Crab

Re Industrial action. A deathly silence covers that subject, didn't partisipate anyway.
Spr

Hilarious Consortium Name
 

[FONT='Arial','sans-serif']Thought it would be fun to mix up the discussion a bit and discuss one of the consortium names. Has anyone noticed the ironic trademark name? This is purely in good fun not malice![/FONT]

[FONT='Arial','sans-serif']Soteria. While in the simplest interpretation it’s the latin translation of the greek word for salvation or "to save" which on the surface seems appropriate for the mission. If you break it down etymologically though, you find that Sot = stupid or drunk to the point of stupidity. and eria being an organism, disorder or disease. So, one could say that Soteria is a painfully progressive stupidity disease, or that they’re a bunch of drunk SAR crews and businessfolk. Either way I’m sure you brilliantly-witted British rotorheads will come up with some funny repartee on this theme.[/FONT]
[FONT='Arial','sans-serif'][/FONT]
[FONT='Arial','sans-serif']Further digging in Wikipedia reveals that Soteria is also a center for holistic mental illness treatment. No matter how you slice it, I believe that thorough trademark research wasn't conducted for this business name. It's just too easy a target :D Thoughts, volleys, parrys?[/FONT]

Parries, surely?

Sorry, but your intelligent linguistic/semantic questions made it irresistible.

What do you make of US101 (HH-71) for CSAR-X?

I would have thought the biggest threat to the HH-71 is the spiralling costs of the VH-71 program.

That aside, I wouldn’t be at all surprised if C-SARX didn’t feature in the 2010 US Defense Budget.

Pavehawk - I think Soteria's problems lie in two 3-letter areas at the moment - CHC and RBS :)

Some still around the SAR world remember this as the best SAR cab.......

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i9...2009_00000.jpg

Kind of defeats the purpose of PFI doesn't it? The now majority state-owned RBS part of Soteria (who I'd assume were the financial backers for the bid). Might as well keep military SAR as it is, get some new helicopters on COMR and sign a partnership agreement with a company to maintain the things once in service.

Bertie Thruster - not the best example of the whirlwinds performance as, a few seconds after that photo was taken, the helicopter suffered an engine failure and ditched off the back of the boat. It was a demonstration to the press off Thorney Island in 1955 to mark the the re-formation of 22 Sqn in the helicopter role. Fortunately happened as the helicopter was moving back in to pick up a 'volunteer' reporter strapped into a stretcher.

Parries!
 

Jacknicko, :O Touche! You caught me. In my zeal to be humorous, I forgot my audience and the Queen's English..

CSAR-X
 

Jacknicko & Hilife

While the VH-71 may present some challenges for CSAR-X I believe that the vendor has sufficiently distanced themselves from that program to avoid collateral risk. The bigger issue as Hilife pointed out is the 2010 budget. If OSD decides that each service must sacrifice one or two big programs to fund the perennial war on terror, then it'll be up to each service Chief of Staff to prioritize and defend his key programs. Gen Schwartz has twice now said in public that he would cancel some other program before his top two priorities (tanker and CSAR-X) so time will tell. We pray CSAR-X doesn't get cancelled because our Hawks are dying on the vine from overuse.

Soteria's problems?
 

Crab,

I apologize for not being "up to speed" as a new member of this thread. What do you mean by "Soteria's problems"? I wasn't aware that they had any with all the good press about MCA Shetland and Sumburgh rescues; barring of course the publisized one where the S-61s had to come in and perform. It seemed that they were doing well. Do tell..

USAFPAVEHAWK - it was a dig at a consortium who are bankrolled by RBS (who should have been allowed to go under) and use the management skills of CHC (trying to change terms and conditions of crews without negotiation, introduced a SAR aircraft into service that wasn't fit for the job - accepted by an offshore pilot with no SAR experience I gather - and employ a guy who was universally hated when he in the RAF and who seems to be doing a similar job in civvystreet).

Apart from that Soteria are doing fine, after all they have the lovely Nicky working for them;)

From another thread:

and:


It is still very early days but there surely will be an impact of this on the UK SAR S92 operators now and not good timing for the soteria bid.

SW

SW

Whilst noting your comment on the fallout from this tragic incident, there have been three Puma accidents (two over water) already this year with two of them also resulting in fatalities, so not a good start to the year for either platform.

2009 has not been kind to the rotary industry, so hoping the outlook will improve.

Don't think this yera sbeen tolo kind at all to anyone really - unless you paddle the Hudson.

Tell us about Nicky Crab, I could do with some entertainment!!! . . . . . .shes not a he is she!!!?:\

Definately not! Only met her twice and definately a her.

Yes, she has a couple of outstanding features...........................her eyes of course;)

I'm still completely clueless about this Nicky!!!?

Q. If Pave had a choice would he trade in his 60 for a 53?

I don't know if you guys would consider the Pavehawk a "high disk loaded" helo. But, I have found that when dealing with a raft, a higher hover (around 70ft) alleviates the raft flipping phenomenon. If I was doing this purely visual, it'd be very hard, but with INS referrenced hover cues, it's pretty easy and if you through in a hover coupler, it's a complete non-event.

Not so busdriver since the INS hover cues and a hover coupler will not keep you over a raft which is subject to wind, waves and downwash. All you need are reasonable visual cues and a good winch op's patter.:)

crab, I know what you're talking about, but all it takes is a bit of re-caging your brain to what a "stationary" hover is. If you center the cues and the hoist operator keeps telling you to stop right, then you figure out that a left drift is required to stay over top the raft. I've found the more I do night water, the less I rely on outside references and the more I rely on hover cues and the back-end talking to me. The normal hover height for a hoist is 40ft for us. I started using the higher heights in the Gulf of Mexico, where the waves are very small. Rotor wash seems to be a bigger problem in flat sea conditions than it does in higher sea states. Although I will admit, my experience in heavy seas is only about 3 months old.

My hover coupler comment was intended to reference the systems where the hoist operator actually controls the aircraft, of which I actually have zero experience since our system is basically an Atari brain and very poor at holding a hover.

student,

There have been many before you who have asked similar questions. Stand by for a torrent of abuse about not being the right sort of character to be a mil pilot if you are already thinking about going civvy. The mil lifestyle is such that to get to the point where you become 'useful' to a civvy company, either fixed wing or rotary, means a significant personal and professional commitment to whichever service you join. In other words dont even consider joining if your actual reason is to get free flying training before jumping ship...it simply doesn't work like that.

With regards to SAR, RN pilots have generally done a number of years 'front line' before being given a SAR tour. Some might then manage to stay SAR for a while, others will just do 2-3 years before returning to other duties. Post 2012 when SAR-H starts to take hold the numbers of mil pilots in SAR will be massively reduced. You can work it out for yourself but the chances of new mil pilots getting in will be equally massively reduced as the old boys who for whatever reason are not transfering to the new company will be hanging on in there.

Good luck and if you succeed in your ambition to fly for the RN you will be joining a fantastic family - you just need to make sure you join with the right attitude and expectations otherwise you may find fitting into the family more difficult. :ok:

HeliEng

I agree - particularly as the majority of the present civ engineers working the SKIOS programme are not / and do not require to be licensed. I would hope that once the winning bidder & aircraft are announced then those working in the SKIOS deal will be approached with an attractive training plan. At the end of the day these guys and girls are already based at the locations and working within the SAR ethos so seem an ideal source of engineering manpower....we shall have to wait & see.

SW

It will probably depend on whether the aircraft is CoCo, CoMo or CoMr.

Student - the RN regard SAR as a secondary role, the RAF regard it as a primary one - take your pick:ok::)

crab - not sure the RAF, outside the SAR Force, regard it is a primary role anymore either :ok::ok:

certainly, as things stand, post 2012 RAF manpower in SAR will be extremely limited too.

SW

HeliEng.
Recent advert in Flight for Engineers for SAR. As well as crews!! Someone is at least trying to think ahead! Soteria??:hmm: Air Knight??:hmm: But just where they are all going to come from is a mystery?
3D

SW - sad but true, the 'big RAF' will miss us when we're gone if only for the PR.

As for mil manning, I believe 2/3 to 1/3 RAF to RN and I'm not sure if that means the RN will be joining us for our increasingly regular trips to Mount Pleasant.

Crab, you know full well the RAF have the finnest PR machine of the lot! And they do't have to do a thing! It's all done for them!!!!!

Nice to see the 139 from Lee at Chiv today, thanks to the chaps for showing us round it:ok:

Sexy looking machine but not built for SAR (when people say the cabin is small they mean the cabin is small!) - however, Lee to Chiv in 45 mins isn't to be sniffed at, if we manage a return visit in the SK it will take an awful lot longer than that!

Crab!!! -You be careful, your heirs and betters will read this and lump you with one! - You know you won't like that!!!

3D try Qatar!!

Would that be a certain nasty little man with a massive Napoleon complex by any chance?? :* All this talk about the mis-management of CHC personnel et al is certainly worrying, which leads onto...


...Here's hoping, fingers crossed.

Just watched on Sky News, the 4 S92 SAR helos in the UK have been grounded following the Newfoundland crash......anyone got any info??

Something to do with this maybe...
http://bondpapers.*************/2009...ds-broken.html

smc33.
Have a look at the Newfoundland thread.

This, normally very active thread, has been very quiet for some time. Is there no news to report? In the absence of news I'll settle for rumour, no matter how unsubstantiated.

CD

Crab,

As the RN once trusted me to recover their super secret torpedo things up at Rassay.....as a civvie.....why not just contract out the most enjoyable posting down south. I am sure Bristow has a few SAR capable 61's left in the stable collecting dust.

Likewise....contract out the Chinook flying to Columbia and Bob's yer uncle!

SASless,
I think that the place that you mentioned has already been covered. It is still classed as an Operational Theatre for reasons that cannot be discussed here. The military guys are part of the bayonet strength ie they can be used as troops when the chips are down, that is why the civilian engineers are all military reservists.
The helicopters are not owned by the SAR force, but by the Permenant Joint Headquarters ie the guys who mount the deployed operations, the crews are on loan and the chinook has been withdrawn for some time.
I for one would be delighted not to ever go back to the place and I am sure that others would agree, but at the end of the day, the army want a platform that they "think" has military capabilities. Army, think !!!!!!!!!!!:p:p

Head down, look out for the flack

Breaking News - AIRKNIGHT propose new platform choice
 

AIRKNIGHT propose new platform choice to align with MOD funding profile.....


http://www.heirloomwoodentoys.com/Ai...-pr-18795.html

Don't tell them your name Pike
 

Is it true that Service SMEs reviewing the bids were asked to sign an undertaking not to join either of the bidders in the future and some refused? If so are the bids being reviewed by credible SMEs? Perhaps Crab could enlighten us?:confused: