rotation
 

Hi,

Does anyone know, about how are the rotation going to be??

Thanks

UK SAR 2013 privatisation: the new thread
 

With regards to the rotation, the Bristow concept is all pretty conventional as far as I can gather, the top bit goes round very rapidly and lift is produced...

I can answer one of my own questions. Certification is scheduled for the end of 2013. :ok:

What about those problems with the 139 doing SAR though? Lighting and problems over the water at night wasn't it? Have these issues been designed out of the 189?

I have never been in a 139. What little I have heard about them has made me suspicious about their SAR capability.That conversations about the 139 in the SAR role tend to be hushed one-to-ones in quiet corners does nothing to instill confidence.

You mention: lighting and some kind of problem with over-water ops at night.

I hear: very limited space, generally poor role eqpt, missing tail rotors and 20+ fatalities.

What I am hearing about the 189 is that it has a basic family resemblance, 139 door(s?), a lot more space, role equipment similar to the S-92, oodles of control power, big-boy engines and transmission, and lots of new bits and bobs.

I am generally happy with the story so far. I am keen to know more though, and particularly about the reported SAR Prototype which one might expect to have done a few hours by now.

I am, however, somewhat amused by part of the Bristow website that mentions capacity for "additional standing persons". Perhaps the extinction of Homo Floresiensis was prematurely reported.

Jim, Perhaps you should have a chat with the many other operators throughout the world who have been happily using the AW139 in a SAR role for years to get a better picture of the capability. The UK is not the only place where SAR is flown at night - although to listen to some you'd think it was.

Yes, a helicopter that hovers 8 degrees nose up with a small cabin and poor ground clearance is a perfect SAR helicopter for UK.

Hi Adroight,

Where it is used elsewhere, is it used over the sea at night with minimal references and in poor visibility? If so that's important because that's what will be required by the 189 in the UK.

Crab
 

Stop knocking the Sea King, its more like 10 nose up. Besides it is nearly a retiree so show some respect to her.;)

I am aware that the UK isn't the whole story. The 2007 contract had its shortcomings and the 139 may suffer because of that as much as anything else. There are a lot of mixed messages and mis-information out there about the S-92 and it may be that the same is true for the 139. However, if there are real problems then I would like to hear the real evidence.

Space is definitely an issue for those who are used to Sea King and S-92. However, people used to 135 and Jetranger will undoubtedly think it has bags of room.


Still uneasy about those tail-rotors though.

Cabin space
 

Dear all, i'm not qualified to say but having just read 'On the wire' by Dave Peel, ex Navy and UK CG winch op, he describes his concerns about the a/c and says the cabin space is smaller than the Whirlwind that he first started SAR work in, seems a backward step to me, even though it is more powerful, two engines etc.

Cabin space is an important point. The 189 is advertised as being slightly bigger but does it have the capacity to carry a Mountain Rescue Team with all of its equipment or to rescue a dozen mariners from a liferaft 150 miles offshore? These must be basic requirements for a SAR helicopter operating in the UK, as must the ability to do the same at night. It's not that long ago that a declared SAR asset in the UK was unable to rescue the survivors of a helicopter ditching in the North Sea in poor visibility because of crew and aircraft limitations. So have the previous night overwater concerns about its younger brother, the 139, been sorted out and if not, does the 189 have different design features to overcome those problems?

Why are you beating the living daylights out of the type of a/c being used?
It's a done deal, the a/c are well and trully tested around the world and some of the best and biggest helicopter operators buy them in droves.

So PERLEEEEEZE can we move on, get a life and talk about other aspects of the project and forget about the wrong type of a/c being used....Jeeeez.

As if ANYONE is going to listen or do anything now.....

Lighten up TC. Few people know much about the 189. Its little sister may be a successful aircraft type but like everything else is not without its shortcomings. Valid questions are being asked.

Personally, I think that the 189 is likely to be very very good. I am expecting excellent mountain performance and cabin space similar to a Pavehawk (but without the need for those monster cabin tanks).

Survivor spec: tick the box. MRT standard load: tick the box. Range and endurance: tick the box. Performance at 4000 feet: tick the box.

La oss gå flyr.

Jim,

You've been around this industry a long time and it's obvious you are a very passionate participant - more power to your elbow,
but let's add some fresh air to this draggy thread shall we?

The chopper,s selected are inbound come hell or high water. What is the point of slagging them off or questioning their ability? They won't change.

When will people realise there is more to this process than the right a/c for the job???

People, places, prices: this is what counts and the nearest a/c will do.

The 189 is going to rejuvenate down south and for that matter the British helicopter industry which currently is NIL.[To speak of]. Thousands of jobs guaranteed, major affiliation with an EU partner (Italy) whether we like it or not. You rub my back and I'll rub yours......

The day someone buys the right product for the specific job in hand is the day that company goes to the wall!

The MoD was absolutely crap at Pr (still is) no qualified experts running that department hence a dreadful performance. Watch as the Bristow PR machine spins up over the next few years and turns this 'process' into a massive success story. Of course the government will not shy away from being a part of that methinks.

It will be a success make no bones about it.
Modern equipment, the best helicopter company in the world and some of the best "hand picked" pilots globally. Watch and smile!

The Bristow PR machine?

Let me see now. I'm sure I remember them from somewhere.

Oh yes. Scottish Mountain Rescue magazine - Casbag edition 31

On to people then TC - the present allocation of SAR flights in the UK has the RAF with 6, the MCA with 4 and the RN with 2.

How then does Bristow justify their plan to have each flight split one third RAF, one third MCA and one third RN? How does that keep the level of SAR expertise and knowledge where it is now?

What does that tell you about Bristow remaining a Navy club, especially since some posts are being filled with very recent ex-RN who are being called civilian?

Not a great plan for producing a world-leading and marketable SAR service of the underlying ethic of the crews is 'SAR is a secondary role and anyone can do it'.

Discuss

It was only a matter of time...
 

OK, I'll bite... but treading carefully so as not to descend into a dark blue/light blue slagging match.


"How does that keep the level of SAR expertise and knowledge where it is now?"

I think you will find in all cases, 'SAR expertise and knowledge' is the same regardless of what colour Sea King you fly. Having known many RAF exchange officers through the years who have been thoroughly pleasant chaps this has proven to be true - albeit with a different con/patter! We just choose to do things a little differently and rotate people through different roles. What this means is that the number of SAR qualified personnel is much larger than the number of bods currently on 771/GSF.


"underlying ethic of the crews is 'SAR is a secondary role and anyone can do it'"

While SAR IS a secondary role for any helicopter, this statement in the way it is meant is utter rubbish. All personnel on the RN's SAR units consider themselves SAR aircrew. Long gone are the days of ASW with a bit of winching thrown in. There have however, been many rescues conducted by Lynx, Merlin & various mks of Seaking over the years (and even a few Chinooks!) that have been hugely impressive.


That is all ;)

SKD

No of course the UK is the only country in the world that operates overwater, night IFR, SAR - just ask Crab. He is the one with who has extensive world-wide civilian SAR experience in the AW139 :rolleyes:

If the workforce at SAR flights in 3 years' time is at or near this division of backgrounds, I'll be going on the Trilby diet.

Lala,

I really hope your post was intended in jest (Crab's sidekick eh? Chosen from a cast of thousands no doubt)...if you mean what you say, you are hardly helping those in the light blue world who are really hoping for a Bristow slot.

TOTD

Yes TC. I understand. With a shrinking defence force and a tiny air corps, the south will have to wean itself off its state dependency and join the real world.


Two EU partners? Italy and Poland?

SKD - then you will be able to tell the Dft when all that SAR expertise was last used winching to a windfarm, taking part in a multi-agency exercise, conducting multiple beacon homings (or even single for that matter) or even something really basic like night wet winching.

SAR expertise is more than just pitching up and cuffing it and, having done both sides of the fence, the crabs have the far more professional approach becauyse they actually do some training.

Lala: I'm not biting.....

The contract is awarded at about 80% of the lower end of the value estimated in the contract notice, in spite of extra aircraft, and a quarter of the figures being talked about for the previous version in 2010/11, so the gongs are in the bag.

I do wonder what chance there is of being able to tell the DfT anything?



I expect that will be the principal difference between a good implentation and a bad implementation.

Jim, I see a MRT beginning to disband over the next few weeks with them standing down completely by the end of the year?

I was thinking more in terms of where are we going to get 20 more foot-soldiers from (per team) if nobody does enough training for rocky bits at night and the police and coastguard don't learn to do grid references.

TC, it would be a very strange world if the potential inadequacies of aircraft selected for a project of national importance did not attract concern from some quarters.

Which aspects of the project would you rather talk about? Night wet winching was suggested but you weren't biting. It's probably pointless talking about night wet winching anyway because it doesn't sound like there will be sufficient training hours for it. How can that be the way ahead?

I have at least flown a SAR 139 over the water at night:)

Apart from the fact I don't like the transition profile in light winds, it is more than capable at night now - it's just that what was accepted by the MCA and CHC a few years ago wasn't fit for purpose as the lighting was inadequate and the SAR modes for the autopilot hadn't been certified.

AFAIK the 189 is just a 139 with a plug in the fuselage to make it longer so it should breeze through certification and be at least as capable as the 139.

There have been decades of flying Sea Kings over heaving decks and in spindrift-filled gullies, producing a huge knowledge base across aircrew, controllers, engineering, management and SAR partners.

We have seen 5 years of SAR flying by the S-92 and we are approaching Year Zero for the AW189.

No matter who is doing the flying, a capability droop is inevitable.

What will minimise this effect?

"the police and coastguard don't learn to do grid references"

Jim

Care to expand ?

The Coastguard have statutory responsibility for SAR below the high water mark and the routine location reference system is latitude and longitude.

The Police have statutory responsibility for SAR above the high water mark and the routine location reference system is the postcode.

Now we hand responsibility for the UK SAR Helicopter Service to the DfT and brand it HM Coastguard. Between 50% and 70% of tasks will be land tasks. DfT spec: "... display of the Aircraft's geographic position shall be capable of being displayed in the following formats: latitude, longitude, British National Grid and Irish National Grid."

Postcode districts in rural areas are up to 90km across. Complete postcodes in mountainous areas or military training areas can refer to areas 10km across.

Many devices that can accept multiple types of reference system do not provide grid references in the format that is most widely known and understood.

There is something called ARCC that can make a lot of this go away. But it can still get interesting.

=============================================

I say again

" ... ... a capability droop is inevitable.

What will minimise this effect?"

" ... ... a capability droop is inevitable.

cobblers:p

"the routine location reference system is latitude and longitude."

Bugger! why do we teach OS grids as one of the core skills for the guys and girls on the ground then !


"But it can still get interesting."

Yep they phone the for the OS grid for the HLS (see above)

Maybe its me but you do seem to have a MR are gods and CG are **** attitude !

As others have said this is the kit that's coming it may not be perfect but its pretty good in comparison to most country's and I would rather be F##ked up in this country knowing the collective capabilities of UK-SAR were coming to help me.

HM Coastguard
 

Oh yes they do...

No way. The MCA is a world class maritime regulatory and safety organisation.

Look at it this way. If there was a major new aspect of maritime rescue, would you give it to the police/MR?

==================================

Looking at our neighbour to the NE, look at what is happening with NAWSARH to see how they do things in a joined-up way. Justice department working with Defence and Health. Then there are the JRCC where everyone is sitting in the same office. What can we do in the UK, with the hand we are being dealt, to get more joined-up thinking and joint working without degrading specialist skills?

Compromise the service
 

Jim, regarding your comments in post 677 then even if the RAF/RN kept the SAR contract but had new aircraft then surely we would be in the same position in having no experience on type (unless you used a Merlin) to fall back on and therefore a compromise in the service would again be inevitable?

Just how are we going to get around this problem in this commercial world upon where we live?

The Seaking has to go. A new type has to replace it. All the previous 25 or so years experience gained in operation will be history soon, or at least a large portion of it.

J

Yes.


As stated previously,

Replacing the aircraft is inevitable but if the transition plan works there will be enough experience on type to avoid a drop in capability but ONLY if the right crews are operating the new aircraft.

If you replace a large proportion of the crab crews who do have the local knowledge and strength in depth from multiple SAR tours and replace them with 'done one tour and therefore SAR qualified' crews from the RN who only operate at 2 sites in UK - that's where you will find a drop in capability.

Don't expect anyone to like it but it's the truth.

That is certainly one of the potential problems. However, I am aware, and I hope others are, that each of the current providers has something to bring to the party. A wise operator would recruit appropriate diversity.

La La ... what a complete load of guff!! Local knowledge??? its called navigation - so when Chivenor covers the Culdrose patch and vice versa does this mean there is a drop in capability - of course not - you are talking complete nonsense. SAR is all about captaincy - this is why the RN system relies on using experienced rotary drivers from other areas - they have the captaincy experience to make sensible decisions - in exactly the same way that the RAF SAR force utilises experienced pilots as their captains. You need to move away from the idea that SAR is a black art ... it is'nt. The correct training in a capable aircraft = no drop in capability. Crews (RAF, RN and Civilian) will move from the Sea King (and a plethora of other types) and bring their skills with them ... hence no drop in capability.

Wrong. SAR is all about rearcrew. Only a poor SAR captain would think it revolves around him.

RAF SAR captains are often first tourists. The reason they're able to do this is that they select and train them properly to be dedicated SAR pilots and in so doing ensure that listening to advice from the rearcrew is second nature.

SAR is considered not to be a black art by those who haven't been exposed to much of it or haven't been doing it very well. Which one are you?