UK SAR 2013 privatisation: the new thread
As we used to say in the world of technical authorship, 'If all else fails, read the instructions'.
DfT contract spec for Lot 1:
"minimum rescue capacity per Aircraft of 8 Casualties/Survivors (2 of which are capable of being stretchered)"
Bristow SAR website, fleet section, Sikorsky S-92, stated capacity:
"21 persons as required – 3 stretchers, 10 seated persons, additional standing persons"
Bristow SAR website, fleet section, Sikorsky S-92 illustrations:
http://bristowsar.com/wp-content/upl...-survivors.jpg
http://bristowsar.com/wp-content/upl...figuration.jpg
http://bristowsar.com/wp-content/upl...ernal-view.jpg
DfT contract spec for Lot 1:
"minimum rescue capacity per Aircraft of 8 Casualties/Survivors (2 of which are capable of being stretchered)"
Bristow SAR website, fleet section, Sikorsky S-92, stated capacity:
"21 persons as required – 3 stretchers, 10 seated persons, additional standing persons"
Bristow SAR website, fleet section, Sikorsky S-92 illustrations:
http://bristowsar.com/wp-content/upl...-survivors.jpg
http://bristowsar.com/wp-content/upl...figuration.jpg
http://bristowsar.com/wp-content/upl...ernal-view.jpg
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Terminal 5
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Satsuma - you raise a point the airlines also struggle with. All airlines require the row of seats leading to the emergency exits to be clear of baggage, however should anyone seated in one of the (in economy) 3 seats be a large person who has become incapacitated then that emergency exit becomes blocked and unusable. We live in a world of compromise.
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe so, but at least that obstruction isn't designed in by the manufacturers.
I don't fancy the chances of anyone escaping from an uncontrolled ditching if they're in the rear half of that cabin. You can't expect multiple passengers to be simultaneously removing seats from their housing to facilitate their escape. That would be hard enough if it was warm, dry, the right way up and well lit. But it won't be, it'll be the opposite. They really need to address this with a seat re-design before tragedy strikes.
I don't fancy the chances of anyone escaping from an uncontrolled ditching if they're in the rear half of that cabin. You can't expect multiple passengers to be simultaneously removing seats from their housing to facilitate their escape. That would be hard enough if it was warm, dry, the right way up and well lit. But it won't be, it'll be the opposite. They really need to address this with a seat re-design before tragedy strikes.
You can't expect multiple passengers to be simultaneously removing seats from their housing to facilitate their escape. That would be hard enough if it was warm, dry, the right way up and well lit. But it won't be, it'll be the opposite. They really need to address this with a seat re-design before tragedy strikes.
However, the S92 is lacking the f'ing big door that the Sea King has halfway along the pax compartment - even fat boys can get through that one
Ah but how long does it take to open/jettison?
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An EASA approved emergency exit needs to be simple, obvious, unobstructed, not require exceptional effort to open and to have conspicuous markings for use in the daylight and dark. It is doubtful therefore that the S92 ramp upper door would fall into this category whereas the Sea King cabin door window might (were it in need of EASA approval). The main S92 ramp certainly cannot be considered an emergency exit due to its mode of operation.
Last edited by The SAR RC; 12th Mar 2015 at 00:05.
So to summarise the last few humorous posts the Sea king is betterer (yes I did spell better like a 6 year old would in an argument) because it has a big door in the middle near all the seats (not that you can actually sit on the seats due to the role equipment). The S92 is not as good because it's big ramp door is not an emergency exit (nor is the sea kings but let's not let facts get in the way). Priceless discussion going on here 😜
One thing that surprised me about that video was them tossing the winchman out at anout 100 ft.. I can appreciate the downwash being to strong to hover at 20ft or so but we had the same problem with the Puma. What we did was to approach at the normal low winching height, toss out the winchman and we would climb as the W/O kept him at the same height over the sea. We would then arrive at about 80 ft or so. After the pickup we would pull them up 20 ft. and descend as the W/O winched them in. I believe that a similar procedure was use for a cliff rescue.
It's all to guard against a cable breaking with somebody on it. I thought for a moment that with a dual winch you had a main and backup cable but it didn't look as if there was more than one. I can only assume that there is an awful lot of trust in the winch cable.
Not that I should worry too much, I'm not in the game anymore.
It's all to guard against a cable breaking with somebody on it. I thought for a moment that with a dual winch you had a main and backup cable but it didn't look as if there was more than one. I can only assume that there is an awful lot of trust in the winch cable.
Not that I should worry too much, I'm not in the game anymore.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can see your PoV however, I would be very surprised if it were >40'. They are pretty anal about it, sometimes it can be a bit frustrating. Operationally it is different; if the winchman needs to go out at 3500', then so be it. Like most things nowadays, we are all becoming too risk averse.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With regards to the dual hoist; on the S92 you have an inboard and outboard hoist. On the AW139 (not sure about 189) you have a fore and aft mounted hoist. The are identical hoists, but are not /cannot be operated simultaneously. If one hoist were to fail (not cable snap) with, for instance 250' of cable out, the winchop attaches the serviceable hoist to the u/s cable via a karabina, and winches out delivering the 'S' hook to the winchman, who then connects himself to the new hook, unhooks from the other and is recovered to the a/c. The other cable is then either jettisoned or recover by hand to the a/c.
This is basic HHCO, hook hoist changeover, and would be carried out if after considering whether it would be prudent to return the winch man on a fixed cable to the deck or cliff etc, where they have just come from.
Hope I'm not teaching you to suck eggs - no offence intended.
This is basic HHCO, hook hoist changeover, and would be carried out if after considering whether it would be prudent to return the winch man on a fixed cable to the deck or cliff etc, where they have just come from.
Hope I'm not teaching you to suck eggs - no offence intended.