Yes, there is some good info on the Bristow web cast and slide show but, since they seem to have nothing to prove, why did they deliberately fudge the comparison of the Sea King with the S92 and 189?

Their slide gives the max speed of the Sea King as 100 kts so that it looks much much slower than the new aircraft. The max speed is 127 kts but at normal operational fuel states it is around 120 kts.

Why did they feel the need to manipulate the stats so unfairly - we all know the newer aircraft are faster, why lie about how much faster?

The range is also quoted as 'above 200 nm' and the S92 as 'above 250' nm with no mention that the S92 needs extra tanks to achieve this figure and the Sea King is actually good for 250 nm at max fuel.

Have they been taking lessons from 'Noo Labour' about spin?

They'll need to replace the 8-10 S92 captains we're taking..........;)

Miles,

If you're aim is to scare people from posting anonymously on a rumour network then your post is most effective. I think that there are very few in the military world who deem it a God-given right to be handed a SAR role with Bristow on a silver platter. Just take a step back from the petty bickering for a moment and imagine how it might feel if you were told that Bistow's Aberdeen operation was being taken over by a new contractor. Imagine you were then told that you had to re-apply for your current job, possibly moving you and your family to a new location, if you failed to get that job the company would move you to another location anyway, possibly not in a flying role. The future for Bristow and civilian SAR is bright and rosy at the moment. The atmosphere within mil SAR is somewhat different, people are a bit nervous and have every right to ask a few questions on PPRuNe. The majority of the posts on this thread have stimulated some decent debate. To suggest people who post in this forum will be black-balled because 'we know who you are' is most unhelpful at this time.

Seems he's retracted his post?

Interesting!

Just got round to listening to the webcast that was linked on page 22. Lots of good stuff on there, and there does seem to be a real passion for SAR - a real shame our media can't hear it!

The number of applicants they speak about is a bit daunting: 800 with half applying for managed transition! :bored:

SKD

If I was a GD officer in the RAF that was what I would be subject too; SAR privatisation or not.

Lala the S-92 at Stornoway is good for over 250nm with no more prep than filling the tanks up that are on board (plus still having some payload left)... Is it the same for the Sea King?

Having never flown one.. Is 120KIAS the typical cruise speed of the Sea King? It's about 140-145 in the S-92 for reference.... Though long range speed is a little less.

Cheers

Lioncopter

LionCopter:
do you carry a ferry tank for very long missions? Btw, what's the longest distance a S-92 has flown in SAR/medevac, does anyone know?
(In Portugal, our longest distance in the Merlin was 380 for a medevac from a ship, and 360 for a rescue.)
Thanks

Yes we have a extra internal tank installed at all times.

Good question... Not sure is the answer... Ill see if I can find out.

Though the longest by time was about 10 hours and over a 1000nm including 2 refuels I think... Again not 100% sure as I was not on the crew that did it.

Though I do realise that's not that much compared to come places. :)

Our 380 miles rescue also had 2 refuels, they did 200+380x2+200, so almost 1200 miles, 12 hours or so, and to the West of the Azores you are literally in the middle of the Atlantic, these are very uncomfortable flights. The 380 leg was made from (and to) an airport that has no VOR or ILS, just a NDB, and the closest viable alternate is 200 miles away.:}

The weather is very bad in the winter (45+ kts, BKN002, etc), but I'm sure not as bad as in the North Sea!

Best wishes from sunny Portugal

Is Crab on holiday?

He's probably going through the Bristow selection process.....

Merlin,

With BKN002 I don't think Portugal is anywhere near as sunny as the North Sea has been for about the last 2 weeks. Speaking to a few former Sea King pilots 250 sounds optimistic and for max range I wonder what speed the cab is flown at? Also is there much payload left when it's turned into a flying gas can? But anyway no need for a hangup with the fuel on the 92, a 262NM ROA with 30 mins on scene and 30 mins IFR reserve on landing is enough thanks. Could be eeked out if you scoop and run and reduce landing reserve with discretion, might see 300 ROA but wth no proper TOP COVER anymore who's going to come and get you at 300 if there's a problem? Where's that Nimrod gone again? Can my local MP raise a question in parliament re lack thereof?

Can of worms open. End rant. :E

I'm going back to a previous life but our ASW SK had 5,300lb of fuel at 1,000lb/hr, and the SAR machines sold to Germany, Norway and Denmark had a full centre tank where the sonar well was, increasing fuel to ~7,000lb. In my book that gives 6+ hours, and as to payload then you will burn off 40% of your fuel to get to the scene: there's 2,000lb at least!

That was with underfloor tanks, which made no intrusion into any cabin or cargo space nor had any extra effect on CoG.

Or don't the current SAR Sea Kings have the full fuel capability?

6371 lbs is full fuel on a Sea King 3/3A but you do have to strip out some of the role kit to keep within the 21,400 MAUM. The Vmax starts off low at that weight (105 kts) but quickly increases giving an average speed over a 4 to 5 hour long-range rescue of about 110 kts.

Our standard planning has 30 min on scene, a min landing fuel of 400 lbs and a 10% reserve for contingency and the aircraft will typically land with 1000 lbs.

As far as the S92 goes, perhaps Lala is thinking of when the S92 was originally introduced in Stornoway and Sumburgh without the bigger tanks fitted as standard.

Thanks for that: I know we're a bit OT but that helped clear up actual figures instead of some of the guesswork that has gone on!

1,000lbs land on, eh? Luxury! When I were a lad that were s'mthin to dream of, 12 minutes were enough to call fuel state chicken in the port wait....... :p

For longest range, the Merlin does 110 TAS, but that is after you shut down #3 engine, it increases range by 7%, more or less. If you use 3 engines you make 120 TAS, but range is reduced. Our max fuel is around 5000 Kg to comply with MTOW, but we could carry 5300.

Payload ,with unnecessary stuff left on the ground, is enough to carry all SAR equipment, 2 pilots, winch operator + winchman, and because of PtAF regulations we still carry a doctor and a nurse for SAR! Space inside the cabin is not a problem...:E

You won't carry top cover from now on? We always take a C-295 or a P-3 to the longest ones, they fly ahead, identify/search the target and pass the coordinates to us. When the target is small, and the weather is bad, it makes all the difference. We've been averaging less than 30 minutes on top of the ships on the medevacs, and it's only because of this.

Also, I've had a nasty failure in the main rotor 250 miles from land, at night, and we had a P-3 on our wing on the way back, we weren't sure we'd make it, and we were 450 miles West of the other Alert Merlin in the Azores, at 500 feet with no comms, so in terms of safety, it's certainly a plus!

I remember reading somewhere a 300 miles range for the S-92, and looking at your SRR to the North/Northwest there is a lot of open sea, hence my original question.

In theory we have a Hercules at 3 hours notice for long rangers, yet to be used I believe. It has just become the norm to go solo... Gets lonely out there!

The Coastguard Cessna 404 (?) can be and has been used for similar long range tasking. Always good to talk (or have commas relayed).

Pas

Even better to have ASRA in a nearby bomb-bay:{

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Sorry:oh:

Nicer to have a radar equipped top cover with droppable life rafts etc. Also the Coast Guard 404 vanished from Inverness at a point, waiting on an aircraft on 2 hour standby to come from East Mids wasn't helpful. Hercules was requested but that was clearly too difficult and the proper MPA aircraft with full kit in Ireland was ruled out as being impossible to get.....:ugh:

Oops, another rant.

Good point, forgot the Cessna!

As you would.

Someone asked early on about the Falkland Islands SAR cover. Well, (now don't laugh...) but having fairly recently returned from our South Altlantic outpost, "word on the street" there is that the powers that be are looking at putting Puma down there. Now I told you not to laugh! I'm not a "rotary man" but I'd have thought the winds at MPC would not favour Puma Ops. Surely they'd topple over with the winds they get?
Another rumour is that BRINTEL don't expect to get their contract renewed when the current (extension) runs out. Purely a rumour but who would get it if they didn't? CHC? Who are currently at Stanley on Oil Charter work.

Hey ewdardspannerhands check the Falklands helicopter support contract thread. Rumour there is BI have held onto the contract. However nothing confirmed yet from MOD contract section .

CHC's last aircraft left the Falklands a couple of weeks ago in the back of an Antonov - reportedly on its way to reduce the shortage of airframes on the UK North Sea......

edwardspannerhand: read MoD's lips: MO MIL SAR...nada...nil...noooo.
Meantobe: BI continue with the contract (as advertised) until 2016.
Bristow: SAR analysis paper prepares for SAR ops on the Falklands post 2016 - 3 cabs. QED.

Rumour on the (mil) street is that the new contract for SAR UK is going to be called: "Future UK SAR." :mad:

Seemed to have managed in the Shetlands for the last forty years.

Damn you predictive text! :mad:

At range speed the S92 will burn 1250 lbs/hr :ok:

Thanks for the replies guys. like I said, they were just the rumours floating around on my recent visit. Good news if BRINTEL have secured a new contract - from what I saw they provided an excellent service. Safe Flying to all. ES.

Industry insider - if your figures are correct then 3.6 hours minus 30 mins IFR reserve equal 3.2 hours - multiply by 145 kts and you get 464 miles or a RoA of 232 nm without any time on scene unless your time on scene was the 30 mins but then you don't have any reserve.

232 RoA doesn't beat the Sea King - more poetic licence???

Pasptoo - what is the range speed that gives that fuel burn?

Lala...

Industry insider did say "without Aux tank" and I did say 140-145 was not best range speed... So everyone was being honest. Best range speed is about 130KIAS. If you can get to a good alt then fuel burn will drop off a little more than what Paspatoo has said.

We almost managed a full page of grown up discussion. No poetic licence... Just facts.

If there is an SK with a ROA greater than 200 nm then I don't think it has found its way onto the ARCC state board yet.

Jim, I don't know why that should be - change of sop's, a/c heavier? I have several entries in my log book out to 280 miles west of Ireland, as did all the ex Brawdy 'boys'. (and boy were we happy to see the Nimrod) :ok:

Does it matter? You draw a line on the chart, if whatever it is is beyond that line it has to sail within that line if it needs a helicopter. Twenty or thirty miles isn't going to make a lot of difference.

Unless the boat is sinking.

But the SAR aircraft will have aux tanks....

A few question for those who operate the S92 with the Aux tank:-

1. How many survivors can you seat with the tank installed?
2. The S92 has I believe its fuel in the sidepods -for better crashworthyness, is the aux tank at the back of the cabin or under the floor. How does it affect its' crashworthyness?


Also can you use the windscreen wipers above 40kts which I believe was a limit on the earlier S92s?

HF

You can use it to lay out the stretcher. So no space lost per se.

Jim671: don't be silly: ALL SeaKings have an ROA of 200Nm's :ugh: ALL should be on your board.