The radar will hold small fishing boats if set up correctly. Windfarms don't appear overnight, they get put on maps and I would guess that an offshore windfarm would show on the radar; the one up here does. Masts? Your bound to be able to correct me on this, but with 22 years of flying over the seas around this island including working for one of the oldest navigational authorities in the world, I have never seen a mast randomly placed in the sea.
You clear the area before making the TD. Most boats (masts & windfarms) probably only do a max of 20 kts so are unlikely to sneek up on you and jump out during a TD. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Seaking has a blind arc out front of 30 degrees and therefore if a target is in front of you (the place where you are most likely to bump into it) you can't see it unless you continuously make blind arc clearances. When moving towards the target after the let down, having it out front is a distinct advantage. The TD that I have flown in modern aircraft is generally very accurate. Can you home to two military PLBs in a Mk3 yet? Modern SAR aircraft have homers that can track and designate multiple beacons. This is probably more of a concern than having a 330 degree radar and should have been high priority for military SAR. Please tell me where you will put the radar on a S92/EC225/AW139 etc. to gain 360 coverage? Perhaps it should go in an inflatable bag on the side?
You are unlikely to ever see a company's Ops Manuals unless you work for that company. These are normally commercial in confidence for good reason. However, the manuals are written based on the best aspects of all SAR outfits and not just the military. Some of the SOPs would be very familiar to you as they have been created along the lines of military SAR. Some of them wouldn't because they have been written by forward thinking people with an open mind prepared to explore new possibilities. I know this to be the case 'cos I woz there!

Do the copilots get trained to set the radar up correctly? Windfarms don't appear overnight but I have encountered at least one that hadn't been added to the mapping. The first thing that usually gets erected before a windfarm is set up is a single mast - again the mapping often lags behind the reality.

Our TD takes just over a minute so the length of time spent on the final run in and letdown into the blind arc is probably less than 3 minutes or so and the whole area would have been cleared in a turn beforehand. We can modify out TD tomake 180 turns if required because the radar can see that area - this gives more flexibility when letting down into bays or in busy shipping lanes. Bristows came up with a plan to put a tail mounted radar on a S61 - maybe that's why they lost the contract:)

You could fit the S92 with a 360 radar, it's just that no-one wants to because they are so 'forward looking'!!!!

You are right about the homers though - the Griffin in Cyprus has the fit we need in UK but the IPT keeps getting in the way. We can do double PLB homings though and it is a quarterly requirement for pilots to practise them - can you say the same?

I personally don't practice double PLB homings because I don't need to - go figure. I have seen civilian crews practice to more than one beacon as it is part of their contract. I was alluding to the fact that even if you practice double PLB homings, the chances of you being successful when IMC are slim because the kit doesn't work with the newer beacon. If I turned up at a RAF base and asked your Joe average pilot to demonstrate a double PLB homing in IMC to two successful pick ups, I reckon I would be on a safe bet to say they couldn't do it. Not skills, not practice but the one piece of kit you need for a double ejection over the sea, doesn't work. To me this is far, far more important.

My point is that there are always going to be inadequacies with SAR aircraft but some aspects are more important than others and the nose mounted radar doesn't present a huge problem. Having a working homer does. All the pilots are trained how to use the radar as it is part of everyday operations and not rocket science.

Cyclic, you are very wrong about double PLB homings - just because the kit doesn't automatically present you with a graphical picture of the locations doesn't mean it is unusable. I give pilots this sort of scenario on their annual check rides all the time, over water IMC, over land or a combination of the 2 and I have yet to see one not completed satisfactorily. The kit does work with the new beacon but not as well as it did with the old one.

We could do it quicker with the Griffin homer but we don't have it - that's why we train hard to fight easy.

As for radar Vs homer - I have done a lot more IMC over water jobs using the radar than I ever have needing the homers - go figure:)


SARREMF - I know who you are now:ok:

Crab , I didn't expect to see you admit that there was anything wrong with your precious Sea King and I was right! Perhaps we could agree to differ on this even though I have documentary evidence that blows your argument out of the water. Keep training hard although I thought you boys were lovers not fighters :ok:

Do we always have to have 'my SAR Cab is better than your SAR Cab' discussions?
 

Cyclic,
having just left the HAR3 I can say with a degree of confiednce that every line pilot can and does a double PLB homing and letdown in sim IMC. The kit ain't great and more often than not you have to use one of your main radios to acheive a satisfactory homing. Not great but workable - don't denigrate the abilities of RAF SAR aircrew.
Crab,
just because the more modern SAR cabs don't have a 360(or 330 - not including the rear blindarc) radar doesn't mean that they can't let down to the land or ships etc. They will just do it differently. In fact they can probably point at or just away from the target, which may make things easier. Like the HAR 3 and 3As they'll have to do some manouvering to ensure that they will remain clear of shipping etc but essentially they will let down using their kit quite safely.
Please guys get over yourselves. You fly your aircraft to it's capabilities and then work round the deficincies. Crab - a future SAR service as capable as the one we have now doesn't meant that the aircraft must have a 360 radar - it means that people can be rescued in IMC.
Enough already - I'm off to an Oil Rig.:ok:

Crabb - Dam!

Cyclic - sorry, making a habit of this at the moment, but I have to agree with crabb. They will be able to do double PLBs IMC with 2 good pick ups.

And crabb, you thought 84's kit was good, you should see the new stuff!

Saint Evil - you rewriting a manual by any chance whilst on the rig?

SE, I never dared to "denigrate" the abilities of RAF SAR aircrew. I denigrated the poor state of the kit which was what this thread was about before everyone got all crabby. I think we probably know each other.....:uhoh:

yes, you're probably right.

Crab
Cyclic is right, you are unlikely to get to see any companies Ops. manual! Commercial in confidence and all that bull! Why so interested anyway, it's not too long ago that you thought we didn't have such a beast?:rolleyes:
Said manual by the way, approves operations down to 40ft, IMC. It is approved by the CAA who witness the safe operation before issuing their approval! The CAA are our regulatory authority and just because Boscombe Down have not ticked the box doesn't make it wrong. And yes, you would be surprised at what you may recognise in our SOP's, but then you think we don't have any!
As for Bristow losing the contract due to lack of 360 radar, well what a load of b******s! Where is it on the winning bidders aircraft??
We all know why BHL lost the contract! One reason is no longer working for the MCA and another is no longer working for the RAF???

If you know why BHL lost, please tell.

I thought that info was rather seriously commercial in confidence.

But of course if you know different ...

Sven

3D - I was referring to the lacklustre way they seemed to bid for the contract and laughably suggested tacking a tail mounted radar onto the S61 when their efforts were critcised.

I knew you had an ops manual I just didn't how heavily plagiarised our SOPs were - has someone tippexed out where they say Sea King and replaced it with S61?:)

I vote for going back to the Wessex days - day VMC SAR only - hurrah:ok:

Crab.
Bloody hell, we agree on something! Lacklustre is not the word I would use. Complacent, just short of arrogant, is more like it!:sad: And not listening to the client!
Wessex?? No!! Whirlwind9/10.:):)
As for the ops. manual, as Cyclic says previously, I think you will find it takes the best of all worlds, not exclusively RAF. You do not hold the rights to worldwide SAR you know, people have done it successfully before, even the Navy.:)(Oh. and Bristow!):)
Sven
There's your answer. Plus what I said in my previous post.

3D - :ok: The only problem with the Whirlwind was that you winched the aircraft down to the casualty because it was so underpowered:)

...Not sure about that; I seem to remember lots of night mountain and cliff training, interesting (pre-NVG) night mountain rescues and one night PLB homing to a wet winching 40 miles out off St Andrews bay (F4 Nav) plus a man in a rubber dingy 5 miles off Chivenor (spotted by the winchman who did have NVG's) and some assorted night deck rescues.

However it was the night mountain work that was always the most exciting! (training limits were 1/2 moon plus and less than 15kt. The ops tended to be in the pitch black, blowing a gale and snowing!)

Crab,

So the Griffin has a piece of kit that is better than it's equivalent in the Sea King?

Remind us again who provides that Griffin? FBH? So private finance does have some use in SAR.

just been speaking to a guy who does rescues in offshore wind farms using an EC135.
Takes all sorts - different strokes for different folks and amazingly enough it all seems to work.

Droopy - yes but they also provided that aircraft without a night over-water capability so it was as much use as a Wessex - hardly progress and it shows that unless the spec is detailed enough, someone will save a few bucks here and there because it meets the letter of the contract if not the spirit:)

Crab, is that why they lost it? I'm asking you cos you are obviously in the know?

Nice to see your anti Bristow feeling is as strong as ever... Tell me if they win harmonization will you be applying for a job with them or is it just beneath you?

At El Adem in the early sixties a Sycamore was the chariot. The winchman would be sent down to strop up the casualty, who would then be lifted and flown back to base. Then they would come out again for the winchman.