There. Reality.


However,
the risk-taking of UK MilSAR was easily eclipsed by the military flyers of some allied nations. I have heard several scary tales of daring-do from SAR Force pilots describing their experiences while training in other territories (the helicopter near miss with the bus always sticks in my mind :eek:). Some of the civilian rescue flying in other EASA territories raises eyebrows in these parts and the rate of European Human External Cargo accidents is still too high.

So UK MilSAR flying was safe in relation to many other examples and now UK CivSAR is safer. And the job is still being done very very well. :D

Thank you to all those working to keep us safe on the wire. :ok:

So when there is a need to hover taxi up a mountain in cloud, will it only be done if the casualty has life-threatening injuries (if you actually know that at the time) or will there be times where you just say 'f88k it' and leave them to it.

Jim, you know that many helicopter extractions are often conducted because leaving the MRT to do it would put them at significant risk with a stretcher in poor weather on treacherous terrain - how do you feel about the 'super-safe' SAR crew letting you get on with it because there is a 1 x 10-5 or even 10-6 chance of a single engine failure?

What next? No night decks because you might end up in the water if a donk stops?????

The whole point of having all the best kit is so that the technology mitigates some of the inevitable operating risks (through increased reliability and performance) of doing the job in the way it sometimes has to be done.

Who is joining at the bottom of civ SAR? Sooner or later the talent pool will run out and all those who trained hard in mil SAR will be gone. You can train your own but there is a real problem brewing for all commercial operators. During the downturn there has been no investment, schools have closed and the pool of available pilots is drying up. I’m not talking about rich 200hr Robbo pilots but those with the experience necessary to sustain the service we now receive. People are paying for their own S92 ratings as the big operators are reluctant to spend the cash on an uncertain future. SAR will find itself in the same situation and the quality of new entrants won’t be determined by their talent but more their ability to pay. Contracts are being accepted that leave zero margin for anything other than regulatory training. The next renewal may not be so attractive to HM Government.

No one says “**** it”. What they will do is assess whether the risks to be taken are appropriate to the task and act accordingly. The “super safe” SAR crew is going to weigh up the risks involved in flying or winching MRT and act accordingly. And as I engage with MRT regularly, let me tell you Crab that they feel just fine about that.

Just when you thought this willy waving thread was history, someone has to go and breath life into it.............. really!! ��

Good point. Apologies. I’m out 👍

Suggest you read cyclic's post - no willy waving required, just an ability to look at SAR without rose-tinted 'brave new world' glasses.:ok:

I have the greatest faith in my ex-colleagues to always make the right decisions regarding risk - some of the others with little real SAR experience....I'm not so sure.

Crab,

With that final swing of your willy you prove my point. Well done.

P3

Crab is providing a useful service. :eek:

I'm 'IC Silly Questions' and he's 'OC Faecal Agitation'. Necessary team work for ensuring best compliance in a challenging environment. :E

Where I work, the non ex mil SAR pilots to whom Crab presumably refers are by far the best operators. Why even now he continues to denigrate them is beyond me. And with that I really am out.

Like you, I am concerned about the future talent pool. What is evident is that there are some great SAR pilots working in this service who have never served in the military. Some of the best training sorties and ops we have done have been with these guys. So civil pilots can do the job and there will still be military pilots, some with some SAR experience, going into SAR after mil service. What currently concerns me most is the situation for the development of 'SAR Technical Crew'. For the long term security of that skill set I believe that the CAA should take the bold and world-leading step of making it a licensed aviation trade. Yes, more f33kin paperwork, but also major benefits.

DDW - do you work at a mountain flight?

Crab, with respect, just stop now. I have watched you spread nastiness and sneer at people on here for years now. It is not pleasant and I’m not playing.

Step away from keyboard.

Please note DDW's use of the term "MRT".

DDW - I think you must be a Daily Mail reader with your outrage settings.

Just because I say I have the greatest faith in my ex-colleagues and am not so sure about those with little real SAR experience DOES NOT mean I am denigrating all non ex-mil SAR pilots in any way shape or form - that is a conclusion you have jumped to without keeping my comments in context ie we were discussing risk/reward wrt hover taxiing up hills in cloud.

I am quite aware there are good operators and bad on both sides of the ex-mil fence so I think you should get over yourself slightly and put teddy back in the cot.

Teddy firmly in cot. You are clearly unaware of how offensive you are on this thread. And if you think I am the one who needs to get over myself then you are delusional.

I am aware that many of those with vested interests didn't like what I had to say about privatisation of SAR and I may have reacted in the past to some of the insults and abuse that came my way but I have never set out to be offensive.

Some people just want to take my remarks that way because they either don't understand them or read far more into them than is there - it is the nature of the written word that it is open to interpretation and easy to be selective about what one reads.

I am many things but delusional isn't one of them - cynical maybe, but that comes from 57 years on the planet and 32 years of being f**ked about by professionals in the military - I was never one of the 'staff-speakers' who thought if they talked the talk it meant they could walk the walk.

I didn't buy the reasons for privatising SAR and I am still unconvinced by its sustainability in its current form - let's hope, for the sake of all those who might need a world-leading SAR service, that I am wrong.

@Crab
I have never understood the rational of privatization either? am I correct the mil still have SAR capability with training if so why not invest in our military to the tune of the contract cost yearly.
I appreciate there is a initial cost but if a private concern can get funding :confused:
We need a longer view, not just in this context either, to meany experts each with their own short term ideas.
A re think of MOD operations & procurement might be a ides

500e - SARTU still exists at Valley (under a different name I think) and there will some form of basic SAR trg under MFTS but nothing like the long SAR courses that used to be run there and at the Sea King OCU.

The Navy have SAR as a secondary role but how much specific role training they complete I don't know but I don't think it is a lot.

We traded away an excellent capability with poor aircraft for a good capability with excellent aircraft which cost a big bunch of cash, but that was moved from MoD balance sheet to DfT, in what was effectively a PFI (not that those have proved very cost-effective in the past).

Military procurement is so broken and has been for many years with 'clever' staff officers in London doing creative accounting with budgets, Out of Service Dates and long term costings - ask Tucumseh on the mil forum if you want more details.

As I mentioned earlier, SAR was doomed because it wasn't seen as 'core' military business at a point where the Govt realised how bloody expensive going to war actually was!

On top of all that the Coastguard need to feel important and AVM Niven didn't want SAR in JHC. Then there is the gaping hole in our war-fighting capability that is our lack of proper independent CSAR on a level commensurate with our strike capability. Then for CivSAR to end up starting at the same time as the Fleet Air Arm start working up their SAR-capable helicopter for carrier service is ludicrous. All set in motion about 20 years ago and effortlessly drifting from one disaster to another across the years it has miraculously ended up with a very capable CivSAR service. Although some of the credit for that goes to the advisors who set the spec for the aborted SARH25 for their professionalism and to MCA Aviation for their tenacity, largely, success is due to the skills of the aircrew.