Privatising SAR - makes me depressed on so many levels

[UncleAlbert]

No ones mentioned the thin end of the wedge that this is starting now that it has news coverage.

The scenario is this:- Two formite members are in a bit of bother in the channel and need rescuing. One is insured for rescues and the other is not. Once the rescue is agreed and the sums negotiated then the one who is covered gets rescued and the other is left to fend for himself, or passes his bank details by VHF and has his cash (even if its not in a Cypriot bank) or possibly his home conviscated or has a lien made upon it. Could have nothing left to cover his nursing home costs then. (I could go on but feel that I might be accused of being really grumpy)

This is a business (Bristows) which has been awarded this contract, they have shareholders and they want their dividends from profits and where do you think that will come from Watch you insurance premiums go up in the not to distant future.

I am depressed now think I'll take up tiddlewinks.

 

[dylanwinter]

No ones mentioned the thin end of the wedge that this is starting now that it has news coverage.

The scenario is this:- Two formite members are in a bit of bother in the channel and need rescuing. One is insured for rescues and the other is not. Once the rescue is agreed and the sums negotiated then the one who is covered gets rescued and the other is left to fend for himself, or passes his bank details by VHF and has his cash (even if its not in a Cypriot bank) or possibly his home conviscated or has a lien made upon it. Could have nothing left to cover his nursing home costs then. (I could go on but feel that I might be accused of being really grumpy)

This is a business (Bristows) which has been awarded this contract, they have shareholders and they want their dividends from profits and where do you think that will come from Watch you insurance premiums go up in the not to distant future.

I am depressed now think I'll take up tiddlewinks.

you guys will be telling me that Bristows are in it for the money next

illusions being shattered one by one

D

 

[Joker]

This is a business (Bristows) which has been awarded this contract, they have shareholders and they want their dividends from profits and where do you think that will come from Watch you insurance premiums go up in the not to distant future.

Are you a Guardian reader, sir?

 

[UncleAlbert]

No, far from it, but there are some things which I consider sacrosant, and this is one of em, Dread to think if they should ever consider 'buying out' the RNLI as another money making opportunity.

Now Ive lost me tiddle and can no longer wink!!!

PS for info my one and only chosen newspaper is the Saturday Telegraph, and that purely for the cryptic crossword ( whihc they keep relocating within the paper) and the letters page.

 

[UncleAlbert]

[/QUOTE]by the way I have a helicopter joke

if you are at a party with 500 guests how can you tell which one is the helicopter pilot

don't worry... he will soon tell you[/QUOTE]

I fly an RC heli, does that count

 

[dylanwinter]

by the way I have a helicopter joke

if you are at a party with 500 guests how can you tell which one is the helicopter pilot

don't worry... he will soon tell you[/QUOTE]

I fly an RC heli, does that count[/QUOTE]

case proven

not even at the same party and you felt you had to tell a complete stranger that you are a helicopter pilot

D

 

[Scillyboy]

the Saturday Telegraph, and that purely for the cryptic crossword ( whihc they keep relocating within the paper)

Thread drift - I hate that too - having to dismember the paper rather than just fold it over, just for some cr**py full page advert on the back...and the ads next to the crossword should have lots of blank space for doing anagrams! Bah, humbug.

 

[chanelyacht]

No ones mentioned the thin end of the wedge that this is starting now that it has news coverage.

The scenario is this:- Two formite members are in a bit of bother in the channel and need rescuing. One is insured for rescues and the other is not. Once the rescue is agreed and the sums negotiated then the one who is covered gets rescued and the other is left to fend for himself, or passes his bank details by VHF and has his cash (even if its not in a Cypriot bank) or possibly his home conviscated or has a lien made upon it. Could have nothing left to cover his nursing home costs then. (I could go on but feel that I might be accused of being really grumpy)

This is a business (Bristows) which has been awarded this contract, they have shareholders and they want their dividends from profits and where do you think that will come from Watch you insurance premiums go up in the not to distant future.

I am depressed now think I'll take up tiddlewinks.

What is even more depressing is this sort of scaremongering.

The scenario above has never happened in 30 years of private UK SAR helo operation - and won't.

I'd rather have a S92 above me than a SeaKing held together by gaffer tape...

 

[Seven Spades]

the problem with privatisation was that privatising the telephones was a huge success, this gave the misleading impression that it is better to privatise everything. Privatising the Railways has been and still is an unmitigated disaster with railways thinking they are airlines. You now need to know how to work the system to get a ticket at a sensible price, under British Rail you just bought a ticket to Edinburgh and got on any train you liked, simple.

Next week all GP out f hours services are being transferred to 111, I can't wait to hear what a success that is!!!!

This concern I have, and please correct me if I am wrong here is that the new helicopters have reduced capacity, so in an even such as Fastnet 79, the new helicopters would have to leave some yachtsmen in the water for the next trip.

I am a supporter of privatisation but privatised monopolies are a stupid idea (Utilities).

 

[glashen]

I think the truth is most pilots civilian or military are in it to some extent for the pleasure of flying, the R4 radio comedy "cabin pressure" has a good take on this. Helicopter pilots doing air sea rescue are unlikely to be wage slaves and will almost certainly be highly dedicated to their profession, but most people (Prince William excepted) find getting paid for work done useful.

It is notable in this thread that those with direct experience of SAR and those who sail in areas covered by a "private" CG helicopter are generally relaxed by the change and welcome the new equipment.

I think Dylan who may be demonstrating the same ingrained prejudice against the commercial that some on the right show against the BBC on the grounds it is publicly owned. The problem is that general SAR is not really a good fit with the military, the CG helicopters in the south seem to work well, but I believe the kit is an issue. If a private / public partnership is the best way to provide the service don't object to it just because it involves private money and some commercial companies have sometimes done bad things. There is plenty of mud that could be flung at public organizations but that doesn't mean all public institutions are bad either.

 

[chanelyacht]

This concern I have, and please correct me if I am wrong here is that the new helicopters have reduced capacity, so in an even such as Fastnet 79, the new helicopters would have to leave some yachtsmen in the water for the next trip.

The S92's have a capacity roughly equal to the Sea Kings, which is why they are at the extremities of the area. For the Fastnet scenario, an S92 from Newquay would go, as would an S92 from Southern Ireland.

The 189s are smaller, but to be honest, from the Solent / Portland experience of runing 139s, I can't think of any incidents where capacity was an issue. Something like 90%+ of incidents are to single person evacs, so the speed and better ease of landing at hospitals counts.

The 189 at St Athan will spend most of its time in the Brecons anyway, I should think.

 

[glashen]

The S92's have a capacity roughly equal to the Sea Kings, which is why they are at the extremities of the area. For the Fastnet scenario, an S92 from Newquay would go, as would an S92 from Southern Ireland.

The 189s are smaller, but to be honest, from the Solent / Portland experience of runing 139s, I can't think of any incidents where capacity was an issue. Something like 90%+ of incidents are to single person evacs, so the speed and better ease of landing at hospitals counts.

The 189 at St Athan will spend most of its time in the Brecons anyway, I should think.

Thanks for that, to me it looks like a good plan, two helicopters at each base available 24 hours looks sensible and an improvement of the present situation. The 10 S92s apparently have the range to reach the whole UK waters. I note average flight times to a casualty of 19 minutes could anyone really complain if that is what they achieve.

If you don't have the kit to stay alive for 30 minutes maybe you should reconsider your emergency equipment.

 

[chanelyacht]

Thanks for that, to me it looks like a good plan, two helicopters at each base available 24 hours looks sensible and an improvement of the present situation. The 10 S92s apparently have the range to reach the whole UK waters. I note average flight times to a casualty of 19 minutes could anyone really complain if that is what they achieve.

If you don't have the kit to stay alive for 30 minutes maybe you should reconsider your emergency equipment.

Plus people forget mid Channel the French from Cherbourg are always happy to help, and the Irish for the Irish Sea / N Ireland coast. The Dutch (Bristows at Den Helder) cover a lot of the southern north sea too.

The real win from the whole deal is getting an aircraft back at Manston.

 

[dylanwinter]

utterly rediculous idea I know but I assume it would be inconceivable to give the existing organisation better gear.

 

[chanelyacht]

utterly rediculous idea I know but I assume it would be inconceivable to give the existing organisation better gear.

I don't think the MoD wanted to go down that route.

The aircraft would be considerably different to the military versions operated so would raise maintenance issues.

Interestingly, they were only a contractor anyway - the bill was charged by MoD to Dept. Transport, same way as when the army help out with flooding, etc, it's charged for (known as MACC, military aid to the civilian community).

 

[RadiumRob]

...

Next week all GP out f hours services are being transferred to 111, I can't wait to hear what a success that is!!!!

....

Glad to help - 111 was rolled out early to our area. We had cause to use it last Monday when my eight year-old developed rapidly-worsening hip pain. The call was answered immediately and an ambulance dispatched while we were on the phone. All went well thereafter. It was a seamless operation, quicker and much less hassle than tackling the old GP surgery system.

Not related to S&R, but neither was the OP's remark, and I am pleased to report an instance where change can be successful.

 

[charles_reed]

Not too fussed about who delivers the service as long as it is good and timely at point of need.
Consider again our wonderful, sacred, treasured NHS. Beloved to one and all - especially politicians. This is a state provided hugely expensive organisation that has given us Dr Harold Shipman literally murdering his way through his NHS patient list. It is an organisation that has recently caused the needless deaths of thousands of patients through gross malpractice and institutional incompetence beyond all understanding in Staffordshire. It was not a privatised outfit that caused those deaths.
If I need rescue services (or medical services) I would primarily wish that they be good at the job. Tendering out of SAR provision is no guarantee of improved service but it may not necessarily be a turd in a teacup.
Robin
Pleiades of Birdham
MXWQ5

Thank goodness for a breath of commonsense.

Whether the service is private or state-run is immaterial if it does the job properly - all to often "privatisation" has been driven by an attempt to cook the Treasury books and blind obeisance to a slogan.
There are some activities where letting in a little competitive wind leads to a tremendous improvement.

As was once said - there's only one thing worse than a state monopoly and that's a private one.

 

[UncleAlbert]

Surely there is a difference betwixt RAF and Private enterprise, in that, as a private company, the ubiquitous 'Elf and safety rules will/must be religiously applied.
I mean we cant have businesses putting their employees at risk by flying in difficult situations, there might be a sueing opportunity to take place if something goes wrong! So if the weather is a bit iffy and your in a bit of strife, then is there a likelihood that the Bristows crowd would not fly when the RAF chappies would.
Anyone out there got ideas of how this gets handled?

 

[Tranona]

Surely there is a difference betwixt RAF and Private enterprise, in that, as a private company, the ubiquitous 'Elf and safety rules will/must be religiously applied.
I mean we cant have businesses putting their employees at risk by flying in difficult situations, there might be a sueing opportunity to take place if something goes wrong! So if the weather is a bit iffy and your in a bit of strife, then is there a likelihood that the Bristows crowd would not fly when the RAF chappies would.
Anyone out there got ideas of how this gets handled?

Chanelyacht will probably be along soon when he is off watch to give you an insider view, but can't understand why you think there will be any difference. Bristows are contracted to provide a rescue service which by definition means operating in potentially dangerous conditions. They have been doing this for years for the coastguard, other governments and similar environments such as the North Sea oil rigs.

Civilian rescue work is not a military activity and the use of military equipment and personnel only came about because there was a need for sea rescue services for aircrew when ditchings at sea were common. The antiquated equipment used by the military suggests it is not now a high priority for the MOD, so makes sense to move to a contractor that will operate state of the art equipment and provide wider coverage.

 

[Pleiades]

The Armed forces lost what used to be "Crown Immunity" many years back - hence if you wander through one of Her Majesty's grey jobs for example you will find notice boards have lots of advice about Equal Opportunities Legislation and variuous Statutory obligations on the MOD as an Employer and respective Employee Rights and entitlements- all vitally important stuff in a fighting ship - more important than how to kill the enemy or say, resist interrogation without bursting into tears when a fiendish enemy abducts you and confiscates your I phone
So the legal duty of care for safe flying and so on is in practice not likely to be much different whether an MOD rank is in charge or a civy pilot. Taking safety risks is always unwise whether it is done as a form of military bravado or reckless cowboy flying by a hotshot Top Gun reject civy.
Anecdotally the reputation of the RAF has always been uber cautiuos the Navy more give it a go and the Army even more "can do" in attitude.
Traces of that might come through I suppose if a retired military pilot is working in privatised SAR but all pilots want to get home at the end of the shift and short of dodging muck and bullets in a war zone I don't think you could expect military crews to do more for you than a civilian one. A competent professional will be expected to do his or her best if contracted to go out and rescue folk. That will potentially involve them taking more risks than a routine flying task but no flight would be so urgent as to take the aircraft or crew beyond their safe operating limits.
Certainly in law there would be no defence at a subsequent enquiry to taking more risks just because the crew are military.
Robin
Pleiades of Birdham
MXWQ5