PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Rotorheads (https://www.pprune.org/rotorheads-23/)
-   -   UK SAR 2013 privatisation: the new thread (https://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/511282-uk-sar-2013-privatisation-new-thread.html)

[email protected] 28th Mar 2013 07:58


“We will introduce new helicopters to the UK equipped with the latest Search and Rescue technology that will deliver unprecedented levels and quality of SAR coverage across the country. The existing expertise and local SAR knowledge is immensely valuable and we will ensure that this is not lost.

“Bristow Helicopters Ltd knows the responsibilities that go with providing this service and we are committed to working in full partnership with the Maritime and Coastguard Agency and ensuring a smooth transition process and the long-term continued delivery of a world class SAR operation in the UK.”
Straight from the Bristows web-site - they have set out their stall so shall we wait to see what the details are - they have a fairly major task ahead and no-one can afford for it not to work.

junglie jock 28th Mar 2013 13:07

Managed path
 
I was just wondering if anyone has any more info about the managed path? Is this a legitimate offer or just a way of our masters keeping bums or SAR seats until the end so their is no exodus of SAR qualified types? Would it be best to get IR done now to be ready or will Bristows provide? Will people already in Bristows be able to use seniority to get their choice of bases if they fit the requirements etc. I know details are still a little vague but I don't see any point on hanging on till the end if i can leave sooner and get more of a chance of getting a job where I want, although I have heard the Outer Hebrides are quite appealing!

jimf671 28th Mar 2013 14:31

So, as an example, on 1st April 2015 at Inverness, in the back, would they want a guy from Den Helder or a guy who has spent years being dragged across rocks all over the NW Highlands and Grampians?

Reading the piece that Crab has quoted (or the DfT stuff), surely the latter has got to be the case.

onesquaremetre 28th Mar 2013 17:05

Even the true blue free marketeers of the Telegraph seem to have figured out what's going on here.

Cartoon - Telegraph

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/...7_2520653a.jpg

:D

junglie jock 28th Mar 2013 18:11

If your reply was towards my question Jim, I see no drama for the rear crew who are trained as Paramedics getting a job in the place they want. To be honest, I see them being in more demand that the pilots. My question was more from the front seat point of view relating to training times/hours building etc. There are a lot of guys out there with the pre-requisite SAR hours and Glass cockpit time in the civil world. What I am asking is will it be a disadvantage to stick it out to the end in the military rather than jump now and get established with Bristows. i have a feeling this managed path maybe isn't all it is cracked up to be. :confused:

Al-bert 28th Mar 2013 19:05


i have a feeling this managed path maybe isn't all it is cracked up to be. http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/sr...s/confused.gif

then think of it as 'crazy paving' :cool:

hueyracer 28th Mar 2013 19:12

There is no chance for military personnel to "jump over", as they require a minimum of 100 hours ON TYPE (for Captains-on AW189 or S92)...

jimf671 28th Mar 2013 19:31

I refer you to the statement of our learned friend during a previous session.

http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/511...ml#post7762957

roundwego 28th Mar 2013 19:35


There is no chance for military personnel to "jump over", as they require a minimum of 100 hours ON TYPE (for Captains-on AW189 or S92)...
Oh yes there is!

A type rating and a couple of months on oil and gas flights ex Aberdeen or Scatsta will get them to 100 hours very quickly on the S92. Not difficult to get AW time either. I am sure BHL will facilitate this very easily if required.

Fareastdriver 28th Mar 2013 20:55


Most of the Bristow crews I knew in Sumburgh and Stornoway were there because they wanted to
and moved over to CHC to stay there. Now they will move back.

Should Bristow need experienced SAR S92 captains thay will either funnel experiencd SAR captains or an experienced S92 captains though the system as fast as possible.

Ticked all the boxes 28th Mar 2013 21:58

So how do the current coastguard crews plan to become Nvg trained and experienced? I am sure some of the ex mil pilots will dust off the rust pretty quickly but even some of them may not have used Nvg before. It is a hugely demanding and different skill set in the SAR world. I fully understand the TUPE rules that are in play but will it be sensible to suddenly have crews with very limited nvg experience suddenly together on shift? Perhaps a safer bet would be to have a mixture of the managed transition crews in and amongst the current civilian crews.
I have the upmost respect for the coastguard crews. My point is merely a safety question as it takes a long time to become comfortable on nvgs and there may well be quite a few current sar captains without any Nvg time.
Personally I think it is very sad to be losing military sar. But I also see it as a great opportunity to mix strengths and overcome weaknesses that exist across all 3 current sar providers. If the right people are recruited then there will be a potent mix of experience and skill across the new sar flights around the uk. Hopefully that should provide two things; a great atmosphere to work in and a first class service to the public.
As long as the mil guys accept it is a new way of doing things and leave their attitude of 'we used to do it like this which was the best way' behind then I am sure we will all get on great!

jimf671 28th Mar 2013 22:26


So how do the current coastguard crews plan to become Nvg trained and experienced? ... ...
For the crews at Sumburgh and Stornoway, by this time next year, this will be sorted.

At Lee and Portland, I do not know.

Variable Load 28th Mar 2013 23:02


At Lee and Portland, I do not know.
So why would CHC train the crews at Lee and Portland for NVG use? No chance springs to mind!

Thomas coupling 29th Mar 2013 02:19

It's not 'Managed Path" anymore it's: "Managed Transition" :ugh:

Current Mil crews will not be allowed a bespoke PVR unless they are offered a firm position in the new scheme. Those who elect to leave and NOT join Bristow's will be left to fend for themselves and do a normal PVR process.

Secondly, recruitment is NOW and the mil SAR encumbents have yet to await the outcome of what will happen to their pensions if they do benefit from a bespoke PVR and the results from this won't emerge before June (ish) I am told!!! So some nail biting there.:{
Finally, hueyracer, it isn't 100hrs on type it's 250hrs :eek:

This could scupper the whole deal, couldn't it? So what does this line in the advert really mean then?
Does it say: Bristows is confident there will be a controlled exodus from other aspects of its business into SAR, from currently qualified S92 drivers, which can then be filled by (possibly) mil sar crews leaving the service or will they realise they have over egged it and climb down / accelerate current mil crews thru to a lower 'type' qual entry level?
Currently NO mil crews can comply with this qual..............:ugh:

NVG is not a dark art (excuse the pun), it will easily be absorbed on the job. All mil crews are NVD qual'd. So they won't be a problem and the civvy crew will do OJ training. It is VERY straight fwd.

PS: I see Jamie is advertising for S92 SAR crews in Brunei and his requirement is a lower entry gate than this requirement. Better money too :D

212man 29th Mar 2013 04:42


PS: I see Jamie is advertising for S92 SAR crews in Brunei and his requirement is a lower entry gate than this requirement. Better money too
Yes - it's a pity my thread highlighting that got 'modded' into the depths of the 'Rotary Jobs' thread so quickly! :(

[email protected] 29th Mar 2013 08:05


NVG is not a dark art
true TC but it is one that needs respect as complacency on NVG, especially in tricky terrain and poor weather, can be a killer.

The on the job training will be sufficient as long as there is a proper ground training package behind it so that the physiological problems and technological shortcomings of NVG are properly understood by those who are new to them.

Additionally there needs to be adequate continuation training to ensure that crews are setting them up and focusing them properly using something like a Hoffman box. NVG are often seen as a 'strap on and go' item that turn night into day - that works on a nice night in easy conditions but you need training to get the best out of the goggles.

Junglie Jock - as TC has said, the managed transition is the way to get directly from milSAR to SARH - what concessions will be made in terms of hours and IR we have yet to see - otherwise you have to apply in direct competition with the rest of the world which will mean sorting your own IR and possibly type conversion.

Geoffersincornwall 29th Mar 2013 08:12

139 = 189 ???
 
I don't think so. You had better check that a differences course will cover it. I reckon another TR is a strong probability. New engines and new avionics/displays usually mean a new type.

Certainly 139 folks will have a head start for the other systems are very similar but not identical.

G.

onesquaremetre 29th Mar 2013 21:02

Nice Margins
 
Bristow.com Financial News


Under the terms of this new SAR contract, Bristow Helicopters currently anticipates earning approximately $2.5 billion in revenue. Jonathan Baliff, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, added, "We believe that these contract terms and conditions are transformative from an operational and financial standpoint for our company. The number of helicopters operated, combined with the revenue and earnings generated under this contract, will create both a larger and lower risk company going forward."

"The total capital requirement for this project is expected to be approximately $1 billion, much of which is dedicated to the acquisition of 22 of the most technologically advanced, SAR-equipped S-92 and AW189 helicopters ever built.
Nice and cheaply does it.

Rigga 30th Mar 2013 00:56

I think it was Alan Sheppard (1st US Astronaut, 1961) who said: "When I got into space I couldn't help thinking that all the parts of the craft were made by the cheapest bidders!"

Didn't do them any harm.

More lookout 30th Mar 2013 08:57

Time to move on. MIL SAR is over, the true test is the test of time. The crews that will make up civ SAR I suspect will be no less determined to provide the best response to those in danger. I had a great time as a part of RAF SAR, but it could never last in these times of cost austerity. It became top heavy and expensive, just look at the shiney SAR force HQ built at valley. How much did that all cost?

Focus on the future.

John Eacott 30th Mar 2013 09:17

Today's Daily Telegraph:


The Ministry of Defence will retire its 40-strong fleet of Sea King helicopters from 2016, with the search and rescue aircraft being replaced with newer models provided by Texas-based firm Bristow in a £1.6 billion contract with the Department for Transport announced on Tuesday.
However, The Telegraph understands that only 22 new helicopters have been commissioned under the new contract – a shortfall of 45 per cent.
Ten of the new helicopters are believed to be AgustaWestland AW189s models and another 10 are thought to be Sikorsky S-92s, both four-bladed twin-engined crafts.
The new craft are expected to be 20 per cent faster than the existing Sea Kings and will be introduced from 2015 in a 10-year deal ending 70 years of search and rescue being run by the RAF and Royal Navy.
Richard Drax, Conservative MP for South Dorset, who has campaigned to prevent a search and rescue base in Portland from closing, condemned the cuts saying it would have a severe impact on safety.“However fast it is, one helicopter can only be in one place at one time," he said.
“I don’t care how fast they are, if they are tasked elsewhere, and you have less helicopters, what helicopter is going to come and do the job? So by cutting the number of helicopters, that’s a risk.
“The less helicopters and bases you have, the more likely a rescue helicopter will be on another task and will not be able to get where it’s needed, were there more helicopters and more bases.”
He added: “The integrity of search and rescue, by removing Portland, will be harmed, and my fear is – and I don’t want to be alarmist – that lives will be lost.
“Helicopters are notorious for breaking down, because there are so many working parts.”
The Ministry of Defence said front line services would not be impacted by the cut as only 16 of the existing Sea King fleet are deployed for search and rescue missions, with the rest undergoing maintenance or used for training.
Four of the 16 Sea Kings always in deployment are operated by the Royal Navy, while the RAF operates 12, with two helicopters on each base.
The Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) operates another seven helicopters, bringing the number of front line search and rescue aircraft to 23. Those seven, however, are in addition to the 40 aircraft run by the Ministry of Defence.
It was unclear whether those craft will be retired.
A MoD spokesperson said: “It is wrong to suggest the MoD operates 40 Search and Rescue helicopters at any one time. There are 16 operational Royal Navy and RAF Sea Kings - 2 at each of the 8 bases - which deliver the UK’s search and rescue service. The rest of the fleet are either in deep maintenance, used as part of training programmes or based overseas. These aircraft are not available for operations.
“From 2015, search and rescue services will be provided by 22 Bristow helicopters, under a contract awarded by the Department for Transport.”
A spokesperson for Bristow Helicopters admitted there would be no additional aircraft to replace any that are taken out of service but said the helicopters will all be kept fully-maintained and ready to fly, with spare parts always available if an aircraft needs to be serviced.
The company added that it expects 20 of the new helicopters to be used for frontline rescue operations, with two used for training or maintenance at any one time.
The Department for Transport insisted the new service would be better than the current one.
It said: "There will be an overall improvement in flying times to incidents of around 20 per cent (from 23 to 19 minutes).
“Presently, approximately 70 per cent of high and very high-risk areas within the UK search and rescue region are reachable by helicopter within 30 minutes. Under the new contract, approximately 85 per cent of the same area would be reached within this time frame."
Why does some of the flight time stuff remind me of discussions here prior to the NPAS decision? :hmm:

onesquaremetre 30th Mar 2013 09:44

Nearly 600 comments in the Telegraph and not many of them positive. Who said the public didn't care about who was doing the rescuing?

If the Bristows financial officer says that capital expenditure will only be about $1 billion and they're going to be buying 22 helicopters at about an average of $20-30 million each (is that about right?), that doesn't leave much for other infrastructure expenditure etc at all the new locations. I'm assuming by capital expenditure he means INITIAL capital expenditure. Doesn't he? $3-400 million left over from the planned budget stretched over 10 years wouldn't go very far if he was quoting total planned capital expenditure.

fluffy5 30th Mar 2013 10:01

Well I certainly like the cost savings coming in for the Aw189 with those four main blades.......

Fluffy

jayteeto 30th Mar 2013 10:19

600 comments out of how many million? The scaremongering hasn't helped. I landed at a hospital HLS yesterday to be accosted by a family who told me that "it is being taken over by an American company who don't know what they are doing"!!!!!!
If taxes and council tax bills went up to pay for a military option, there would be uproar.

onesquaremetre 30th Mar 2013 10:43

600 comments in a right of centre newspaper whose readership are generally well-educated and recognise the benefits that can be found in private sector efficiencies. Yet in this instance, a life-saving service that has set the standard for decades is being privatised for no other reason than to offload the public purse. I don't think they're that pleased - they know what private sector 'efficiencies' really means.

Fareastdriver 30th Mar 2013 11:52

They can bleat as much as they like; it's all signed and sealed. The overwhelming majority of the 600 almost certainly have no idea of the intricacies of Search and Rescue.

The media will always look for the opinion of the people who are going to slag off something new.

It sells newspapers.

industry insider 30th Mar 2013 12:41

The problem is that the UK is broke and can't afford the capital to replace the old up for retirement Sea Kings with S-92s

There are two options, lease or finance the replacement aircraft or privatise the whole thing and pay monthly for a service. It looks like privatising the SAR service also helps to downsize the military, which is also happening as a result of budget cuts.

The UK public need to realise that the old days of Britannia and her Empire are over.

How many people in the UK would willingly pay extra taxes for SAR which 99.9% of them will never be in a position to need or use?

Al-bert 30th Mar 2013 13:07

as i said int'other thread
 

ex SAR pilot (21 Years) I am just surprised that it took so long to come to this. Over that time the RAF shrank almost year on year and the SAR force became just another career step for many people and huge amounts of cash were wasted in building HQ’s and empires with consequent jobs for senior officers
@ Morelookout is absolutley right, as I pointed out more fully in my above rant in the MilAir forum:ok:

jimf671 30th Mar 2013 13:54


The UK public need to realise that the old days of Britannia and her Empire are over.

In which case we shouldn't really have taken on a million square miles, much of which should be covered by Greenland/Denmark, Iceland, Ireland and France.

SASless 30th Mar 2013 14:26


Yet in this instance, a life-saving service that has set the standard for decades is being privatised.....


Errrrrr.....a Standard maybe....but not necessarily THE Standard.

cyclic 30th Mar 2013 16:57


ex SAR pilot (21 Years) I am just surprised that it took so long to come to this. Over that time the RAF shrank almost year on year and the SAR force became just another career step for many people and huge amounts of cash were wasted in building HQ’s and empires with consequent jobs for senior officers
So true. Used to have Flt Lt flight bosses and the Squadron run by a Sqn Ldr. By the time I left we had Sqn Ldrs everywhere, Wg Co's at sqn HQs, more at SARF HQ and a Group Captain along with more at Group. The job hadn't changed and neither had the aircraft - go figure as they say.

Al-bert 30th Mar 2013 18:57

Cyclic - couldn't agree more! In fact, that's what I said int'other thread :ok:
We had the best of it I believe :)

Helinut 30th Mar 2013 19:26

Sounds like the modern way with most things - a vast explosion of middle managers who spend their time justifying themselves to each other. In the end it takes so long for something really important to trickle through that "opportunities and challenges" are missed.

heli1 30th Mar 2013 21:38

Recent availability figures released by Sikorsky suggest a very high percentage for the S-92 so not unreasonable to assume they won't have25percent of the fleet in deep maintenance most of the time? But I have a question. Who/what wil cover the Falklands post 2017?

sudden twang 30th Mar 2013 22:19

Rigga
Not sure Mrs Grissom would've agreed with you.

TorqueOfTheDevil 30th Mar 2013 22:20


A [sic] MoD spokesperson said: “It is wrong to suggest the MoD operates 40 Search and Rescue helicopters at any one time. There are 16 operational Royal Navy and RAF Sea Kings - 2 at each of the 8 bases - which deliver the UK’s search and rescue service. The rest of the fleet are either in deep maintenance, used as part of training programmes or based overseas. These aircraft are not available for operations.
It shouldn't still depress me that even the MoD can't get the facts right, but it does...


a Standard maybe....but not necessarily THE Standard
Do elaborate?


Who/what wil [sic] cover the Falklands post 2017?
Never mind 2017, all the RAF Sea Kings will be gone by the end of 2015 (under current plans). Doesn't leave a huge amount of time, but no doubt something will turn up...

Geoffersincornwall 30th Mar 2013 22:44

The trouble with old colonials.......
 
....... is they are

OLD

and

COLONIAL

Please humour him and agree that Brits can no longer make claim to be the best at everything. Sometimes the colonials are good at something...... like...

Cricket (Aussies - oh no, not these days)
WORLD series baseball (Yanks - but don't tell them that it was an Englishman that first drafted the rules of baseball)

But most of all don't say that we do SAR better than anyone else. It's not diplomatic and in all probability it's not true. If you do then SAS will get his big stick out and.... well woe betide you.

G. (wot no smiley with tongue-in-cheek)

MightyGem 30th Mar 2013 23:53


However, The Telegraph understands that only 22 new helicopters have been commissioned under the new contract – a shortfall of 45 per cent.
It will be more effective, and more efficient. Well, that's what NPAS are saying about their decision to cut about 30% of Air Support aircraft. :rolleyes:

jayteeto 31st Mar 2013 09:15

You know what I think of NPAS!! However they are using less of the same aircraft. This is a capability improvement with the S92.
Let us not kid ourselves, if the government are going for it, it will not be as good a service. My argument is that it will not be an awful service. It will "do a trip". Whilst the purists cannot accept this, the realists will understand that in the current financial climate, the public DON'T GIVE A TOSS about the SAR service. They are worried about paying for gas and electric, mortgages and holidays. They don't care if an aircraft takes 12 or 18 minutes to get to scene. When you are involved in a public service job, you always overestimate just how important you are. How many times have I heard military, police, NHS and Firemen say that the public "would never accept us being cut that far". Absolute tosh! They don't care, neither do the politicians, worse is still to come in the next 12 months. Live with it!! :(

[email protected] 31st Mar 2013 09:19

Perhaps SaS should ask some of his fellow countrymen who have been the US CG exchange pilots over the years - all good men but all had to raise their game significantly to meet the 'standard' and all returned to the US as significantly better SAR pilots (some with medals from their UK exploits to prove they exceeded the standard)

The first one I flew with at SARTU was in the LHS of a Wessex for a winch weight check (up to 300' in an OGE hover and basic stuff as far as we were concerned) - at the end he said 'Wow that was awesome' - I commented that perhaps he didn't spend much time in the high hover in the USCG and he replied that he didn't spend much time in the low hover either:)

The Torygraph journos and readers should have expressed their concerns 10 years ago when the civilianisation was first mooted - but no-one gave a toss then because it wasn't a neat 'US firm makes millions from SAR' headline.

The only way is forward now to make it as good as it can possibly be for the sake of the 0.1 % of those taxpayers who really will need the best service in the world.


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:49.


Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.