The first one was built in Italy, as required by the Authorities The remaining ones are being built at Yeovil. Just as contracted.

Should see them soon.

Red and White new-looking CG SAR helicopter seen flying in and around Yeovil this weekend. Unusual, never seen a CG SAR cab here before.
I'll be honest I can't tell any AW products apart unless they were designed over 40 years ago. Could have been a 189.

CAP 999
 

If ambulance paramedics are to be converted into winchmen the training they receive has to be of the highest order - lengthy and thorough - and we're talking the best part of a year. Any less just won't do.


Section 4.7 of CAP 999 gives a detailed list of ground and flying training requirements which although not exhaustive, would at least give someone without any SAR experience a fighting chance of doing a decent job. So here the CAA have laid down the bare minimum they expect to be covered, in quite a lot of detail, but then they get all vague. They say that the training and checking of what they are calling 'Technical Crew' has to be carried out by someone who is 'suitably qualified'.


What qualification are they talking about for rearcrew in the civil world? How will the CAA ensure that the 'technical crew' trainers themselves are capable of providing this training that will be absolutely critical to the safe outcome of operations?


http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP999_...icoper_SAR.pdf

I dont know? a lot of the CAP999 requirements are covered on the in house Air Ambulance Courses, same with Police Observers. Recruit Air ambulance guys who want something a bit different and more pay and they always have something to fall back on.

(Very much tongue in cheek)

Didn't winchop cover this already?

http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/511...ml#post7791363

Joining BHL UK SAR
 

Given the many comments about (poor) pay levels, lack of training etc etc for rearcrew what is rely happening on the ground are military rearcrew:

a) joining BHL in their droves
b) holding out for better pay offers from BHL
c) looking for other SAR aviation roles
d) staying in the military

Some of us are going to Bristow. Some are staying in. Some have gone or are going elsewhere to do SAR. There's a fairly even spread of the first two and a handful of the third. As for holding out for better pay, that maybe some peoples plan but not that I'm openly aware of.

Sort of. This is what he said.

The kindest thing that can be said about what is reported above is that the CAA's understanding of what is required of SAR rearcrew is totally inadequate. Those updated training requirements shown in the revised CAP 999 may have changed, but I don't know if the Chief Cabin Crew Safety Inspector is still their top man to oversee SAR.

My question though was regarding the qualification of trainers on SAR flights. If pilots have to prove their ability to train and check others to the CAA, why not rearcrew? It makes no sense when rearcrew are so deeply involved in the safety and success of an operation. And if Bristow are, as appears to be the case, converting ambulance paramedics with minimal flying time into front line winchmen, then it is absofunkinglutely essential that the people that are responsible for training them have been recognised by some sort of authority as sufficiently capable instructors with a broad enough range of SAR experience to be both credible and authoritative. That's what is expected of pilot instructors. Why not rearcrew? This is serious stuff.

Said trolley-dolly inspector did actually visit a SAR flight to see what it was all about and was taken on a training sortie - if after that he still doesn't think the specialisation warrants full-time oversight from an experienced professional then that absolutely sums up how poorly thought out the governance of UK SAR is going to be.

Everyone had to start somewhere
 

Whether Navy, RAF SAR crews or indeed HEMS remember you all had to start at some point. UK SAR will work because SAR crews are passionate and dedicated to make it work!

Correct. Somewhere like an aircrew selection centre where only a small percentage make it through followed by months of leadership and ground-based professional training designed to reveal unwelcome character flaws and suitability for flying training. Then a year or two of basic flying training, operational conversion on one type or another, squadron-based operational flying, SAR pre-selection, then a lengthy, exacting SAR course with a high chop rate followed by SAR operational conversion and squadron acceptance.

Or you could bypass all that flying selection, training and experience and just get lucky when some gaps need plugging.


I think it will take a little more than dizzy optimism and blind faith.

And it is supposed to hit the ground running to replace the military service with no loss of capability - there is no start-up honeymoon period which is why the mil won't stand down their flights until the new ones have been proven to operate to standard.

Is that officlal MOD or crab@ policy? Has anyone told the guys trying to keep the Sea Kings alive....

...and if true who is going to determine they are operating to 'standard'? That trolley dolly inspector you have disparaged or maybe the author of 999 (who now works for Bristow!) or perhaps the MCA who reportedly are out of their depth to deal with inland SAR.....maybe DevA could be contracted to send in Glenn to save us all:ok:

Now there's a question! I wonder if they'll pass. :hmm:

Spanish - there is a 3 month overlap to ensure that each new SAR flt is up and running before its military counterpart stands down - this was part of the Dft plan to minimise disruptions to the SAR service - so, not crab@ policy at all:ok:

As for the new flights being up to standard - they will meet their own internal standards, perhaps with a bit of fudging as it isn't clear whether the many people offered jobs in the 'transition teams' meet the full contract specifications. The 'steady-state' of some of those flights probably won't be achieved for a good while after they are officially stood-up as some of the mil guys won't get released early enough for their 250-hours glass-cockpit training (or will that just get ignored).

I am sure the author of CAP 999 will be a valuable addition to the party and ensure that the vague guidelines included in that document are strictly adhered to.;)

The trolley-dolly inspector might be a fine individual but wtf does he know about SAR rearcrew and their operating standards????

Crab - I think you & I both know that a planned 3 month 'overlap' of the service is not the same as the mil not standing down until the new has been proved to operate to standard

Out of interest how is the military keeping trained and proficient crews at bases til the bitter end? I thought that was the point of a managed transition but if each base is hanging on to its military crews for 3 months once the civilian service is up and running then the numbers dont add up! I appreciate it is being phased in but you cant step out of a sea king straight into a S92/189/139:mad:

That is a surprisingly easy question to answer - not all the mil crews are part of the managed transition so they will fly the old girl until the bitter end while those who are being taken on will leave early to convert to type - that is the theory anyway;) As each flight shuts it will also free up crews to do shifts at the remaining bases.

Why is there a 3-month overlap if not to ensure the new service is up to speed before removing the old one???

139 is being phased out as well.

There may have been a 3 month overlap but Bristow is currently advertising it is ahead of the game by almost 3 months. I think you'll find there is no "monitoring" of 'civvy SAR flights to ensure all is well! The transition will be managed but you won't be able to get a fag packet between the stop and start times. :( RAFSAR will end earlier than you think - in the UK.

I still continue to be amazed at the mentality of military folk towards their civilian counterparts. Bristow won't even break sweat doing this for a living - credit where it's due please. They are a WORLD class operator, always have been.:rolleyes:

Do work for Weber Shandwick?