That's OK then. At the current rate of attrition they will end up with the required 2 or 3 per lot for ITT without the need for any selection decisions.

J671 I don't know how you fathom that one. Any of the bidders will have their bids assessed even if there was only one per Lot - no one will get a bye. I think originally the DfT was hoping there would be a wider bidder field than expected so as to give Bristow and CHC a run for their money. Maybe it would produce a better solution too. Looks like that possibility is fading fast and if so, it will be the final solution that might suffer.:uhoh:

If we dont use real operational SAR aircrew then there is a very real chance that the aircraft will be delivered without even having a chilled meat cabinet or an ice cream freezer. :ugh::ugh::ugh:

Nothing to fear there MC as I read that the tech spec is demanding satcom internet to allow affiliate shopping en route to and from the target area.
All purchases will be drop-shipped to the home SAR base without any "embarrasing" need to provide impromptu photo ops to the ambushing paparazi! :)

So glad you guys brought up the catering issue. I have been really worried about how I was going to get along without the boiler opposite my favourite front pax seat in the Sea King. No sign of Starbucks in any of the bidding consortia unfortunately.

I checked CAP 637 but can't find the signal for Cappuccino.

Don't you just drop into a Starbucks en-route?
Or does that just apply to butchers and ice cream shops?
;)

When CHC won the interim contract from Bristows in 2005 they came and visited the flights to ask what we wanted on the new aircraft. I mentioned the hot water boiler (ex Sea Kings), amongst other things. Basically it was just laughed out of court and never appeared along with a few other things asked for which never materialised. There idea-couple of flasks that when scrambled where the winchman's reponsibility to sort out, while getting changed and finding out what the job was and did he need any extra kit!

Civvy SAR do not appreciate how valuable the boiler is. To many ex-Navy involved!

Wiretensioner

Water boilers??? You'll be wanting Playstations/X-boxes for the crewroom next.;)
No time to fill flasks? get the engineers to do it... they've got nothing else to do after all. Or...... fill them, the flasks, at the start of shift.:rolleyes:
3D

The RAF SAR hot water boiler is primarily there for getting a warm drink into a cold wet survivor. A couple of 'self heating' cans of coffee kept on the aircraft would be considerably cheaper, safer and much lighter.

Sumburgh playgroup have already got them! In fact within the first year of being with CHC.

Wiretensioner

Classic ignorance by a classic ignoramus :=:=

When did you last do something to 'help out' i.e. go beyond watching people work and offer assistance?! Take off your blinkers, you may even find some day someone will like you...........:ok:

Water boiler: A joke when it was installed and a joke to this very day. More bother than the worth of it. Nil by mouth comes to mind! Can you imagine a civvy cab having this onboard: some bright CAA spark will insist on adding it to the MEL:ugh:

TC you seem to be someone who has had little to do with long range SAROPS or you are a pilot! I certainly wouldn't call the boiler a joke. Bloody useful on a long job to get something hot to drink or a Pot Noodle (only way to get Leopold Bloom out of the radar shack in the Falklands!), heating up fluids before we got the heater packs and if able to hot liquids into a casualty.


Wiretensioner

For example

Is it me or is there something a bit sad about this thread having drooped down to a mere discussion on the merits of long range hot coffee?:ugh:
Its no wonder few seem to enter any sort of signifcant debate on here about the future of the Nations SAR service anymore:{

Well you see 4thright, we've got a bit of a problem. The SARH bids were assessed by chaps of the calibre of RWOETU and SAR Staneval and the like - long time SAR pros who had years and years of front line SAR and SAR training experience. Now that SARH is dead and buried, who's going to assess the bids for Longsar and how can we tell they've got any pedigree whatsoever? The whole of military SAR is going to be replaced, potentially by a winning bid that has been scrutinised and recommended by people with minimal SAR experience.

Water boilers are only one small issue but there will be many more like it and if anyone involved in appraising bids holds strident and pre-conceived views like, 'a joke when it was installed and a joke to this very day' then it's unlikely that the future of SAR in the UK is going to be rosy.

VSF I think you raise a good point. I don't know who in detail is assessing the bid but if what you say is true, then there is a problem. I am still not convinced that arguing about some aircraft bits and pieces is the place this thread should be at this stage. I would be more concerned about whether the new service will deliver good mountain rescue and overland capability. With the Transport Ministry and MCA in charge, what do they know of these issues and the focus needed? The Police have authority and experience in these rescues but the Home Office is nowhere to be seen. Of course there is the perenial issue too about ANVIS, as far as I see it, the CAA and its new CAP999 is taking a very tentative approach. There really is little chance of the new service being anywhere near that presently offered by the military in this essential area.:ugh::ugh:

A helicopter with HM Coastguard on the side spends half its time doing overland work in the north west of scotland.... so you might be surprised how much they do know...........

How ever it is a intresting question, who are the advisers on this new SAR stuff?

The CAA have no issues about ANVIS.... and thats what they have said.... someone just has to talk to them about it. :ok:

LC I am aware of Stornoway's activities but its daylight only in the hills is it not? I do not agree with your rather sanguine view of the CAA. Talking to them yes of course, but their actual reaction to ANVIS when faced with their first AOC application might be more cautious than you would like to hope for.
Anyone know what's happening to the ARCC now Kinloss is closed?

CG/CHC Stornoway is 24 hours and regularly doing mountain work, night and day, summer and winter. They are not contracted to have a low light capability, so do not have NVG. In extreme low light conditions, other aircraft must be deployed.

MCA Aviation have stated that the Gap SAR technical requirements are broadly similar to the 2007 contract, so no contractual requirement for a low light capability (NVG) and, presumably, not the best comms fit.

The effect of a contractor change, with similar technical requirements and the same a/c type, is going to be extremely interesting.


(With LC on CAA & NVIS, though NVIS from a standing start is always likely to be problematic.)

That'll be every night then :p

Wiretensioner / Vie...whatever / Lioncopter, you are what we term: bottom feeders: end users who come into work each day, do a solid days work, earn a decent crust and get fed (info) from above, (if they remember) occasionally.
You know very little of what is going on - and to be honest, you are not expected to either.
The water boiler was a side show, bringing in some light relief. But please believe this when I tell you - it serves absolutely NO purpose whatsoever in front line life saving missions. It is a typical RAF bolt on accessory about as useful as a chocolate teapot.
Vie: why do you think the RAF are so important as to be the default for SAR advice? The RN were doing SAR before the RAF could spell it :=
As it happens the work stream for this current SAR project (Long SAR) is driven by a very competent civil servant and a Commodore. The consultancy firm is well versed in SAR doctrine. You MUST give other people credibility and you must aslo accept that perhaps people like you don't know it all. [Because you only operate in a tiny part of the jigsaw]. Civvies around the world have been doing SAR for decades, it is NOT a fine art (as the RAF would like it to be - to justify their empire), it is for most military units throughout the world a SECONDARY ROLE. It is not nuclear science and most of all Civvies do it very very well indeed.
Lioncopter: The CAA have issued NVD certification to several AOC's (The police for instance); they have already formalised applications for SARH NVD Ops. Again, not a difficult evolution and one which future operators will take to overnight.

Try and look at the big picture. Future civvy SAR service isn't going to see massive degradation. It will see change (and for some long in the tooth, has been's) and it will take time. But change it will, adapt it will and develop it will. With better. cheaper, more reliable aircraft. Civilian crews infused with military experience will run the service FAR FAR more effectively and financially more efficiently than any military outfit. Move on guys. :sad:

4thright: It is my personal view that the ARCC might eventually be re-located to the MCA HQ @ Southampton (but still retain uniformed personnel).:suspect:

Bless!
 

I was initially a tad irritated by TC's comments, but then I realised he must be ex navy - bless! :cool:

Those that get most defensive usually have most to be defensive about.

Ted,
Actually about three years ago! And I would still be doing so if I had my way!:{
I know very well what the engineers do.... I am one!!!!!:ok:
3D
P.S.
Do you know me?? If not, don't get personal. I like to think that I was/ am helpful in my job, to the best of my ability anyway.
I don't expect, nor want a reply. Lets keep the thread on track.

I agree with much of what TC says.

However, the p1ssing contest between the MCA and the MoD, equalled only by the similar contest between the RAF and RN, continues to prevent proper analysis of the existing task and preparation for the new one. This scene of division leaves an open door for those skilled at grabbing extra slices of the taxpayers' dosh, detracting from Treasury and DfT objectives of good value and fair competition.


The ARCC should be in the hands of those who know about aeronautical matters, about rescue and about co-ordination. This means there are no options better than leaving it as it is.

TC - I read much of what you said with little concern and much agreement.
However, I do not agree with several points/facts.

Firstly, it is not so that most other militaries view SAR as a secondary role. Many see it as a a significant primary role, and indeed many smaller countries have it as one of the few primary roles they operate at all. Indeed it can be argued that the UK over recent decades has been one of the few European nations to eschew military ownership of SAR as a primary or secondary role.

As for your statement that the RN operated SAR a very long time before the RAF reflects a lack of knowledge of the actual UK service history on this. This is so whether you look at purely rotary SAR or go back to early pre WW2 days and review what happened during that War - with of course the rescue means being via launch, pure fixed wing or with flying boats. This of course is not meant to detract from the very fine contribution that the RN has made to SAR over the decades too.

I do support your opinion that the ARCC will close - probably after the MoD finally loses its last SK SAR flight, and it becomes logical to colocate it with some MCA MRCC somewhere. Should we worry about this - well maybe if it loses its expertise on overall rescue coordination and any specific aviation and overland focus it now has

Ho Hum - now thats a bteer thread already with no sign of coffee boilers anywhere!:p:)

Ahh..... good to see some life in this thread again!:hmm::rolleyes:

You have to understand that TC's bitterness comes from his predicament - ex RN (not real SAR though) and resigned to working on a daily basis where he gets to see an almost endless stream of professional RAF SAR pilots put through their paces and producing performances that he and his 'secondary role' chums would struggle to match;)

If you want mil pers in the ARRCK in a different location then Swanwick would be a much better choice than MCA HQ.

The RAF is facing a glut of pilots and a shortage of helicopters - just give us some shiny new S92s and let us get on with the job.

.

I take that your CV is with CHC/Bristow then?

Crab....ha ha
 

Don't worry, Crab already has his CV in, but I slipped it to the bottom in the HR pile of --- :{

Straws, grasping at......'Give us S92's...:}

ARRCK?.......Will be MCA soon enough, why waste money moving it twice?:ok:

Surplus of crab pilots..some new Chinook's inbound, get in SH and go front line again with those fantastic skills that only the RAF pilots have.:D;)

Boys, boys....you asked for this:

Skills such as chopping sandfilters off and Confined area landings to position for ice creams...Mmmmmm Love it...more, more :rolleyes::eek::D:)

careful TC, some of us remember the Fastnet Fiasco....action photos a speciality?:=

yes the MCA know lots about aeronautical co-ordination so that will be useful;)

only 4 years until pension so unlikely:)

With my PA pension I could always offer to work for less than all the civvy pilots in SAR - would that go down well?

Gosh TC I didn't realise how important you think you are! Thank goodness there are people on here who make up for your rants.

Wiretensioner

DfT reps and other 'heads of sheds' at RAF Valley recently to see what training for SAR involves. The questions asked confirmed that the future SAR service will be incompetent at best, and lethal at times. The guys making the aircraft and training specific decisions are accountants.

IE.

'Why do we need rearcrew?'

'Why does a qualified pilot need to keep training?'

'Why can't an NHS paramedic do shifts as a winchman without training - it seems he just hangs there.':ugh:

Nope, I am NOT joking.

Lives will be lost. I have said it before and will keep saying it.

I thought the majority of winchman are NHS paramedics!!! There was me thinking this thread was sarting to get adult like again.

Ah yes, those inept RAF crews stupidly trying to carry out a rescue in tricky conditions in the hills. Of course, the only time that a Navy crew managed to hit the blades on the sandfilter was during a cack-handed bunt to impress some passengers. Far more worthy, of course...

Future Coastguard
 

and on, and on and ...
 

Once again this thread becomes ... "the only people who can do SAR properly are the RAF!".

Regardless of where you sit - the RN, RAF and MCA have been carrying out SAR with great success for decades now, each with their own SOPs. Yet again I struggle to understand why supposedly professional aviators are so blinkered and arrogant to assume that its their way or the highway ...

SAR is going to civilianise - there are hurdles to overcome - but a more capable and modern aircraft crewed by both ex military and civilian crews, will deliver a capability on a par. I have no doubt that some refuse to believe this and struggle to comprehend how this capability could be provided by anybody other than themselves. The military of all three services has changed beyond all recognition in recent years and rightly the priority now is the Front Line (= war fighting capability) ... SAR is a second line capability and when you consider the savings that can be made just in manpower terms it makes complete sense for this to be handed over to the DfT - the MoD has far more important battles (literally) to win.

As for NVG, ex mil experience will provide the backbone of a training programme that will provide for all - the structures required for civilian clearance already exist (EASA and CAA).