division, a separate business unit who role it is to set and monitor operational and engineering standards throughout the company. This includes crewmen, since a member of this unit is an ex and very experienced (and originally military) crewman. This unit is very independant and not profit motivated, and quite used to making themselves very unpopular when they find something wrong!

So compared to the mil, we have our own internal standards division as the mil do, but we also have external monitoring from CAA, some of whom as has been mentioned, are experienced SAR pilots.

Therefore those ranting about the lack of standards / supervision / checking are talking out of their .....

onesquaremetre

How does a CAA pilot check the performance of the aircrewmen? He's a pilot!

Bristow Global Standards = Self-policing. Who will determine that they've adequately replaced the capability of military SAR? That's what should be being reported back to the Transport Select Committee in a few years from now. Of course Bristow Global Standards are going to say their crews are up to the job. Why wouldn't they?

Thomas coupling

1m2

Give it a rest now. You've been on this forum for 6 months and never started a thread, just done the armchair judge bit on everyone and everything else.

In fact - you're not even a pilot perhaps that's why you can't grasp the way this industry police's itself?

onesquaremetre

Great answer. One that confirms the fears of many.

212man

1m2
How independent are CFS Standards then? Are trappers (or whatever they have now) not internal policing?

HeliComparator

Is im2 a journo? I think he and Pitts should get together - match made in heaven!

212man

I don't know, but maybe his username gives an idea of how wide his horizons are.....

snakepit

OSM
I think the replies you are getting represent the tediousness that everyone is feeling with your groundless argument. Why do I say groundless? It has already been pointed out to you that the success or otherwise of the UK SAR contract will in no way be measured by whether “the winch op” can do drums on one particular day of the year or whether “the winchman” can face forward during decks on a still wind day! Any more than you could accredit the success of otherwise to “the co-pilot” or indeed the “the captain” having a good or bad day during wets or on an LPC. It’s nearly a £2 billion contract and I am sure that there will be sufficient checks and balances to prove to Jonny public and the Transport select committee that things are as they should be.

You accuse contributors’ to this thread of ignoring your concerns but you continue to ignore their replies. Is the current so called "golden standard” SARF (RAF and Navy) externally validated or not! I know the answer to this as well as you do but though it’s been mentioned several times you choose ignore it. The answer of course (for those who don’t know) is NO. So how do you maintain such high standards and how are the public to believe that they are high and not just what your SAR STANEVAL claim (this is the very same argument you are using btw)? Moreover, as your standards are internally validated, how on earth do you propose that any independent organisation (who would not be privy to MOD SARF standards) could measure Bristow rearcrew to see if they could meet your amazing standards?

As you are well aware there is no crewman licensing atm so as with the SARF no external agency or standard exists that crewmen can be measured against! So how on earth does the current military exist and measure its self? I would suggest it’s due to a great deal of professionalism and pride! And you OSM, with your continual ranting on this subject are effectively suggesting Bristow and all civi SAR crewmen have none, and that dear chap is very narrow minded.

So rather than moan incessantly, come up with a valid solution (maybe you could be the CAAs first crewman examiner) or join the other side and use your professionalism to help keep the standards up in the future. Beware though, there are plenty of very professional crewmen already outside so don’t expect to jump in at the top, which I personally think this topic of yours is all about.

212man

Snakepit - well said!

Flounder

Hear, hear. Well said.

Now OSM can go about setting up his own SAR rearcrew evaluation unit as part of his obsession with high standards that no one but the RAF or RN operate under.

Last chance to answer the question OSM or leave this topic well alone: which external independent agency audits the work you do?

jimf671

OSM, the fears of the many are usually based upon a position of ignorance. It can be a long hard path drilling down through the mists of time, the rather chaotic unplanned evolutionary nature of previous services, the really cr4p Sea King myth, the obscurations of the SAR workload by incompetent departmental reporting, and the years of highly specialist knowledge and experience that stand between the external observer and the practitioners.

After a lot of time spent asking stupid questions, my conclusions are that the contractor is up to the task (as would their 2 nearest competitors clearly have been) and the CAA is up to the task. In the early stages, I expect the same minor capability droop that one would expect with any introduction of new types.

The customer, on the other hand, continues to be a concern. The customer is the DfT and they are effectively British Rail by another name. They have done a pretty good job of handling the two recent SAR contracts and the specialist help they have recruited has resulted in a good set of requirements. The customer's agent is clearly specialist in Maritime and Coast matters. So there we have specialist knowledge in Rail, Maritime and Coast, yet the overwhelming majority of the UK SAR jobs are Land. That is where my principal concerns about this service currently lie.

I remain interested in the details of other matters such as pilot or rear-crew standards, or aircraft capability and SAR role fit. I cannot fail to be impressed by the highly professional individuals that I have met and communicated with who are progressing such matters.

The DfT and the MCA have two years to notice that this is not same old same old and that the workload on the ten bases is not Portland or Sumburgh writ large. I wish them success.

snakepit

Jimf671
We are going to have to stop agreeing old chap! Makes for a mighty boring thread! He he

jimf671

Do you mean the bit about me asking stupid questions?

snakepit

Yes and me getting you to smash mugs lol

winchop

The good news is that the CAA have indeed allocated an individual to oversee Rear Crew standards.
The bad news is he is also the CAA Chief Cabin Crew Safety Inspector. His background is as a flight attendant with no Rear Crew helicopter experience.
When I quizzed him on this, he indicated that the CAA do not deem Rear Crew Standardisation and oversight important enough to warrant it being a fulltime position allocated to an individual experienced in the role.
I hope and pray once the transition is up and running, they realise the folly of such an attitude but I'm not holding my breath.

jimf671

Splendid. So all is not lost regarding the demise of the Sea King water boiler?