Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Rotorheads
Reload this Page >

UKSAR2G - MCA CivSAR Second Generation

Rotorheads A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss the things that affect them

UKSAR2G - MCA CivSAR Second Generation

Old 2nd Sep 2021, 15:45
  #101 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: The South
Age: 55
Posts: 455
Originally Posted by chopper2004 View Post
Thing is though whoever wins will have to provide some medium / long range SAR with a 92 airframe
Why do you need a S92 airframe?

There are other aircraft which meet the requirements of Lot 2.
FloaterNorthWest is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2021, 17:24
  #102 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: UK
Posts: 45
Originally Posted by chopper2004 View Post
So is that the end of the Airbus bid? Or will someone else partner with Airbus Helicopters for this?

Thing is though whoever wins will have to provide some medium / long range SAR with a 92 airframe

cheers
S92 won’t feature. Too expensive.
TUPE is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2021, 09:19
  #103 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: U.K.
Posts: 4
Originally Posted by FloaterNorthWest View Post
Why do you need a S92 airframe?

There are other aircraft which meet the requirements of Lot 2.
What other aircraft are there which meet the requirements? the H175 is the same as the AW189. I agree that the S92 is expensive to buy and operate but those initial purchase costs are mitigated over time. It also has a well proven operational history and the BHL frames were all new
In my view a contributing factor as to why BHL won the UKSAR bid was to use the AW189 in the bid since A) it was a brand new frame; and B) it would be built in the UK at the Yeovil plant creating new jobs for AW and thus making the decision to award to a US company more politically palatable.
As for BHL not meeting the serviceable aircraft req's - thats a new one on me. Another consideration in the SAR2G contract award, is that BHL either own all or parts of some of the airports they operate from at the current locations; BHL lost the island SAR contract to CHC many years ago so learnt that lesson and have subsequently 'insulated' themselves from some of the risks this time around. I think BHL will take some beating, they provide a good service and are the current incumbent.

I mean 2XL?? come on the only reason they in there is due to the oil dispersal role with their ancient B727; their P31 Navajos are better placed in a museum, they'll be cheap for a reason
black.beard is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2021, 21:49
  #104 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: U.K.
Posts: 4
ya can either have "good" but it won't be "cheap". Or "cheap" but it won't be "good".

As regards the 'more capable' argument I'm not aware of another current frame which can land a Mountain Rescue team up in the Cairngorms in sh1te weather, with all their kit to rescue casualties and bring them back safely as they have been doing - does anyone else know?
black.beard is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2021, 10:07
  #105 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Falkland Islands
Posts: 22
Originally Posted by black.beard View Post
…..As for BHL not meeting the serviceable aircraft req's - thats a new one on me. ……
Not sure which post you are referring to, but if it was mine above

“If so, I hope whoever is making the decisions on awarding contracts looks closely at the levels of service/reliability that they currently achieve on their one SAR contract!”

and



”Quote:

Originally Posted by Medevac999

viewpost.gif

They seem to have a high turnover of personnel

Yes. Engineers and pilots. And a lot of days with 0/2 serviceable.”

then I was referring to BIH, British International Helicopters, and their SAR contract in the Falklands, not to BHL, Bristow Helicopters.
Aurora Australis is offline  
Old 8th Sep 2021, 21:44
  #106 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: U.K.
Posts: 4
Thank you, I think there was a little message crossing and/or confusion as regards the use of BIH and BHL to represent the 2 different operators. Too many TLAs.

I absolutely agree BIH have both a high turn-over of critical personnel (Crews & LAEs) and their 'S' record will raise eyebrows.

BHL (in my opinion) have - low staff turn-over and good frame 'S' record and a correspondingly good record at saving peoples lives ; but they will be relatively expensive
black.beard is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2021, 13:11
  #107 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Aberdoom
Posts: 274
Originally Posted by chopper2004 View Post
So is that the end of the Airbus bid? Or will someone else partner with Airbus Helicopters for this?

Thing is though whoever wins will have to provide some medium / long range SAR with a 92 airframe

cheers
So are Draken still in the game?
chcoffshore is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2021, 14:47
  #108 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Falkland Islands
Posts: 22
Originally Posted by black.beard View Post
BHL (in my opinion) have - low staff turn-over and good frame 'S' record and a correspondingly good record at saving peoples lives ; but they will be relatively expensive
Absolutely agree with that comment - but I think its a case of you get what you pay for, as the MOD in the Falklands have discovered!
Aurora Australis is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2021, 17:21
  #109 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 99
Originally Posted by chcoffshore View Post
So are Draken still in the game?
Thats a really good question. AFAIK, the Newquay Academy and the SAR2G bid are complete separate things - one is not dependant on the other. As I understand it, the closure of the Academy is simply down to fact that paying customers are not coming through the door. This has nothing to do with whether Draken can support a bid for SAR2G as I see it as HMCG is already the customer. Airbus/Draken could easily put the provision of training services into their bid and outsource this if required - I do not see why the closure should have an impact on their ability to bid.

That said, there is no doubt that it looks bad. Draken only purchased and rebranded the Academy recently from Cobham and have already closed it. Did they do their due diligence? I don't know, but I have to say that on the face of it, it does not inspire confidence. I think the real question is not whether Draken are still part of the bid, but whether Airbus still want them to be.
Baldeep Inminj is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2021, 06:44
  #110 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Aberdoom
Posts: 274
Originally Posted by Baldeep Inminj View Post
Thats a really good question. AFAIK, the Newquay Academy and the SAR2G bid are complete separate things - one is not dependant on the other. As I understand it, the closure of the Academy is simply down to fact that paying customers are not coming through the door. This has nothing to do with whether Draken can support a bid for SAR2G as I see it as HMCG is already the customer. Airbus/Draken could easily put the provision of training services into their bid and outsource this if required - I do not see why the closure should have an impact on their ability to bid.

That said, there is no doubt that it looks bad. Draken only purchased and rebranded the Academy recently from Cobham and have already closed it. Did they do their due diligence? I don't know, but I have to say that on the face of it, it does not inspire confidence. I think the real question is not whether Draken are still part of the bid, but whether Airbus still want them to be.
Yes it will be interesting to see which direction Airbus go in, also apart from the academy their Middle East contract also went down the pan. If you don't have one then obviously you don't need the other............
chcoffshore is offline  
Old 11th Sep 2021, 11:39
  #111 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 99
A usually reliable source tells me Draken will no longer be part of a bid for UKSAR2G. Unclear if Airbus will look for a new partner.

This is a RUMOUR and NOT confirmed, but hes in a position to know.
Baldeep Inminj is offline  
Old 13th Sep 2021, 05:55
  #112 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Aberdoom
Posts: 274
Originally Posted by Baldeep Inminj View Post
A usually reliable source tells me Draken will no longer be part of a bid for UKSAR2G. Unclear if Airbus will look for a new partner.

This is a RUMOUR and NOT confirmed, but hes in a position to know.
If its not a rumour then it will be announced soon enough.
chcoffshore is offline  
Old 23rd Sep 2021, 06:48
  #113 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: UK
Posts: 71
Originally Posted by Baldeep Inminj View Post
A usually reliable source tells me Draken will no longer be part of a bid for UKSAR2G. Unclear if Airbus will look for a new partner.

This is a RUMOUR and NOT confirmed, but hes in a position to know.
No announcements then
Medevac999 is offline  
Old 23rd Sep 2021, 14:08
  #114 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Inverness-shire, Ross-shire
Posts: 1,346
My estimate of the programme timeline expects "Deadline for Submission of Initial Tenders" about now and the "Shortlisting for Participation in Negotiation" about 6 to 8 weeks hence. So I expect this is a period when there is an opportunity for the great ego that is Airbus to disappear from the process without fanfare and with minimum embarrassment.

On the helicopter side of things, we would then be left with 'the usual suspects', unless one of them does something strange in which case it would all be over.
jimf671 is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2021, 08:01
  #115 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 520
It was indeed just a rumour. The Airbus/Draken teaming is still very much alive in UKSAR2G after checking with the right people
helihub is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2021, 12:33
  #116 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Inverness-shire, Ross-shire
Posts: 1,346
In that case it becomes more interesting to observe whether, with 3 bidders still in the game for the helicopter lots, there will be a down-seletion in November-ish. Invitation to Submit Final Tender will only go to those that MCA Aviation judge can do a proper job.
jimf671 is offline  
Old 27th Sep 2021, 11:52
  #117 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 99
Originally Posted by helihub View Post
It was indeed just a rumour. The Airbus/Draken teaming is still very much alive in UKSAR2G after checking with the right people
This is great news - healthy competition is rarely a bad thing!
Baldeep Inminj is offline  
Old 8th Oct 2021, 08:35
  #118 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2021
Location: Wales
Posts: 7
Rumour has it that Airbus Helicopters will be no-bidding UKSAR2G citing "commercial reasons" following the supposed break up in early September with Draken Europe.
_SpinFlight_ is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2021, 05:59
  #119 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: UK
Posts: 71
Originally Posted by _SpinFlight_ View Post
Rumour has it that Airbus Helicopters will be no-bidding UKSAR2G citing "commercial reasons" following the supposed break up in early September with Draken Europe.
yes there is a official confirmation on Twitter of all places
Medevac999 is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2021, 07:16
  #120 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: England
Posts: 108
Originally Posted by Medevac999 View Post
yes there is a official confirmation on Twitter of all places
Im not disagreeing with you by the way, but a quick look through Airbus tweets over last week and I couldnt find anything. Have you got the link?
SimonK is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.