UK NPAS discussion thread: Mk 4
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
With regard to the advert above. "Competitive salary" is mentioned. Compared with what, bearing in mind that there is now no competition as far as employment of police pilots is concerned?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: 6 minutes ahead of the landing 747
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Competition, Air Ambo, Off-Shore, Corporate, Wind Turbines (did you not see the ad?) some of us do have IRs, overseas work if your not fussed about staying were the sun never shines.
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
Thread Starter
Greater Manchester Police give helicopter rainbow makeover for Pride
Greater Manchester Police are feeling the love for Pride this year and have decorated the force's helicopter with rainbow colours - or have they?!
As well as the helicopter, which the NPAS team posted a picture of on their Twitter account sporting it's new 'paint job' just for today, GMP have an actual Pride police car in today's parade bearing the rainbow flag.
Earlier this week PCC Tony Lloyd expressed the force's support for Pride.
This year GMP officers will be wearing t-shirts with the slogan "Love shouldn't hurt" as part of theoretical campaign supporting people around the issues of domestic abuse.
As well as the helicopter, which the NPAS team posted a picture of on their Twitter account sporting it's new 'paint job' just for today, GMP have an actual Pride police car in today's parade bearing the rainbow flag.
Earlier this week PCC Tony Lloyd expressed the force's support for Pride.
This year GMP officers will be wearing t-shirts with the slogan "Love shouldn't hurt" as part of theoretical campaign supporting people around the issues of domestic abuse.
Greater Manchester Police give helicopter rainbow makeover for Pride - Manchester Evening News
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: On the fence
Age: 62
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice one - excellent photography skills demonstrated! 
(the pride one, that is)
(the pride one, that is)
Last edited by Filtre de fadaises; 30th Aug 2014 at 20:20. Reason: New photo appeared as I was typing!
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: In a world of my own!
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If Putin kicks off one of the last things I'm going to be worried about is how much it costs to run a 135 compared with a 902, I'll be worried about the cost of fuel in my own car or the cost of heating my home.
Let's not forget the forty odd years we spent staring at the 'soviets' over the Fulda Gap. This could get nasty.
Let's not forget the forty odd years we spent staring at the 'soviets' over the Fulda Gap. This could get nasty.
Back in July 2013, Coconutty asked:
I published costs for the North West earlier in the year. Here's the full hit. Savings? What savings! Well more or less.
I asked each Force, under the FOI act, what was their total budget for Air Support in the last full financial year before they joined NPAS, and what was their total contribution to NPAS for Air Support for this current financial year.
For the likes of Cambridgeshire and Hampshire, I asked them for their budget for the last financial year before they closed their ASUs.
As it’s a spreadsheet and I took the post NPAS payment from the pre NPAS payment, savings are in green, and overspends are in red(well, more pink really). So, we seem to have a total nationwide saving of £3.6 million. A long, long way from the advertised £15 million.
Most Forces replied well within the 20 working days, a couple needed a gentle reminder, but after 3 months Sussex still can’t tell me what they were paying prior to joining NPAS, so I guess they have no idea whether they are getting a good deal or not. For that reason I’ve put them as paying the same.
Some Forces appear to have made large savings, with North Wales coming out best by saving £737,560. How on earth are they managing to get by without all that extra cash? However, Devon and Cornwall are paying an extra £293,390 for 150 less hours.
Of all the Forces asked only Merseyside couldn’t tell me how much they were paying NPAS. They said that they didn’t hold the information for cost or hours. So, they have no idea what they are getting, or how much they are paying for it! Perhaps this apparent lack of interest explains why they were happy for their ASU to be shut down without making a fuss like S Yorks did. I had to get their current budget from W Yorks/NPAS.
West Mercia told me that their pre NPAS cost of £564,000 didn’t include the costs of the bobbies. On a further request they said that the cost for them was £1,668,204. That would put their budget over £2M, but is not reflected in the post NPAS costs. Nor is it reflected in the budgets of other Units.
West Midlands also said that they receive £310,000 a year from NPAS for the transfer of their aircraft to NPAS. So, can we assume that the other Forces who still have their own aicraft are also receiving similar payments? If so, surely that is going to reduce the meagre savings even further?
It think it will be VERY interesting to find out, once everyone has joined NPAS,
by way of Freedom of Interest Requests, just how much each force is paying for NPAS,
and for how many hours cover, and compare this with what was being paid and the hours flown pre-NPAS
by way of Freedom of Interest Requests, just how much each force is paying for NPAS,
and for how many hours cover, and compare this with what was being paid and the hours flown pre-NPAS
I asked each Force, under the FOI act, what was their total budget for Air Support in the last full financial year before they joined NPAS, and what was their total contribution to NPAS for Air Support for this current financial year.
For the likes of Cambridgeshire and Hampshire, I asked them for their budget for the last financial year before they closed their ASUs.
As it’s a spreadsheet and I took the post NPAS payment from the pre NPAS payment, savings are in green, and overspends are in red(well, more pink really). So, we seem to have a total nationwide saving of £3.6 million. A long, long way from the advertised £15 million.
Most Forces replied well within the 20 working days, a couple needed a gentle reminder, but after 3 months Sussex still can’t tell me what they were paying prior to joining NPAS, so I guess they have no idea whether they are getting a good deal or not. For that reason I’ve put them as paying the same.
Some Forces appear to have made large savings, with North Wales coming out best by saving £737,560. How on earth are they managing to get by without all that extra cash? However, Devon and Cornwall are paying an extra £293,390 for 150 less hours.
Of all the Forces asked only Merseyside couldn’t tell me how much they were paying NPAS. They said that they didn’t hold the information for cost or hours. So, they have no idea what they are getting, or how much they are paying for it! Perhaps this apparent lack of interest explains why they were happy for their ASU to be shut down without making a fuss like S Yorks did. I had to get their current budget from W Yorks/NPAS.
West Mercia told me that their pre NPAS cost of £564,000 didn’t include the costs of the bobbies. On a further request they said that the cost for them was £1,668,204. That would put their budget over £2M, but is not reflected in the post NPAS costs. Nor is it reflected in the budgets of other Units.
West Midlands also said that they receive £310,000 a year from NPAS for the transfer of their aircraft to NPAS. So, can we assume that the other Forces who still have their own aicraft are also receiving similar payments? If so, surely that is going to reduce the meagre savings even further?
Given the number of tales of single crewing(and experiencing same), I asked West Yorks/NPAS two questions under the FOI:
1) On a Base by Base basis, on how many occasions, during the period 1 Apr 13 to 31 Mar 14, were NPAS helicopters crewed by only a Pilot and one TFO, due to a second TFO being unavailable?
2) On a Base by Base basis, on how many occasions during the same period was a Base aircraft offline/unavailable due to a pilot being unavailable?
The word occasions was obviously a bit ambiguous given the different occasions in the results. By occasions, I meant shifts. And no, that is not my mistake; I was supplied with two sets of figures for Exeter.
Where Blank is recorded, this is because Bases had exceeded the 18 hours allowed for answering FOI questions.
Also, North Wales have been a bit sneaky in answering Nil. Their answer is technically correct, because they dont fly with a single Observer. They cancel the shift, and from experience they have done that a lot in the past, and to quote a NW bobbie, an awful lot lately. So perhaps Barton are guilty of that as well.
Now, I dont know what it was like elsewhere, but the only time in 15 years with Merseyside that I flew single crewed was when one of the bobbies looked so sweet asleep on the couch that we left him there. Mind you, we did wake him up with the skyshout outside the crewroom window when we got back!
As for lack of a pilot, if one of us went sick, given enough notice, Premiair would have a relief on the same day, or the next day at the latest, and covered many long term sickness cases. I suspect that this was the case with all Units that employed contract pilots. Obviously direct employment has its downside when you dont have enough floaters.
Effective and efficient!
1) On a Base by Base basis, on how many occasions, during the period 1 Apr 13 to 31 Mar 14, were NPAS helicopters crewed by only a Pilot and one TFO, due to a second TFO being unavailable?
2) On a Base by Base basis, on how many occasions during the same period was a Base aircraft offline/unavailable due to a pilot being unavailable?
The word occasions was obviously a bit ambiguous given the different occasions in the results. By occasions, I meant shifts. And no, that is not my mistake; I was supplied with two sets of figures for Exeter.
Where Blank is recorded, this is because Bases had exceeded the 18 hours allowed for answering FOI questions.
Also, North Wales have been a bit sneaky in answering Nil. Their answer is technically correct, because they dont fly with a single Observer. They cancel the shift, and from experience they have done that a lot in the past, and to quote a NW bobbie, an awful lot lately. So perhaps Barton are guilty of that as well.
Now, I dont know what it was like elsewhere, but the only time in 15 years with Merseyside that I flew single crewed was when one of the bobbies looked so sweet asleep on the couch that we left him there. Mind you, we did wake him up with the skyshout outside the crewroom window when we got back!
As for lack of a pilot, if one of us went sick, given enough notice, Premiair would have a relief on the same day, or the next day at the latest, and covered many long term sickness cases. I suspect that this was the case with all Units that employed contract pilots. Obviously direct employment has its downside when you dont have enough floaters.
Effective and efficient!
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
Thread Starter
Interesting figures MG, I especially like the single TFO/No Pilot chart, however I notice that Benson and Wolverhampton aren't there. I wonder maybe if there was any particular reason PNAS didn't release their figures? 
Perhaps it may also be interesting to know how many shifts are also lost due to 'training' or 'attending open days'
Perhaps it may also be interesting to know how many shifts are also lost due to 'training' or 'attending open days'
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just popped back ( like I said I might ) to add :
"Interesting" figures indeed, especially as some of them are blatantly wrong !
Back in January 2009 I posted "I know of at least one Air Support Unit that has a budget of 1400 Hrs.... "
( http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/357...ml#post4635442 )
... which was a reference to West Midlands - who budgeted for up to 1400 Hours a year and, AFAIK,
continued with those hours up until joining NPAS, not the 1200 Hrs reported in this FOI request !
I would also question the £££'s quoted - pre NPAS I seem to recall someone mentioning
that pre NPAS the budget for those 1400 Hrs was nearer £1.7m, not £1.9m,
and I suspect that post NPAS it is probably now even higher than the figure quoted !
If so, then it would not look, on paper, as though there is a £148,800 "saving" for an extra 200 Hours flying time
It would show an increase of £50,000 ( and likely more ) for the SAME number of flying hours,
making the service to West Midlands more expensive,
together with the more frequent lack of service during the Night shifts
when the a/c based at BHX is out of area servicing other forces that don't have a closer 24 hr Unit.
Makes me
!
"Interesting" figures indeed, especially as some of them are blatantly wrong !
Back in January 2009 I posted "I know of at least one Air Support Unit that has a budget of 1400 Hrs.... "
( http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/357...ml#post4635442 )
... which was a reference to West Midlands - who budgeted for up to 1400 Hours a year and, AFAIK,
continued with those hours up until joining NPAS, not the 1200 Hrs reported in this FOI request !
I would also question the £££'s quoted - pre NPAS I seem to recall someone mentioning
that pre NPAS the budget for those 1400 Hrs was nearer £1.7m, not £1.9m,
and I suspect that post NPAS it is probably now even higher than the figure quoted !
If so, then it would not look, on paper, as though there is a £148,800 "saving" for an extra 200 Hours flying time
It would show an increase of £50,000 ( and likely more ) for the SAME number of flying hours,
making the service to West Midlands more expensive,
together with the more frequent lack of service during the Night shifts
when the a/c based at BHX is out of area servicing other forces that don't have a closer 24 hr Unit.
Makes me
!
Last edited by Coconutty; 3rd Sep 2014 at 09:12.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well done MG for extracting some interesting figures, although it wouldn't surprise me if not all Forces calculate their expenditure in the same way.
I presume your figures are for pre-NPAS actual hours and post-NPAS contracted hours? If that's the case, it will be interesting to see (after a full year or so) how many of the Forces, certainly without in-county aircraft, actually get what they're paying for - and also how much service they actually received in comparison with the past. Sadly, a lot of data (Task time / Transit time) will likely have been lost from those bases that have closed and, although it should have been part of the original business case, it'd be a few years out of date.
I presume your figures are for pre-NPAS actual hours and post-NPAS contracted hours? If that's the case, it will be interesting to see (after a full year or so) how many of the Forces, certainly without in-county aircraft, actually get what they're paying for - and also how much service they actually received in comparison with the past. Sadly, a lot of data (Task time / Transit time) will likely have been lost from those bases that have closed and, although it should have been part of the original business case, it'd be a few years out of date.
I presume your figures are for pre-NPAS actual hours and post-NPAS contracted hours?
how many of the Forces, certainly without in-county aircraft, actually get what they're paying for
Whatever way you bag it up and present it. NPAS is delivering a very sad and depleted service compared to that which was delivered by the individual forces in the years up to 2010.
And neither do I believe that the money saved is anything approaching that what the pundits promised.
A classic example if ever there was one, of "if it aint broke Don't fix it"
And before anyone comes back with the "NPAS was the only option other than closure" I would ask "Oh yes? And how hard did you personally fight to keep what you believed in?" How much dirt did you dig to show that their plans were flawed?
Never give up, and never forgive the Luddites
tigerfish
And neither do I believe that the money saved is anything approaching that what the pundits promised.
A classic example if ever there was one, of "if it aint broke Don't fix it"
And before anyone comes back with the "NPAS was the only option other than closure" I would ask "Oh yes? And how hard did you personally fight to keep what you believed in?" How much dirt did you dig to show that their plans were flawed?
Never give up, and never forgive the Luddites
tigerfish
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: UK
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Coconutty do you think NPAS Birmingham should not be allowed to leave the city at night to support operations further afield?
It might be a less of a service for West Mids but it's an improvement for everywhere else.
It might be a less of a service for West Mids but it's an improvement for everywhere else.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TFO,
"If" I were paying my Council Tax to Birmingham Council, or parked an expensive car in the West Midlands force area,
or had premises there - that might be subject to the type of criminal activity that West Midlands Police decided
were reason enough to extend their Air Support coverage to 24 hours MANY years ago, then YES I personally WOULD
want the aircraft to stay in the area ready to respond, and not be servicing another part of the Country that doesn't
directly affect me, and where the forces covering those areas didn't previously perceive any NEED for 24 hour Air Support,
other than in Life threatening situations, ( when there were Mutual Aid agreements in place to cover those sort of requests ).
However I don't live in the West Midlands force area, ( at the moment ), I don't pay any Council Tax to Birmingham Council,
and don't have any premises there that might get "ram raided", although I do park in their force area area occasionally
,
so I am probably one of the ones that benefits from the former West Mids cab providing a service where I do live,
while the miscreants are free to plunder in Birmingham while they are doing so
"If" I were paying my Council Tax to Birmingham Council, or parked an expensive car in the West Midlands force area,
or had premises there - that might be subject to the type of criminal activity that West Midlands Police decided
were reason enough to extend their Air Support coverage to 24 hours MANY years ago, then YES I personally WOULD
want the aircraft to stay in the area ready to respond, and not be servicing another part of the Country that doesn't
directly affect me, and where the forces covering those areas didn't previously perceive any NEED for 24 hour Air Support,
other than in Life threatening situations, ( when there were Mutual Aid agreements in place to cover those sort of requests ).
However I don't live in the West Midlands force area, ( at the moment ), I don't pay any Council Tax to Birmingham Council,
and don't have any premises there that might get "ram raided", although I do park in their force area area occasionally
, so I am probably one of the ones that benefits from the former West Mids cab providing a service where I do live,
while the miscreants are free to plunder in Birmingham while they are doing so
Last edited by Coconutty; 7th Sep 2014 at 07:40.