NPAS 2017 news
A pattern is forming.
For the same reasons the government in power at the time gives the "impression" it is struggling to fund the NHS, when in actual fact it desperately wants privatisation to 'save the day', so, too is NPAS being driven into the ground by the powers to be until or unless it is privatised or becomes a charity or until the budget is stopped.
To speed matters up, you employ a mercenary with absolutely no aviation experience or business acumen to lead it.
The government works in mysterious ways.......
Rotate too late hit the nail on the head: NPAS has dipped below critical mass - will it recover?
There is now only one aviator left on the board.....what does that say for police aviation in the UK?
{I can accept the demise of an already sick animal - but police aviation grew from nothing in the 80's to (one could argue) one of the best in Europe, possibly the world. The best pilots, the best cops, the best aircraft, the best equipment).
And now it's been allowed to go lame and there is no imperative to heal it.}
For the same reasons the government in power at the time gives the "impression" it is struggling to fund the NHS, when in actual fact it desperately wants privatisation to 'save the day', so, too is NPAS being driven into the ground by the powers to be until or unless it is privatised or becomes a charity or until the budget is stopped.
To speed matters up, you employ a mercenary with absolutely no aviation experience or business acumen to lead it.
The government works in mysterious ways.......
Rotate too late hit the nail on the head: NPAS has dipped below critical mass - will it recover?
There is now only one aviator left on the board.....what does that say for police aviation in the UK?
{I can accept the demise of an already sick animal - but police aviation grew from nothing in the 80's to (one could argue) one of the best in Europe, possibly the world. The best pilots, the best cops, the best aircraft, the best equipment).
And now it's been allowed to go lame and there is no imperative to heal it.}
Last edited by Thomas coupling; 24th Oct 2017 at 15:54.
So, here are the costs per Force and flying hours for 2016/17. When I started this, way back in 2014, not all Forces were part of NPAS. Those Forces are shown by the white spaces, which are where I don’t have information for them.
As usual, there are winners and losers. The biggest loser is Avon and Somerset. They are paying £644,713 more than the previous year and £695,613 more than before they joined NPAS. Their hours are slightly down from 2015/16, but up from 2014.
The biggest winner, in terms of money saved, are North Wales. The’ve saved £809,776 on 2015/16 and last year’s payment is a massive £1,547,337 less than prior to NPAS. Mind you, their Air Support budget prior to NPAS was always a bit extreme, 1.5% of the total Force budget when the average for the North West was 0.5%.
Flying hours continue to drop, 15,432 last year, 1,705 down on the previous year. More telling though, I think, the 2014 Forces had 11,960 hours, that’s 9,149 less than prior to NPAS. How many of those 15,432 were taken up with 20, 30, 40 minute transits?
The cost per flying hour don’t seem to follow any logic: from £985/hour for Cumbria to £3,616 for West Yorks, an increase of £1,749 for them. I’ve asked for an explanation as why they are so different and how they are calculated.
Total cost of Air Support prior to NPAS: approx £46M with approx 25,000 flying hours and 30 aircraft. Now: £38.3M for 15,432 hours and 17(?) aircraft. Value for money?
Hang on people. The fixed wing is just round the corner and its introduction will save the day!
It will slash costs and revolutionise police aviation, just like all the other times it has been tried in the UK.
It will slash costs and revolutionise police aviation, just like all the other times it has been tried in the UK.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Luton
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does anyone have any information on how the grounding of the GMP Defender has affected covert surveillance teams in the area? I believe the aircraft was predominantly used for covert ops?
Last edited by airfarceone; 7th Nov 2017 at 19:30.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now I knw why I haven't seen my old Unit ( West Midlands ) flying
( around the West Midlands ) very much since Retiring !
Pre NPAS Budget spend was £1,731,654, ( Budget of £1,700,000 )
and is now £167,146 ( 9.65% ) less, although I understand that
in at least the first year post NPAS it cost them more.
What doesn't leap out from those costs is that prior to NPAS,
that budget paid for 1400 Hours.
So, less than a 10% "saving" has resulted in a reduction of 847 hours
to just 553 hours - a reduction in Police Air Support
over the West Midlands Force area of 60.5 % ! ! !
Never mind vague and indeterminate allegations of sexual assault
by Members of Parliament, what about the FACT that Police Air Support
has been well and truly (
) "Shafted" by them ? ! 
Coconutty
( around the West Midlands ) very much since Retiring !
Pre NPAS Budget spend was £1,731,654, ( Budget of £1,700,000 )
and is now £167,146 ( 9.65% ) less, although I understand that
in at least the first year post NPAS it cost them more.
What doesn't leap out from those costs is that prior to NPAS,
that budget paid for 1400 Hours.
So, less than a 10% "saving" has resulted in a reduction of 847 hours
to just 553 hours - a reduction in Police Air Support
over the West Midlands Force area of 60.5 % ! ! !
Never mind vague and indeterminate allegations of sexual assault
by Members of Parliament, what about the FACT that Police Air Support
has been well and truly (
) "Shafted" by them ? ! Coconutty
It's obviously a bit late. From November's Police Aviation News:
As you say, it will be interesting to see what it says.
Meanwhile here in the UK we await with some impa-
tience the report of Her Majesty’s Inspector of Con-
stabulary (HMIC) into NPAS.
tience the report of Her Majesty’s Inspector of Con-
stabulary (HMIC) into NPAS.
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: UK
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The latest minutes from July. September's is still being de-sensitised, I presume.
The feeling I get is that other members of the panel are still unhappy about air support when they need it (or lack thereof).
There is a a shortfall of cash (in the red actually).
A cock up with the transition to FW (due to them not being able to calculate basic maths when it comes to available load capacity). Which is unusual since they have been down this procurement route several times with the Squirrel / 135 / 145 / 902 / FW - before. That must have hurt them finacially never mind professionally.
And lately it seems they have lost the unfair dismissal case with one of their board members, due plainly and simply to NPAS burying their head in the sand when it came to basic employment law. This has cost tens of thousands of pounds of taxpayers money wasted due to poor governance.
It seems they will be going through it all again soon as another member follows suit.
When will they ever learn - leadership comes from the top, time to review who is running this slow motion car crash methinks.
The feeling I get is that other members of the panel are still unhappy about air support when they need it (or lack thereof).
There is a a shortfall of cash (in the red actually).
A cock up with the transition to FW (due to them not being able to calculate basic maths when it comes to available load capacity). Which is unusual since they have been down this procurement route several times with the Squirrel / 135 / 145 / 902 / FW - before. That must have hurt them finacially never mind professionally.
And lately it seems they have lost the unfair dismissal case with one of their board members, due plainly and simply to NPAS burying their head in the sand when it came to basic employment law. This has cost tens of thousands of pounds of taxpayers money wasted due to poor governance.
It seems they will be going through it all again soon as another member follows suit.
When will they ever learn - leadership comes from the top, time to review who is running this slow motion car crash methinks.
Sorry, MG, missed your reply:
as a result of the terrorist attacks, calls for service had been declined.
Oh no, they're going on a journey!!
OD advised this would be the first of regular updates in terms of NPAS’ journey to a fleet replacement
From an email from a Midland Force to me:
They aren’t particularly happy with what they are getting, and sent me a copy of one of their 6 monthly reports, on NPAS support, that the Force sends to the PCC.
Some of their figures are interesting/depressing. In the year to date(Report dated 28th November. Not sure if the year is from January or April)as a percentage of total calls, they had an attendance rate of 27.4% (38% 2014/15), a decline rate of 17.4% (11.6% 2014/15) and a cancellation rate of 44.8% (40.8% 2014/15). The cancellation rate represents where they have requested NPAS but subsequently cancelled them, often due to the incident being resolved or a change in circumstances.
Only 27 out of 100 times did an aircraft turn up.
Their average number of monthly requests for January to September 2016 was 53, a 61% reduction compared to an average of 135 for April to December 2015.
Attendance times for priority one, from request received to arriving on scene have increased from an average of 18.6 minutes to 20.53 minutes, and for priority two, have increased from an average of 25 minutes for April to December 2015 to 43 minutes for January to September 2016. Outrageous!(my word)
They have reduced their requests significantly by over 60% yet they have seen a less than satisfactory service provision with only 27.4 % of requests resulting in deployment of NPAS.
At worst the average overall response time for a priority two has been 54 minutes in April from request to arrival at scene. This is less than ideal(their words). NPAS were going to increase their cost to them by nearly a third due to(funny old thing) the fact that it’s taking NPAS longer to reduce their costs that originally thought, and the Force was requesting them too often, compared to other Forces. However NPAS relented, and agreed to keep their charges the same as last year.
The PCC and the Chief Constable have requested that they be kept the same for more than one year.
Some of their figures are interesting/depressing. In the year to date(Report dated 28th November. Not sure if the year is from January or April)as a percentage of total calls, they had an attendance rate of 27.4% (38% 2014/15), a decline rate of 17.4% (11.6% 2014/15) and a cancellation rate of 44.8% (40.8% 2014/15). The cancellation rate represents where they have requested NPAS but subsequently cancelled them, often due to the incident being resolved or a change in circumstances.
Only 27 out of 100 times did an aircraft turn up.
Their average number of monthly requests for January to September 2016 was 53, a 61% reduction compared to an average of 135 for April to December 2015.
Attendance times for priority one, from request received to arriving on scene have increased from an average of 18.6 minutes to 20.53 minutes, and for priority two, have increased from an average of 25 minutes for April to December 2015 to 43 minutes for January to September 2016. Outrageous!(my word)
They have reduced their requests significantly by over 60% yet they have seen a less than satisfactory service provision with only 27.4 % of requests resulting in deployment of NPAS.
At worst the average overall response time for a priority two has been 54 minutes in April from request to arrival at scene. This is less than ideal(their words). NPAS were going to increase their cost to them by nearly a third due to(funny old thing) the fact that it’s taking NPAS longer to reduce their costs that originally thought, and the Force was requesting them too often, compared to other Forces. However NPAS relented, and agreed to keep their charges the same as last year.
The PCC and the Chief Constable have requested that they be kept the same for more than one year.
MightyGem:
Problem for the customer is that when they detect the response rate is not good, they don't bother calling as often. With demands on NPAS reduced, the number of future declined attendances by NPAS will be less thus making it look like the service has improved!
My contacts on the ground have described a 'malaise' has set in with police forces when air support is an option. They can't be bothered calling anymore due to the appalling response times / rejections etc.
The "system" will therefore stabilise for NPAS at this performance level and they can then project their performance going fwd on these poor base lines.
Smoke and Mirrors.
Problem for the customer is that when they detect the response rate is not good, they don't bother calling as often. With demands on NPAS reduced, the number of future declined attendances by NPAS will be less thus making it look like the service has improved!
My contacts on the ground have described a 'malaise' has set in with police forces when air support is an option. They can't be bothered calling anymore due to the appalling response times / rejections etc.
The "system" will therefore stabilise for NPAS at this performance level and they can then project their performance going fwd on these poor base lines.
Smoke and Mirrors.
Coastguard helicopters are often called out on what used to be Police tasks these days. Mispers are a favourite (often nowhere near the coast) and we are often told that the 'weather' is the reason. Hmmmm. I wonder?
Well, I've just read this last page and it really is quite depressing. (And I know that many things on Pprune are quite depressing)
When I left the Met ASU it had just gone through a series of lectures/talks to the BCUs asking/instructing them to call for air assistance on...anything!! I think, to see if they could get there before the event was over. Now, it seems, all that work has gone backwards and ASUs are perhaps actively rejecting calls. As had been previously stated, any series of rejections will lead to 'the customer' finding an alternative means of compliance...i.e. they just wont bother to call anymore.
The alternative you all really do need to watch is legislation to allow more of the dreaded Drones being carried in many or all cars!
That would be out of every/anyone's control.
When I left the Met ASU it had just gone through a series of lectures/talks to the BCUs asking/instructing them to call for air assistance on...anything!! I think, to see if they could get there before the event was over. Now, it seems, all that work has gone backwards and ASUs are perhaps actively rejecting calls. As had been previously stated, any series of rejections will lead to 'the customer' finding an alternative means of compliance...i.e. they just wont bother to call anymore.
The alternative you all really do need to watch is legislation to allow more of the dreaded Drones being carried in many or all cars!
That would be out of every/anyone's control.
Wow. Just.... wow. Like Rigga, I find this truly saddening. It's as if the whole police aviation system had taken a good hard look at itself, found the least capable unit with the most effective spin-doctors in the country (not a million miles from where I used to live) and modeled the revamped system entirely around them. For units and Forces/Constabularies where aviation used to be an effective asset, I can only imagine what it must be like to deal with the revised system. Still, at least the criminals will be happy, eh?
Given the widely differing cost per hour in my post #182, I asked NPAS the following:
If an aircraft is tasked to a Force:
When does that Force start paying? From take off, or arrival on scene?
If the aircraft is cancelled en-route, does that Force still pay?
If the aircraft is subsequently tasked to another Force while airborne, when does the second Force start paying?
If, for example, the Hawarden aircraft is tasked to Blackpool and then receives a task to Chester, whilst still over Blackpool, does Cheshire have to pay for the transit from Blackpool to Chester, some 20- 25 minutes, when if it was on the ground at Hawarden, it would be less than 5 minutes to Chester?
Back came the reply(after the statutory 20(although in this case 25 after a gentle reminder) days):
OK, so who pays for all the transit flying?
Meanwhile:
From November's Police Aviation News...
It's due to be published on Thursday, and should be available here:
https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.../publications/
Looking forward to reading it.
If an aircraft is tasked to a Force:
When does that Force start paying? From take off, or arrival on scene?
If the aircraft is cancelled en-route, does that Force still pay?
If the aircraft is subsequently tasked to another Force while airborne, when does the second Force start paying?
If, for example, the Hawarden aircraft is tasked to Blackpool and then receives a task to Chester, whilst still over Blackpool, does Cheshire have to pay for the transit from Blackpool to Chester, some 20- 25 minutes, when if it was on the ground at Hawarden, it would be less than 5 minutes to Chester?
Back came the reply(after the statutory 20(although in this case 25 after a gentle reminder) days):
Each force is charged when an aircraft arrives on scene irrespective of where the aircraft has flown from. If the aircraft is cancelled en-route the force does not have to pay.
NPAS utilises ‘actioned calls for service’ as the currency for charging forces. This doesn’t rely on hours flown but creates a ‘unit cost’ by dividing the revenue cost of delivering NPAS against the numbers of calls delivered to forces.
The cost per force is calculated by considering
- The total revenue cost for NPAS
- The number of calls delivered to each force in the preceding 12 month period (Jan-Dec)
- The total cost is then divided by the number of actioned calls providing a cost per call to be
allocated
A call is only charged when an aircraft is assigned to a call and arrives on scene. If an aircraft is cancelled en-route the force requesting does not pay as an actioned call has not been delivered. If an aircraft is diverted en-route from one task to another it is only the force that the actioned call is delivered to that pays.
NPAS utilises ‘actioned calls for service’ as the currency for charging forces. This doesn’t rely on hours flown but creates a ‘unit cost’ by dividing the revenue cost of delivering NPAS against the numbers of calls delivered to forces.
The cost per force is calculated by considering
- The total revenue cost for NPAS
- The number of calls delivered to each force in the preceding 12 month period (Jan-Dec)
- The total cost is then divided by the number of actioned calls providing a cost per call to be
allocated
A call is only charged when an aircraft is assigned to a call and arrives on scene. If an aircraft is cancelled en-route the force requesting does not pay as an actioned call has not been delivered. If an aircraft is diverted en-route from one task to another it is only the force that the actioned call is delivered to that pays.
Meanwhile:
From November's Police Aviation News...
Meanwhile here in the UK we await with some impa-
tience the report of Her Majesty’s Inspector of Con-
stabulary (HMIC) into NPAS.
tience the report of Her Majesty’s Inspector of Con-
stabulary (HMIC) into NPAS.
https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.../publications/
Looking forward to reading it.
