UK NPAS discussion thread: Mk 5
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: UK
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sid, I'm not following you; why do you think a reduction in air support coverage in remote areas would not lead to an increase in criminality? Do you not believe that what you do is effective?
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
Thread Starter
Max, I am saying that I don't believe, as Shy seems to, that remote area crime will neccesarily increase just because of air cover reductions. If remote area crime does increase, it will be because of many factors and imho air coverage reduction would be placed fairly low on the list.
Of course I believe we are effective, which is why it is so frustrating to hear the increase in remote area crime when the weather is bad!
Do you not believe that what you do is effective?
Last edited by SilsoeSid; 20th Mar 2015 at 16:13.
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: UK
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, you believe air support is effective in reducing crime in remote areas. You have evidence to suggest crime in remote areas rises when you are unable to fly due to weather. You do not think that crime will rise in remote areas due to reduction in aerial cover.
Okay, just wanted to be straight on that.
Okay, just wanted to be straight on that.
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
Thread Starter
Nice try Max 
If you read my post, you will read that I don't believe that any remote area crime will increase purely due to this perceived new lack of air cover.
If you are up to date with things you will realise that NPAS is and will be providing air cover 24/7 for the remote areas that rural forces themselves didn't provide before NPAS. Now why was that? The lack of air cover that Shy mentions simply doesn't exist, as the fact is that remote areas are now covered more than they ever were before NPAS.
You asked if I thought that what we did was effective, of course I think we are effective, and you may be surprised to learn that we don't just cover remote areas. If you continue to read my post, you will understand that the weather may well be a greater factor as to why crime may increase on a particular night at a particular location rather than any air availability, because we are so effective.
If you read my post, you will read that I don't believe that any remote area crime will increase purely due to this perceived new lack of air cover.
If you are up to date with things you will realise that NPAS is and will be providing air cover 24/7 for the remote areas that rural forces themselves didn't provide before NPAS. Now why was that? The lack of air cover that Shy mentions simply doesn't exist, as the fact is that remote areas are now covered more than they ever were before NPAS.
You asked if I thought that what we did was effective, of course I think we are effective, and you may be surprised to learn that we don't just cover remote areas. If you continue to read my post, you will understand that the weather may well be a greater factor as to why crime may increase on a particular night at a particular location rather than any air availability, because we are so effective.
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: UK
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, Sid, you said that when there's no cover in remote areas crime increases and that a reduction in cover won't lead to an increase in crime. Now you seem to be saying that even though crime would not increase due to reduced cover that cover will now be increased.
All I have been trying to do is follow your, for want of a better word, logic. It has now become clear that I will be unable to do that.
All I have been trying to do is follow your, for want of a better word, logic. It has now become clear that I will be unable to do that.
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
Thread Starter
No I haven't Max.
I have said that air cover for rural areas has in fact increased and crime in those areas is more likely to increase due to other factors, rather than this perceived reduction of air support.
Ask yourself this; Why in the past was there a distinct lack of 24 hour rural units?
I have said that air cover for rural areas has in fact increased and crime in those areas is more likely to increase due to other factors, rather than this perceived reduction of air support.
Ask yourself this; Why in the past was there a distinct lack of 24 hour rural units?
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: UK
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sid. I, too, often used to get confused about communication, thinking that what I intended to say was more important than what people actually took from what I said. It's easy to do.
There was previously little air cover between approximately 0300 and 0900, when it wasn't required. There was, however, adequate cover between 0900 and 0300, when it was more often required.
There is now (or soon will be), arguably, better cover between 0300 and 0900 when it's not needed and worse cover between 0900 and 0300, when it is most often required.
That is not a gain.
There was previously little air cover between approximately 0300 and 0900, when it wasn't required. There was, however, adequate cover between 0900 and 0300, when it was more often required.
There is now (or soon will be), arguably, better cover between 0300 and 0900 when it's not needed and worse cover between 0900 and 0300, when it is most often required.
That is not a gain.
Avoid imitations
What type of fixed wing aircraft are replacing the existing helicopters being removed from service, if any?
Once the criminal fraternity realise that certain areas don't get timely air support, watch what happens next. I am very much in favour of more police helicopter units being left in place and not replaced by fixed wing, or not at all. Again, that is why I asked my question. But maybe some police pilots would prefer a redundancy package instead of a job.
I can't understand Sid's logic either. He says one thing in one sentence then contradicts himself in the next!
So , disregarding Sid's ramblings, can anyone provide an answer to my qustion?
http://www.policeaviationnews.com/Ac...er%202014a.pdf
Page 6 :-
Not quite sure how they will assess the capability of operating safely down to 500ft......
This suggests it the Vulcanair:-
http://www.handbook.aero/hb_news_sto...?release=24143
Page 6 :-
No specific aircraft has been mentioned but it will be high wing, piston or Diesel powered and have an operational crew of two. It is required to have a retractable un- dercarriage. Those details alone remove numerous airframe options from the competition. The role is to be overt, not covert, so we can expect it to be dark blue and yellow like the helicopters and the long departed Cheshire Islander, and it will be an eyes out of the cabin
role – reverting very much to the basics of airborne policing. I understand that it must be capable of operating safely down to 500 feet.
Entering the arena of speculation the aircraft options appear to be either the Tecnam[rumoured to be too small and non-IFR] and the Vulcanair P-68R which is a variation on the type they are currently trialling.
role – reverting very much to the basics of airborne policing. I understand that it must be capable of operating safely down to 500 feet.
Entering the arena of speculation the aircraft options appear to be either the Tecnam[rumoured to be too small and non-IFR] and the Vulcanair P-68R which is a variation on the type they are currently trialling.
This suggests it the Vulcanair:-
http://www.handbook.aero/hb_news_sto...?release=24143
Max - yeah no doubt the bit would be important.... although that link is to something dated Nov 2013... the words in the quote box are from Dec 2014.
My personal view is that if its been on trail for over a lengthy period it has more than a foot in the door... there is a timely need.... I guess it becomes more a reason for them to find not to buy them.
But just my view.
If that guy Dismore is still around then it would have to be a huge lemon to backtrack from this gush....
My personal view is that if its been on trail for over a lengthy period it has more than a foot in the door... there is a timely need.... I guess it becomes more a reason for them to find not to buy them.
But just my view.
Captain Oliver Dismore, Flight Operations Director of NPAS, said, "I was tasked by the NPAS Strategic Board to explore opportunities around introducing new generation fixed-wing aircraft to the fleet to enhance our capabilities at modest additional cost. The cutting-edge surveillance equipment (Wescam MX10 and Churchill Augmented Reality System), proposed by Airborne Technologies, is fully integrated into a mission system presented in an ergonomic working environment. This will reduce the workload of the single Tactical Flight Officer crew and will enable the aircraft to perform tasks normally carried out by our helicopters, freeing them up for more time-critical missions.”
Last edited by Pittsextra; 20th Mar 2015 at 21:14. Reason: edited to add the Dismore quote
Avoid imitations
Pittsextra, thanks for that information. Very interesting. I'm quite surprised that NPAS are willing to be one of the lead customers for what appears to be a new type.
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
Thread Starter
Let me get this right.
Someone posts a statement, a question and a paragraph ending in a question mark that isn't actually a question. I make comment on the statement and don't answer the question because I have no knowledge of what the answer might be and leave the question marked paragraph alone.
I then get hammered for not answering the question and accused of trying to make an argument out of it all despite making it clear things are my opinion. (imho = in my humble opinion)
Sorry, who is it that has the fuzzy logic?
Someone posts a statement, a question and a paragraph ending in a question mark that isn't actually a question. I make comment on the statement and don't answer the question because I have no knowledge of what the answer might be and leave the question marked paragraph alone.
I then get hammered for not answering the question and accused of trying to make an argument out of it all despite making it clear things are my opinion. (imho = in my humble opinion)
Sorry, who is it that has the fuzzy logic?
NP. I don't know much about the alternative light twin aeroplane choices tbh that fit the retractable gear, high wing etc.
Its one engine capability demo'd here..
Vulcanair P68R: safety first - FT Wealth - personal finance Video - FT.com
Some detail on the other operators of similar type here page 10 here:-
http://www.vulcanair.com/files/files...s_25-03-14.pdf
Its one engine capability demo'd here..
Vulcanair P68R: safety first - FT Wealth - personal finance Video - FT.com
Some detail on the other operators of similar type here page 10 here:-
http://www.vulcanair.com/files/files...s_25-03-14.pdf
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
Thread Starter
I can't understand Sid's logic either. He says one thing in one sentence then contradicts himself in the next!
"Max, I am saying that I don't believe, as Shy seems to, that remote area crime will neccesarily increase just because of air cover reductions. If remote area crime does increase, it will be because of many factors and imho air coverage reduction would be placed fairly low on the list."
My last post;
"I have said that air cover for rural areas has in fact increased and crime in those areas is more likely to increase due to other factors, rather than this perceived reduction of air support."
Contradiction
Avoid imitations
Thanks, Pitts. It will be interesting to see how this goes.
Sid, I think your transmit switch is stuck on.
Sid, I think your transmit switch is stuck on.
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
Thread Starter
Sid, I think your transmit switch is stuck on.
9,590 posts, methinks we have another Clarkson here
Any particular reason as to why the fixed wing has to be a twin piston with retractable undercarriage?
I seem to remember a briefing in the dim and distant past explaining the selection process 'they' were using in order to replace the Lynx. All the criteria happened to exactly match the then present Lynx, putting the Blackhawk et al firmly out of the game, leaving the selected product to be ... a Lynx
No idea on the requirements spec but sadly it would rule out the home grown Britten Norman Defender.
I don't know whats wrong with this country not supporting its own more. Poor show really.
But you must be closer to the people making the decisions than most? Is it not possible to simply ask the question?? Surely the door is ajar more than tightly shut!?!?!
I don't know whats wrong with this country not supporting its own more. Poor show really.
But you must be closer to the people making the decisions than most? Is it not possible to simply ask the question?? Surely the door is ajar more than tightly shut!?!?!
Avoid imitations
Not allowed to defend myself from your bullying now!!!
9,590 posts, methinks we have another Clarkson here
9,590 posts, methinks we have another Clarkson here
Pittsextra, thanks again, I can now consider a written response to the PCC's leaflet just delivered with my council tax bill. This claims an enhanced police service by removing our local air support whilst at the same time demanding a higher percentage of our council tax contributions.
But you must be closer to the people making the decisions than most? Is it not possible to simply ask the question?? Surely the door is ajar more than tightly shut!?!?!
