As I said above in not so many words- spot on Crab. H145 and 175 for example...reliable, cost-effective and available.

The UK is not exactly awash with surplus cash and the cheapest bid that meets the requirement will win (obviously). Draken and Airbus will take some beating as Leonardo products cost more to buy and more to fly, and as for the S92....

There has of course been a bit of that going on already. That's why there are two AW189 bases (and previously two AW139 bases) on the south coast near large numbers of coastal and near-coastal jobs and three S-92 bases in the northern and western extremities adjacent to large expanses of ocean within our SRR. However, the more diverse the nature of the fleet is made to address the different needs the more often the right aircraft will not be in the right place at the right time.

Completely correct and this is the dilemma- do you put S92’s everywhere ‘just in case’. No, of course not - too expensive. So for the rare long-range job that a 145 could not manage... use a 175. It might not be able to be there immediately for sure, but where do you draw the line? You cannot have an S92 positioned every 10nm around the coast...there must be a compromise and I can assure you that cost will win the day. If I can save millions (realistic figures) by having a couple or 3 of 175 bases and accepting that on occasion a rescue will take longer, then I will take that every day of the week.
We cannot afford 500 offshore helicopter platforms, positioned all around the UK, each with 2 S92’s... which would be a great solution. We equally cannot have 1 base with an R22 - somewhere between the two is the compromise.

We have to buy what we can afford. Draken/Airbus will crucify Bristow on price.

Well if Baldeep is there making the case for 145s and 175s, rest assured that Draken are doomed IMHO :}

Sécurité Civile have 23 bases and are supplemented by the Gendarmie fleet. It's the sort of organisation you have if your SRR is not much bigger than your land area and you have quite a number of major SAR hotspots. I am not detecting an appetite at the MCA for 23+ bases. There is also a much greater emphasis on patient treatment in UK SAR than in some other territories.

As for the cheapest bid, well Draken and Airbus, like others, will not get an opportunity to be the cheapest bid at final tender if they do not demonstrate in the earlier stages that they have a technically more than adequate, and preferably innovatively progressive, solution. The MCA are not laying this out on a plate this time. Nobody knows going in exactly what boxes they have to tick. There is probably a lot of making your own boxes. Anyone who has picked too many accountants and MBAs for their bid team instead of lineys and posh hoverers with imagination and ambitious SAR ethos may not perform well in the environment that I expect the new process to create.

It's still going to come down to money though - the country is broke and Trillions in debt - the solution can be as innovative as you like but in the current and short-term climate, it will have cost as a major factor.

it doesn't help that "Draken" is an awful name that sounds like a Bond Villain. Who on earth comes up with these names? The name hardly resonates safety, reliability and dependability etc does it?

I know it's just a name, but these things do affect how people view your "brand"

Well, actually, NO. The Government owes money to the Bank of England, which is effectively just another government department. So not really debt. Can't go broke. In a high value, monetarily sovereign, developed economy, austerity and poverty are political decisions and they appear to continue to exist for spite.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Deficit-Myth-Modern-Monetary-Economy/dp/1529352525/

https://www.waterstones.com/book/the-deficit-myth/stephanie-kelton/9781529352528


Also, the MCA is using the idea that each accidental death costs the state a sum of around £2M as part of the arithmetic for this contract and this is in the public domain. That means that each year of operations of this current service is paying for the entire ten years of the contract including both fixed and variable costs. I am reliably informed that a number like that was also being used in the previous contract process. A few years ago, I was asked about the cost of helicopter rescue and arrived at the same figure independently using what I had found out from organisations like the Health and Safety Executive, Network Rail and the Crown Office who all propose similar numbers.

Every budget holder in the civil service loves to go to his boss and tell him that he got it so much cheaper, and I am sure Damien Oliver is no different in that respect, but the reality is that pouring money into a well equipped and well staffed highly capable search and rescue aviation service is a wonderful way of injecting money into the economy at a time when stimulus is desperately needed.

Interesting point...but Draken is Swedish for Dragon - which is pretty cool, and at least they are not named after a fat darts player😉.

Or of propping up an otherwise struggling company - as we are doing at the moment:E

They are ALL struggling companies at the moment unless they are Amazon or fake PPE companies owned by the pals of government ministers.

And keeping your people alive is never going to be a bad thing to do.

I wonder what the Payload for a 145 would be in Sar Fit?
2 hoists ,Flir turret, search light , Floats, Life rafts and a wet floor. suppose your only looking at 1 causality statistically. Hems plus basically.

The new 5 blade H145 (no rotor head so maintenance is negligible) has a MTOW of 3800 kg. In full SAR fit with full fuel, she can carry 6 people.

So that is 2 pilots 2rear crew and 2casualties? I am sceptical because I have had to deal with eurocopter statistics in the past. Optimistic doesn't come close.

I suppose it depends how you choose to operate - no requirement for 2 pilots in my book, as other SAR operators operate single pilot without issue, but I am the first to say that single-pilot NVD is not a great idea.

Single-pilot SAR? Excellent, we are back to the Wessex days:ok:

May aswell dual purpose the hems aircraft whilst we are at it. Just stick a winch on, easy as that :sad:

The past SAR performance section in their submission should make interesting, albeit brief, reading.

I know of one operator with 135 that has them in three different equipment configurations: hoist, cargo and EOS. That'll sort of work if you are operating in a small area but across a larger area you are soon going to find that the right aircraft is not in the right place at the right time.

In the light of news of the shifting industry landscape in recent days, there is an interesting question added to the industry Q&A record on the MCA site.

"7.1. If we name a subcontractor in the SQ, are we obligated to use them?" :E