I think this will quite quickly boil down to straight fight between BIH and Draken/Airbus. Airbus have a huge amount of innovation and 'novelty' that they can bring to the table, and Draken have a proven pedigree of delievering SAR training (as Cobham and now as Draken). However BIH have been providing a solid SAR service with a good rep (as far as I know). I think any bid involving Airbus will be difficult to beat on sheer price alone, but reputation counts for a lot and BIH have provided the service very well, which has to count for a lot (one would hope!).

My money is on Draken personally as I have a good idea (having worked with them several times) how Airbus think - they will have done their homework on this one. In any event, it will be a great watch...popcorn at the ready.

The Falklands is not necessarily the problem. I know of many pilots and engineers who have enjoyed their time in the Falklands, both in the distant past (Bristow MOD contract 1983-1998), and Bristow oil contract 2015 - both of which I worked on. And I know of a good number of them now who would jump at the chance to come back here.

However, having also worked there in the past for BIH, over a total of 5 years, I can certainly say that the turnover of staff there was markedly higher than any of the other three organisations that I have flown for in my career. And I know of more than three local aircraft engineers, as well as base management staff, and at least one pilot (me), living in the Falklands, who chose to leave what on the face of it was an ideal job. (At the time I resigned, I did not have another job to go to).

It was the unhappiest workforce I have ever been part of.
That was not my experience. The dedication of the pilots, rear crew and engineers is without question, but the SAR aircraft spend what seems to me an astonishing amount of time unserviceable.

Seems some possible confusion here:

BIH = British International Helicopters - Falklands SAR
BHL = Bristow Helicopters Limited - UK SAR

I don't think there is confusion - surely the Falkland contract is operated on their UK AOC, and the suggestion was that BIH will partner with SERCO?

Well looks like BHL are out of the race then!

"I think this will quite quickly boil down to straight fight between BIH and Draken/Airbus"
"BIH have been providing a solid SAR service with a good rep (as far as I know)"

Actually, re-reading the posts, maybe Balldeep is confused, but the initial comments about SERCO teaming with BIH seem reasonable. Bristow teamed up with SERCO once before for the DHFS contract, but separated (that's why it went from FBS to FBH). Not sure if the parting was amicable or not though.

What do you base that on, they are shortlisted for lot 1,2 & 4 (see link above) so still in it, not?

Baldeep's prediction above. I just tried to point out possibly he got BIH confused with BHL, but maybe he just has inside knowledge 👍

i think someone mentioned that Bristow had picked up the Dutch SAR contract. I never saw a press release

Rumour is Bristow won it but it’s being disputed. Didn’t hear who’s put in the complaint .

what reason could it be disputed?

I think it's standard practice to dispute the contract award. It will probably reveal additional information about the bid - it's a form of intelligence gathering.

Airbus Helicopters UK LTD
Only bidding for the whole thing (Lot 4). Do we take from this that such a big outfit is only interested in a contract of sufficient size to extract a decent amount of profit? Are we going to have to deal with a Super Puma public backlash? This time, is this more about recovering a battered reputation? Draken expected to provide some solid SAR skills.

Bristow Helicopters Ltd
The incumbent has won all but four of the twenty-odd UK SAR contracts and are providing a good service. They know how to do this. They have emerged from rough times and merged with ERA. Apparently undiminished in their SAR ambition. I wouldn't bet against them.

EEA Helicopters Operations B.V.
Parent of CHC who are a former UK SAR contractor. Also been down a rocky road and come out the other end. Current Irish Coastguard SAR incumbent. They know how to do this. Referred to the CMA over their purchase of part of Babcock's helicopter operation.

Serco Limited
One-time electronics company turned general government contractor perhaps in a similar vein to Babcock. Always had some aviation involvement, including aircraft maintenance and airfield support services for the RAF. Expected helicopter partner unconfirmed.


I know you'll all help me out if I got any of that wrong. :rolleyes:

Serco Out
 

https://helihub.com/2021/07/15/serco...pD1OzOssnfYJms

Has anyone with SAR knowledge ever seen a recent UK HMCG’s operational organisation chart, showing JRCC, NMOC, MRCCs etc, and how the organisation dovetails together?

I hear that the Draken Academy at Newquay has just gone under. I wonder how this will affect the Draken/Airbus bid for UKSAR2G?...I am sure it won't help as it will hurt their reputation if nothing else. One of their selling points was the fact that they had a school where they could train new candidates and 'feed' the SAR contract from the bottom up. Sad news for the guys in Cornwall.

Sad for the team there!

Draken Europe has announced plans to close its UK-based Helicopter Academy at the end of this year

So is that the end of the Airbus bid? Or will someone else partner with Airbus Helicopters for this?

Thing is though whoever wins will have to provide some medium / long range SAR with a 92 airframe

cheers

Why do you need a S92 airframe?

There are other aircraft which meet the requirements of Lot 2.

S92 won’t feature. Too expensive.

What other aircraft are there which meet the requirements? the H175 is the same as the AW189. I agree that the S92 is expensive to buy and operate but those initial purchase costs are mitigated over time. It also has a well proven operational history and the BHL frames were all new
In my view a contributing factor as to why BHL won the UKSAR bid was to use the AW189 in the bid since A) it was a brand new frame; and B) it would be built in the UK at the Yeovil plant creating new jobs for AW and thus making the decision to award to a US company more politically palatable.
As for BHL not meeting the serviceable aircraft req's - thats a new one on me. Another consideration in the SAR2G contract award, is that BHL either own all or parts of some of the airports they operate from at the current locations; BHL lost the island SAR contract to CHC many years ago so learnt that lesson and have subsequently 'insulated' themselves from some of the risks this time around. I think BHL will take some beating, they provide a good service and are the current incumbent.

I mean 2XL?? come on the only reason they in there is due to the oil dispersal role with their ancient B727; their P31 Navajos are better placed in a museum, they'll be cheap for a reason

ya can either have "good" but it won't be "cheap". Or "cheap" but it won't be "good".

As regards the 'more capable' argument I'm not aware of another current frame which can land a Mountain Rescue team up in the Cairngorms in sh1te weather, with all their kit to rescue casualties and bring them back safely as they have been doing - does anyone else know?

Not sure which post you are referring to, but if it was mine above

“If so, I hope whoever is making the decisions on awarding contracts looks closely at the levels of service/reliability that they currently achieve on their one SAR contract!”

and



”Quote:

Originally Posted by Medevac999

viewpost.gif

They seem to have a high turnover of personnel

Yes. Engineers and pilots. And a lot of days with 0/2 serviceable.”

then I was referring to BIH, British International Helicopters, and their SAR contract in the Falklands, not to BHL, Bristow Helicopters.

Thank you, I think there was a little message crossing and/or confusion as regards the use of BIH and BHL to represent the 2 different operators. Too many TLAs.

I absolutely agree BIH have both a high turn-over of critical personnel (Crews & LAEs) and their 'S' record will raise eyebrows.

BHL (in my opinion) have - low staff turn-over and good frame 'S' record and a correspondingly good record at saving peoples lives ; but they will be relatively expensive

So are Draken still in the game?

Absolutely agree with that comment - but I think it’s a case of “you get what you pay for”, as the MOD in the Falklands have discovered!

Thats a really good question. AFAIK, the Newquay Academy and the SAR2G bid are complete separate things - one is not dependant on the other. As I understand it, the closure of the Academy is simply down to fact that paying customers are not coming through the door. This has nothing to do with whether Draken can support a bid for SAR2G as I see it as HMCG is already the customer. Airbus/Draken could easily put the provision of training services into their bid and outsource this if required - I do not see why the closure should have an impact on their ability to bid.

That said, there is no doubt that it looks bad. Draken only purchased and rebranded the Academy recently from Cobham and have already closed it. Did they do their due diligence? I don't know, but I have to say that on the face of it, it does not inspire confidence. I think the real question is not whether Draken are still part of the bid, but whether Airbus still want them to be.

Yes it will be interesting to see which direction Airbus go in, also apart from the academy their Middle East contract also went down the pan. If you don't have one then obviously you don't need the other............

A usually reliable source tells me Draken will no longer be part of a bid for UKSAR2G. Unclear if Airbus will look for a new partner.

This is a RUMOUR and NOT confirmed, but he’s in a position to know.

If its not a rumour then it will be announced soon enough.

No announcements then

My estimate of the programme timeline expects "Deadline for Submission of Initial Tenders" about now and the "Shortlisting for Participation in Negotiation" about 6 to 8 weeks hence. So I expect this is a period when there is an opportunity for the great ego that is Airbus to disappear from the process without fanfare and with minimum embarrassment.

On the helicopter side of things, we would then be left with 'the usual suspects', unless one of them does something strange in which case it would all be over.

It was indeed just a rumour. The Airbus/Draken teaming is still very much alive in UKSAR2G after checking with the right people :ok:

In that case it becomes more interesting to observe whether, with 3 bidders still in the game for the helicopter lots, there will be a down-seletion in November-ish. Invitation to Submit Final Tender will only go to those that MCA Aviation judge can do a proper job.

This is great news - healthy competition is rarely a bad thing!

Rumour has it that Airbus Helicopters will be no-bidding UKSAR2G citing "commercial reasons" following the supposed break up in early September with Draken Europe.

yes there is a official confirmation on Twitter of all places

I’m not disagreeing with you by the way, but a quick look through Airbus tweets over last week and I couldn’t find anything. Have you got the link?