Concur with that; it was "common knowledge" in the early 90's that the civsar cabs weren't declared u/s until a scramble request went in. Then they were "u/s on start".

I thought "everyone" knew that!

Bertie - welcome to life above the parapet:)

Crab

Have you ever actually visited an MCA flight?:cool:

Bertie.
"Common Knowledge" ??? By who? If that is true, how come it took so long for the M.C.A. to find out and award the contract to someone else?
Why would we go u/s on start? It is not us who get the big fat salaries/ bonus like our higher management!
Crab.
You still have not grasped the concept of our second machine have you, nor the way the contract is written.
You are correct with regard to the primary machine, but wrong about the standby. The FLIR is removed from the main machine and fitted to the standby as and when required. The wiring is all there, just swap the hardware, takes 10 minutes max. Nor does it have twin hoist capability. Pretty much like your Sea King there! The standby does not have to be to the same standard as the Primary because as you point out, we do not have a second crew on call, and the MCA will not pay for it to be! The MCA will not pay for extra crews to just sit around on standby in the unlikely event that they will be needed. That is not our fault but the way the contract was/is written and paid for. You have other training commitments that mean you need extra crews, something we do not need to do, ie. practice for going to war etc.
RCS... wrong again I'm afraid. I am not even sure of what that stands for but I am sure you will enlighten me.
As WT says, have you ever visited an MCA flight? You should try it one day. You never know, you might catch us waiting to go u/s on start with the MGB and engines out.:)

Doesn't matter now anyway as both primary and secondary a/c are equipped to the same standard (S92)

Surely a few spare RAF Pumas could be converted to the SAR role?

Oh, no I forgot, there are no spares and anyway they're at least five years older in any case. Oops.

SARCO
That may be the case in Stornoway but Sumburgh are not yet on line with the S92, the new year I think for them. Lee On Solent are at least 4months away from seeing the AW139, in one guise or another. Portland even further!!
So actually, it does matter.

3D - so, other than the fact that the FLIR is swapped between 1st and second aircraft, everything I wrote is correct - it does not have to be the same spec as the 1sts in terms of autohover etc and it doesn't have a crew.

Guess what - I know the contract isn't written for you to provide seconds - that is why I highlight the difference between what we have now and we may have in the future.

Strangely enough I have a full-time job involving 3 detached flights on my own Squadron without needing to spend even more time in the car to visit a MCA site.

The strength of your defensiveness regarding serviceability is bordering on the edge of Shakespeare's "Methinks the lady doth protest too much" - are you sure you don't have something to hide:)

PS the Irish Coastguard have an RCS feed linked to to ARCCK, why don't the UK MCA SAR flts - unless you have it and no-one has shown you what it is?

So Crab we'll take that as no then. Such a shame you might learn a few things about civvy SAR. While at Lossie we took a cab up for an overnight visit to Sumburgh (Serviceability was a lot better in '97). Drank a lot and learnt a lot. Since then a couple of exchanges have taken place. But all concerned became more aware of the capabilities of the other lot.

Go on make the time, in fact if you spent less time on these forums you could probably find a day to make a visit.

regards
Wiretensioner

Crab.
Wiretensioners reply sums it up, but...
Yes, I am defensive about civvy SAR. Just as you would be if I slagged off RAF SAR without direct knowledge or experience of it. I and most of my colleagues, air and groundcrew have spent lots of time on military SAR so have seen both sides of the coin. We all try to achieve the same result at the end of the day, just using different coloured machines. You do yourself nor the RAF any favours by posting rumours and stories from the distant past.
Why would we not declare we are U/S? We get no rake off from BHL for staying serviceable and take great pride in the service we try to supply to the southwest so therefore when we do go U/S, we cry for help asap!
I understand that you are fighting your corner for the upcoming harmonisation and I wish you luck. We do not want to see a drop in standards either! (We may even get a standby machine at Portland?? Now that would be a novelty!)
Yes, at last you have grasped the meaning of our standby machines. But I emphasise this is not out of choice, we would love a fully equipped spare aircraft but the MCA would not accept the cost to supply them! This will change as and when CHC take over each base. (That will be the time to check on serviceability states.) But Portland will still have to share the spare machine with the premier unit on the South coast??:)
The Irish may have access to RCS??? but I can assure you, our only direct contact with the local MRSC is the scramble phone!!!

3D, I agree with your post, I also can see where CRAB is comming from, but don't quite agree with they way he goes about it.

Back on 22 Septmber 1988, there was a fire on the Ocean Odyssy where sadly the radio operator died. I was a member of the AS332 that was first on the scene, we were only 10 minutes away when the alarm was raised and were on site 30-40 minutes before the Dauphan from the Forties I think it was, arrived. We spoke to the radio operator who was asking which way he should go, and as the helideck was completely engulfed by fire we moved in closer to see if there was another escape route, however a number of blast occured and debris was blown into the air very close to us. We had to pull back and lost radio contact.

We continued to fly around the area and located a number of people in the water and directed boats to them, we then located the life boat which was now out of sight of the rig and guided a vessel to it. By now more aircraft had arrived along with a Nimrod who took control of the operation. In time the operation was wound down and we were released returned to I think the S701 to refuel and offered to take survivors back to Aberdeen as we were going back empty. We were told it was not necesary as the RAF SAR aircraft would call in later and take them back.

Later that night on the news and in the papers it was all about the RAF recue etc. After the initial reaction of "what the......"we thought about it and realised it was a very good PR exercise for the RAF SAR who were under pressure even then. So I keep this in mind each time CRAB goes on the offensive with what is often garbage and picture a man fighting for perhaps his and his services very existance. I also keep a tub of salt close by and take a pinch every now and then.

Check
Thanks for that, I was beginning to think it was just me.:)
Unfortunately, I am easily wound up, as those who know me will testify.
A trip to the salt mines perhaps?

Wiretensioner - I suppose I could make the effort if I was invited:) Liaison is always beneficial but it works both ways - do you have MCA guys coming to visit RAF SAR flts to see how we do business before they claim they have the same capability as us?

I know we are all in the same business and we all launch when the phone rings, regardless of the weather and I have never denigrated individual crews professionalism or bravery - it is the organisational issues I have problems with.

3D - It is hardly a case of 'at last' regarding my understanding of your second aircraft - I have known the situation from the start but you have been to busy jumping to conclusions about my posts to notice. Your local MRSC is only your tasking authority when the incident is within 30nm - outside of that it is ARCCK. As such, your flight should have access to the RCS and a direct line to Kinloss - if it doesn't then someone has been telling porkies about command and control of SAR helicopters.

Your comments regarding serviceability are slightly naive, if the contract says you must give 98% availability or there will be contract penalties, there is immediately an incentive to be economical with the truth if you are facing a lot of down time on the aircraft.

As I said before, this 'allegedly' occurred sometimes in the 90's but I am sure would not be tolerated now the big contract is up for grabs. Anyway I thought that CHC were already running the contract in the channel, only using S61 until the 139s appear. Was this not the agreement under the interim contract?

Check - we see jobs done by RAF aircraft get reported in the press as RN and vice versa - it is certainly not a big RAF PR machine and we certainly don't try to take credit for jobs we don't do. It sounds like you did a good job in '88 but if you are still bitter about lack of recognition, I think you probably need to give yourself a good talking to.

3D - I'll await the invite but meanwhile if you would like to come to Chivenor to see what we do and how, I would be happy to arrange it.

"Your local MRSC is only your tasking authority when the incident is within 30nm - outside of that it is ARCCK. As such, your flight should have access to the RCS and a direct line to Kinloss - if it doesn't then someone has been telling porkies about command and control of SAR helicopters."

Sorry Crab but that's wrong. For an incident requiring an MCA helo over 30nm ARCC are contacted and if confirmed that the helo is 'closest' then the tasking and scrambling reverts back to the MRCC (no MRSC's nowadays!), hence no direct line between ARCC and SAR Flight because it is all done via us here at the parent MRCC. The SAR Flight keeps us updated with their status hence no need for RCS, but I believe it is on the way.

So take it from somone who does know something about command and control of SAR Helicopters.:)

Crab.
I am not in the position to invite you anywhere. Contact the MCA. Thanks for the invite to visit Chivenor, but the next few months are going to be a bit frantic with the changeover to CHC etc. We did drop in a couple of years ago on the way back from Swansea, maybe you were off shift.
RCS. Yes I know about the 30 mile thing but that will just start another bun fight. We do not have RCS at the flight, nor do we have a direct line to Kinloss!!! If, and it is if, ARCCK task us, it still comes through from the MRSC. Yes, someone is telling porkies, but, rest assured, it aint me!!!!
There may indeed be contract penalties, I'm afraid I am not party to that info. but even so, we always tell the MCA if we are unserviceable. Those penalties apply to the contractor, not us personally so why should we disguise anything? I think we are just going to have to agree to disagree about this issue.
I'm afraid you are wrong about CHC running things in the Channel. Lee and Portland are still Bristow run. Lee change over at the beginning of January, Portland in April. The 61 will be around down here until the arrival of the AW139????
SARCO got there before me.
In fact, Portland is still an MRSC. As far as I know anyway.

CRab said; "...we certainly don't try to take credit for jobs we don't do."

Now that is a porky. I went up to the ARCC at Kinloss last year and learnt something that shocked me.

Every time MRCC (not MRSC) Portland launches WB/IJ to a local dive job (without having to ask anyone for pemission), we tell the ARCC when we get round to it later in the day and they stick another pin in their map and tick off another job they have co-ordinated. Totally fraudulent.

I am looking forward to when the ARCC becomes part of the MCA and moves to Southampton in 2012.

Secondly, every morning MRCC Portland calls the ARCC to ask what aircraft are available at Chivenor and Culdrose. So there are people who see both sides of the picture and have a snapshot of the difference between Bristow, navy and crab availability/maintenance

Yes, I put my hand up to MRCC v MRSC, I copied 3D without checking. As for command and control, the very fact that over 30nm means checking with the ARCCK is a clear indicator of who has overall control of all SAR helicopters in the UK - Kinloss. That logically leads to them being quite entitled to log every SAR job as one that they have co-ordinated whether they were directly involved or not.

The fact that you don't have a direct line to Kinloss or access to the RCS speaks volumes for how the MCA has tried to keep control of its own part of the empire - you are a UK asset not just a MCA asset.

Disappointed about the invite but I wasn't holding my breath and expecting to be welcomed with open arms:)

Send'em.
Sincere and humble apologies, MRCC not MRSC:O:O:O.
Crab.
I never said you would not be welcome. It is just not my place to dish out invites. The MCA are our bosses and say who visits or otherwise. But I would suggest you wait until we get the 139,:hmm::hmm::hmm:, at least that will be something new to look at. I don't know if you would get a trip in one though, rumour has it that there are only 4 seats in the back, including crew seats!!!!
ARCCK.... well, as I said in a previous post, that has the potential for another slagging match and I will leave that to "Send'em" and yourself to sort out.

Off topic slightly...

Wiretensioner - would that trip to Sumburgh have included a bit of winching on the Old Man of Hoy perchance?!?

detgnome

It certainly did, but I did not come off the end of the wire!
Also we did some winching with a couple of the Bristow winchops doing the patter. Our pilot (Lossie's flight commander) saw no big difference between the RAF way and the Bristow way.

Crab instead of waiting why not ring up Portland or Lee and ask if you can visit. Take a Sea King, stay overnight. Despite everything I'm sure you will be well received and hosted.

Wiretensioner

Ah another civvi vs Mil SAR argument! Well I thought PC was looking well. and I too remember when the whole of the east coast was u/s for a couple of hours. As for SAR H. Well I say all bets are off till 2009. What I would say to all is get a copy of the presentation done by the GC and Mil. It's very funny and if you look through the double speak quite revealling.
Crab, as for 2nds all I can say is agggggghhhhhhhh noooooooohhhh!

Love and light

:)

Wiretensioner - take a Sea King........are you mad??? Do you know how many serviceable we would have to have to get an overnight authorised somewhere???:)

Crab,

You misunderstood my post, I was not miffed at lack of recognician, but the fact the the news was all RAF. We were aware at the time that RAF SAR was under pressure but we did not expect the amount of coverage given.

The report by the HSE states that the survivours were winched by Navy "believed to be Sea King Helicopters", So if they were in fact RAF helicopters only goes to re-enforce your comment.

At the end of the day whoever carries out SAR duties do it to the best of their abilities whether it be Bristow, CHC, or the Military. The individual at the point of rescue won't give a dam who is picking him/her up. Whoever you are you will be the best.

As long as there is interservice or civilian rivalry there is always going to be bragging rights or who has the biggest willy, this is healthy and should be encouraged, derogatory remarks should not.

Crab

How silly of me to forget a simple thing like Sea King serviceability.

Wiretensioner

Sar S92
 

Hay Crab I seem to remember the Sea King 3A comming into service and then being taken out of service less than 1 month later because it was unsafe. The S92 is doing a lot better than that! It is not perfect yet, but it will develop into a very good SAR aircraft. It is very early days for the SAR S92!

Crab Said;

"Yes, I put my hand up to MRCC v MRSC, I copied 3D without checking. As for command and control, the very fact that over 30nm means checking with the ARCCK is a clear indicator of who has overall control of all SAR helicopters in the UK - Kinloss. That logically leads to them being quite entitled to log every SAR job as one that they have co-ordinated whether they were directly involved or not."

You missed my point. We tell Kinloss after the helo has landed at the end of the job. We would like to be co-operative and inform them as soon as possible before lift off but sometimes we are too busy and a second job starts during the first. This leads to a situation where the Kinloss guys congratulate themselves on "coordinating" a job yesterday that they only knew about today.

"The fact that you don't have a direct line to Kinloss ...."

We do. When I hit the button a voice says "Hello Portland". It does not say "This the national coordinator of only 13 assets how may we help you.."
(An MRCC typically has around 40 assets).

The sole purpose of Kinloss is to act as a booking agency that will calculate the nearest and fastest helicopter. As a general guide if the target is within 30 nm of Portland or Lee-on-Solent then it is not worth their time to work out who could get there first.

What I think is a fraud is that an MRCC evaluates the situation, conducts the search planning, coordinates other assets, deploys a helo as minor asset in the search, tells Kinloss about it later and then Kinloss claims credit for having done some work when they did nothing other than stick a pin in a map.

Crab said;

"3D - so, other than the fact that the FLIR is swapped between 1st and second aircraft, everything I wrote is correct - it does not have to be the same spec as the 1sts in terms of autohover etc and it doesn't have a crew."

Eh ? It does have a crew. The crew are there to fly the available helicopter.
We have a spare so if one breaks the "CREW" fly the other one.

Do you do it differently in the RAF ?
Do you have to wait for someone to paint your name on the side before you will get into it ?
Do you have to wait for the paint to dry ?
After 8 hours waiting for the paint to dry are you not allowed to fly ?

Sendem - as soon as you are tasked, ARCC are informed and it appears on the RCS, all of our SAR flights know the state of the whole of the UK because of this system that the MCA won't let you have. Just how many aviation assets does your MRCC have?

Have you ever been to Kinloss to see what your tasking authority does - your oversimplified statement would suggest not.

3D was the one who stated you don't have a direct line - are Portland and Lee operating to different rules?:)

As for your last post, you well know what I was commenting on regarding second standby - you don't have a seconds crew and we do, is that simple enough for you.

And, oh yes, we do do it very differently in the RAF. The difference is mainly in ethos, we constantly strive to be better at our job, improve our capability, improve our equipment, revise our SOPs (ever heard of them). We don't just tick the contractual boxes and send anyone away who has a good idea, justifying that it isn't in the contract so we won't get paid for it.

Gaspode - yes but it didn't have problems with gearboxes cracking and dumping oil everywhere - it just had some avionic issues that should have been corrected at Boscombe Down.

Post deleted for personal abuse

ropedope,

You do not enhance your username with such posts: no matter what you think of the posts of other Rotorheads, keep your responses civil, or take them elsewhere :=

Crab.
As usual, you have not read and understood the whole post. If you check his/her title, I think you will find that "Send'em" is actually a member of the MCA!! (Title is obviously lost on you..) and not a Bristow employee, as I freely admit to being.( Not a dig Send'em.)
We, at the flight, DO NOT have direct access to ARCCK. The MRCC may have. but WE DON'T!!!!!!!! O.K. got that one?????
Second standby. I think we have done that to death!!:bored: The taxpayer, you and I, foot the bill for that.
Now to the nitty gritty.
I think you have just blown away any chance of getting a non hostile reception at any MCA flight with your comments on standards! What an arrogant attitude to start the day with.:mad:
I am amazed you need to practice and have SOPS,(yes we do have them:ugh:) you always put it across that you cannot surpass perfection. That is, I think you will find, the attitude which really p....s everyone off with the whole RAF.
Improve equipment?? Would you care to inform us just how long it took you to get FLIR!!! (Something that MCA aircraft had light years before you even thought about it!!) Admitted, yours is better than ours at the moment but that will change with the advent of the new aircraft.:rolleyes: And do all your aircraft have it now? That is a question, not a dig.
Ropedope.
A bit strong but right on the nail!!!
His post has since been removed but summed it up really what a lot of people think Crab is doing, ie. trying to save a lost cause.( And in the process, keeping lots of people in cushy office jobs.) Not you Crab, I know you are at the sharp end but lots of people at ARCCK are just duplicating jobs that can be, and are carried out at an MRCC.

I blame the MCA. How many times have we seen a tasking successfully co-ordinated by the Coastguard being followed by some bloke from "RAF Kinloss" on the telly taking all the credit for it. The MCA just sit back and allow the RAF to trample all over them. Mind you the MCA PR department only seems to focus on the south coast and generally fails to properly inform the media so you could easily mistake the Coastguard for being a English Channel Patrol Group!

3D cam - send'em's handle was obviously too subtle for me - does yours mean you are a 3 dimensional camera??:)

It might have been his use of 'we' when stating that he does have a direct line (we were talking about SAR flights not MRCCs)- he did not highlight the fact he was from MCA in his post. If he had then you wouldn't have to shout at me about it - I replied to his statement in good faith.

If it pisses you off that we do things a certain way and are proud of our high standards then watch out in 2012 when you have to start doing all the stuff that we do now. You won't be able to maintain the standards we have now across all the disciplines because you won't be allowed all the training hours (IMC PLB homings, radar letdowns, FLIR searching, NVG, Mountain flying etc etc etc) because it will cost too much and some beancounter will make you try and cut your flying hours because it's an easy thing to do. Look at the Police and AA - it's mostly on-the-job training because otherwise it costs money.

Yes the FLIR took a long time to get but that wasn't from lack of trying and eventually the money was found to enhance our capability without having to make a profit on it.

I may be trying to save a lost cause but until it is proven that civilianising military SAR will do anything other than reduce capability then I will keep going - I'm not doing it to win friends (probably just as well), just prevent the British Public from being short-changed.

It's a shame I missed ropedope's post but I suspect it was long on abuse and short on fact. You seem to think I am in some ivory tower and don't know anyone outside military SAR - I don't make any of this stuff up and many tit-bits come from guys who are doing your job and recognise that the Holy Grail of civilian SAR is not so holy.

If there is arrogance in attitude perhaps it is those who think they can do more with less that have the problem:ugh:

Fact - The MCA are advised when RAF/RN bases are off state. SYY MCA call the SYY SAR unit to say that Lossiemouth are off state and SYY have to cover their area, it also happens elsewhere.

FAct - MCA units do not have RCS (and I know what i stand for)

Fact - The Mk3A did not go out of service after a month. Introduction was delayed due to the avionics/autopilot problems and when they were sorted, then the aircraft entered service.

Fact - the only capability differences that exists at the moment between the RAF and CHC/Bristows aircraft are:

1. Lack of NVG.
2. Lack of autohover on the standby aircraft.

The RAF wins on both these points, but, that is all. There's not much between the two services and in any case the gap will diminish with once CHC have taken over Portland. Then its only NVG and that will be sorted out with SARH (wont it?)

The Crab said: If there is arrogance in attitude perhaps it is those who think they can do more with less that have the problem.

Then clearly you do not deny the accusation dear boy. Rightly so in my book, from what I have read here and elsewhere. You really do not think that there are others out there in the real world who can do just as well as you perceive yourself to do. Well that is how it reads IMO.

Pride comes before a fall and you'd do well to enjoy your career, I suspect it will be difficult if not impossible to replace out here. We refused an ex Squadron Leader last year, just wouldn't fit in, far too arrogant to adjust, felt it was not necessary.:}

Good luck ginger.

And lets not forget twin winches on both aircraft on the MCA flights:cool:

Already has up North.:ok:

Poor old Crab, at it again. He's a bit like Napoleon - just keeps coming back! Mind you, Napoleon was eventually defeated in the Battle of Waterloo albeit only after the timely intervention of the RAF...... and you all thought it was the Prussians!!! ;)

Have it your own way chaps, we have already been round all the buoys several times and it is getting very tedious - I have said my piece and if you don't like it or don't agree with it, that's your choice. Time will tell.

Calli - yet again you think I am digging at the individual crews which is not the case. You miss my point in that you say you can choose when and how you train (do you really do 4 hrs plus a shift?) but our training is mandated to ensure that we keep topped up on all the disciplines. As for kit - how is your Polycon doing ?

I do worry that many seem to think the adoption of NVG ops will be simple and straightforward.

Crab.
Wow, you really have wound up some people this time!
Wiretensioner.
Sorry, forgot about the dual hoist!
See Crab, that's the differance. Civvies can react to an accident, in this case the very sad loss of Billy Deacon, quicker than the military because we don't have to go through the likes of Boscombe Down! You are still waiting, I believe, for your equal capability dual hoist. Mind you, that's probably a good thing if you have to get Wastelands involved!

Speechless2 - Why is it always assumed that the civilian way of doing things is new, better or cheaper? I defend my service and the job we do robustly because we are going to be sold off for the sake of convenience and a dwindling MoD budget, not because we aren't any good or can't launch for SAROps because the aircraft are U/s. If you don't understand my frustration at this then so be it, if you want to see this as poor CRM or arrogance then so be it. You make so many unfounded assumptions about me without knowing me that I am rather glad not to be working for you.

As for visiting an MCA flight, I am still waiting for an invitation - but how many MCA pilots have visited an RAF SAR flight recently to see how we do business, it's not a one way street you know.

3D - we have been carrying an emergency hoist for many years now and it has yet to be used in anger. I do seem to be quite good at putting peoples backs up, maybe I should write a book about it.:)

Then Crab, you must curb your frustration for you are either misinterpreting or just not reading posts properly or in their entirety.
Yousuggested a lowering of standards if RAF SAR assets form part of a civilian organisation in the future and no matter how much others explain to you that this is not accurate you stick to your guns.
Your unwillingness to accept the justifiable criticism levelled at you (not all of it was justifiable) for any number of reasons is testament to pure arrogance and does not bode well for career prospects should SARH mean you have to apply to a civilian operator to remain in SAR in the south west. Many management personnel within the 2 main competitors for SARH read and sometimes post here, they won't be responding to your CV any time soon.
I agree with many of the posts here and it is testament to many of the comments that some of the criticism comes from those former members of the same service....
N