TA for TLA FIX
 

Thanks for that. I am just getting old and cranky.

Talking of old and cranky - none of those are TLAs......

SAR is though :ok:

It depends if your definition of a TLA is Three Letter Abbreviation or Three Letter Acronym? I would agree that SAR is an acronym and DfT an abbreviation...I believe...but I know nothing.

Yup, to me a TLA is a 3 Ltr Abbrvn.

Back to the thread...

8th Feb Notify shortlisted bidders.
13th Feb Issue of ITPD.
8th May Return of outline bids.
11th - 17th May Bidder presentations.
29th June Notify shortlisted bidders.
27th Aug Issue ITT.
24th Sept Return of final tenders.
21 Jan 2013 Notice of intention to award contract

5th Feb 2013 Sign Contract.

FWIW. On the whole it's PDQ, IMHO.

Tallsar,

Your wise words make an interesting point - Lets assume that company A has been/are about to be awarded gap sar or an element of it (depends on which rumours you believe).

Company A will no doubt also be involved in some way in bidding for long SAR. Should company A hear in Feb 13 that they are unsuccessful in winning a part in long SAR where might that leave their loyalty to implementing a successful gap sar service from July 13?

Likewise if company A is awarded an element of both gap & then long but screws up gap where does that leave long?

SW

Easy. It’s called Business.

1. If Company A wins Gap-SAR and loses Long-SAR, it’s got a few years of revenue then it looks elsewhere with a new line in its CV. If it loses interest, see 2.

2. If it wins one or both and doesn’t perform, the customer implements the incentive system, so Company A loses revenue and reputation until it becomes more profitable to perform, when revenue recovers and, a few years behind, the lost reputation fades. All the while, lives are saved, perhaps not always to the standard of the perfectionist but whisper it - a perfect world doesn’t actually exist - and the taxpayer gets reasonable value for money.

Don’t look for the psychology – follow the money.

Yes, business is business.

However, it's a different business that's nearly upon us.

Contractor SAR aircraft will no longer be peripheral. They will be the only available service. Every SAR aircraft in the UK will be operated under a contract and AOC, in a world of Open Government, with more developed regulatory frameworks, where every stakeholder can look up the details on the internet.

...whereas the MOD view SAR as an anachronism...:p

... until 2015 when we'll be out of Afghan and awash with helicopters and nothing for them to do. :ugh:

SW.. It could be more intriguing than that! If the rumours are true about GAP, and its gone 2 ways, it is in theory, also possible that the UKSAR comp could go to 2 others and not those chosen for GAP ( I know this seems unlikely... But it is possible depending in who bids)... So from 2013 we could face an interesting prospect that there are 2 contractors preparing to start their new GAP service, and 2 others starting their prep for the UK wide service, and in the middle of that the old MoD "contractor" ( which itself has 2 operators with their own views on SAR close down) getting ready to work with all 6 of themselves on an effective and reliable transition plan to get to the nirvana of a UK wide service sometime in 2017/8.... Good grief vicar!:ugh::mad:::{

Tallsar: coincides beautifully with my theory that in 2013, a light will go on, in DfT and they will realise that there is (a) disparity between (too many)operators and/or a chasm forming between the old and the new service, requiring an extension to the SeaKing service [resurrecting logisitics/spares/maintenance/training/aircrew - is NOT going to be cheap, or quick:eek:]. Mark my words :ugh:

In the perfect world, a wise old sage in DfT will pick the GAP incumbents (B, CHC) for a seamless transition to Long SAR....sorry eurocopter/lockheed/bond :oh:

Let’s just analyse your worries:

Logistics and Spares: Most companies in the industry have high tech kit miles from their headquarters and more miles from the OEMs. Getting bits to the right place on time is what they do already if they are to get paid.

Aircrew / training: most of them including chief pilots and trainers will TUPE from Company A to Company B or Company C if they want to stay in well-paid and rewarding jobs. At base level only the logo will change. The interesting challenge will be to re-attitude a minority of the ex-military people.

MOD working with 6 contractors: I hope not. The Navy and the RAF need to talk to the project manager who also talks to the two incumbent and the two future contractors and does what his title says.

Complex and demanding, sure, but the industry does contain a few professionals.

Next?

Manc...you are right to highlight that these things are more within the grasp of those companies and professionals than perhaps my previous post suggested at first glance. I have little doubt that all six interested parties ( if thats how it turns out) would work hard to ease the transition issues, although none of us should underestimate the effect of commercial jealousy once things pan out against certain contractors... Who knows? Whatever, such a scenario certainly increases the complication and decreases the transition management efficiencies, with a resultant increased risk that things will not go smoothly. Bearing in mind that new aircraft types (with associated delays) may also be part if the solution ( look at what happened with Interim here for some clues), then there is more risk in such a managed process involving a large number if contractors. After all if any contractor has a contract end or start date... That's what has to be achieved and stuck to.
Equally I think TC is right to raise the prospect of the DfT potentially realising
that these issues do need some degree of rationalisation...I fear however they have built a competitive environment locked on a course governed by immutable EU competitive jurisdiction... So their room for manoeuvre may be limited.
As for keeping the SK on.. A wise owl in the MOD is no doubt keeping a close eye on this possibility...although I have little doubt the DfT will do it's utmost
to avoid such a situation occurring.

It's going to be an interesting initial 18 months.... :rolleyes::)..and then beyond

what? away from a mindset of delivering world-class SAR, day and night, in all weathers?

The only re-attituding [sic] will be to accept there won't be 4 hours training available every day and that the aircraft should be more serviceable.

CRAB
 

What we are looking for - in the re-attitude stakes - is the desire to be as good as you possibly can with just one hour of training a day. There are many who have to manage with NO daily training so let's think positively about this new strategy given that the profligacy of the past has meant that we have to leave the Rolls Royce (sorry we had to sell that), OK the Bentley (Oh! we had to sell that too!) then the Jaguar (what - we sold that too!) - well let's just say that MoD were past masters at wanting the BEST as opposed to what we could afford.

Personally I believe that whatever equipment our military and our SAR teams have they will have the character and ingenuity to deliver their very best. As far as I can tell we in the UK have almost made 'making-do' into an art-form.

G :ok:

So how does Bristow winning at least some of GAP-SAR affect all this?

Crab -

You can train 4hrs per 24 hour shift if you wish to/are able to on an MCA aircraft contract delivered by CHC or Bristow (whoever wins this contract or the next).

Maybe you bit a little too quickly there. It was a baited hook with your name on it.


I think believing 6 contractors will end up involved is just a little daft and very far fetched. I know it could happen but it almost certainly won't.

Wednesday next week will show who's in for the next contract (Long/SAR-UK?), and I'm sure, as for GAP, the bidders will be whittled down as the bids are closely inspected to leave the usual suspects with perhaps one more for interest and the sake of fairness.

Flounder - I know it was bait but I didn't want to disappoint:)

Geoffers - you are, like me, a trainer and therefore must know that flying skills are perishable - no matter how good someone thinks they are, the fact is that without appropriately challenging and regular training, SAR skills quickly fade.

Being operationally current is one thing, being operationally competent is quite another. I'm not saying the contract has to include the roll-royce, gold-plated training solution - even I am not that naive - but anyone who believes that all the skill sets required to provide a world class SAR capability can be maintained on bare minimum currencies is deluding themselves.

BBC reporting Bristows have the nod for the Northern SAR element of GAP.

BBC News - Bristow Helicopters to take over search and rescue work