Search and rescue.

Biggles Wader

Biggles Wader

Well-Known Member
Joined
3 Mar 2013
Messages
11,347
Location
London
Visit site
I see the American firm Bristow is to take over the search and rescue function currently provided by the RAF and Royal Navy.Is this a good thing?Was the 70 year old service lacking in some way?I thought we had a very good service,and if it aint broke don't fix it,but what do we all think?
 
I wonder how much money this will actually save?
Given that the RAF and RN will still have helicopters and will still be expected to maintain their SAR abilities for a war time role. The SAR role over the seas and mountains must have been good training.
I guess that it all comes down to cost in the end.

Simes
 
Bristow Helicopters have their 'HQ' in Redhill Surrey, their main operational base in Aberdeen and Alan Bristow was a Fleet Air Arm pilot! Saying that it's a Texan company is perhaps correct if that's where the cheques are ultimately signed, but I believe that the management is UK through and through. The Seakings are to be replaced by the Sikorsky 92's, which are a current design rather than a 50's design, thus have far greater range and capacity. I'm a 'consumer' of helicopter travel by virtue of working offshore where the S92 is SO much better than the S61 ever was (Seaking equivalent) by being faster, bigger and able to carry pretty much everything that can be gotten onboard it appears.
Also, the commercial company will be able to run the aircraft more effectively and economically because they have to be more efficient or they'll go out of business.
 
Double whammy?

jamie N said:
Also, the commercial company will be able to run the aircraft more effectively and economically because they have to be more efficient or they'll go out of business.
Click to expand...

How does this work when it is a reactive service?

I find the whole concept quite disturbing. The reduction in RAF costs will be zero whereas the cost of the privatised service will be met by the taxpayer. Double whammy?
 
Biggles Wader said:
I see the American firm Bristow is to take over the search and rescue function currently provided by the RAF and Royal Navy.Is this a good thing?Was the 70 year old service lacking in some way?I thought we had a very good service,and if it aint broke don't fix it,but what do we all think?
Click to expand...

Forum: Practical Boat Owner's Reader to Reader
Share practical, hands-on information,
 
Jaguar 25 said:
How does this work when it is a reactive service?

I find the whole concept quite disturbing. The reduction in RAF costs will be zero whereas the cost of the privatised service will be met by the taxpayer. Double whammy?
Click to expand...

A very good friend of mine is a many decade 'veteran' of Bristow and has described the efficiencies that the commercial operation is able to make; I'm unable to repeat them as I don't know enough about it and may be inaccurate, but the overall view was very positive towards Bristow. He had been in the Fleet Air Arm prior to BHL, so I'm very happy to believe him. It's possible that due to these efficiencies that the aircraft will have greater availability in the light of servicibility. I'm not able to see your point about he RAF reduction in costs being zero? They won't have the overhead and operating costs of running these aircraft, which will probably be retired as they're at the end of their economic operating life I should think.
Seriously, I'd reckon that this is less a "Double Whammy" but more a double winner for the taxpayer. I'm unsure how long the 'negotiation' towards this has taken, but I'd reckon that it's been in the pipeline from long before the last general election.
 
Bristows ran the SAR helicopters out of HMS Daedalus (Solent) for many years. Probably other places as well. Not sure who runs them now. I doubt this change will make any difference to the service, they will probably employ the same pilots/crew, poaching them from the RAF when they get made redundant.
 
jamie N said:
I'm a 'consumer' of helicopter travel by virtue of working offshore where the S92 is SO much better than the S61 ever was (Seaking equivalent) by being faster, bigger and able to carry pretty much everything that can be gotten onboard it appears.
Click to expand...

Likewise a consumer, but in terms of comfort, the S61 was far superior to the S92. The current S92s in (rescue) service have a much reduced interior capacity due to the inclusion of an extra tank the size of a wardrobe.
Having had to call on their services off Rona in 1994 and as a MR member for a goodly number of years, I can testify to Bristow's abilities at the important stuff and indeed in one horrible night, putting their counterparts from Prestwick into the shade.
I'm sure many will recall footage of the Bristows S61 in action on the Braer - these guys can do it when it matters.
 
jamie N said:
I'm a 'consumer' of helicopter travel by virtue of working offshore where the S92 is SO much better than the S61 ever was (Seaking equivalent) by being faster, bigger and able to carry pretty much everything that can be gotten onboard it appears.
Click to expand...

Likewise a consumer, but in terms of comfort, the S61 was far superior to the S92. The current S92s in (rescue) service have a much reduced interior capacity due to the inclusion of an extra tank the size of a wardrobe.
Having had to call on their services off Rona in 1994 and as a MR member for a goodly number of years, I can testify to Bristow's abilities at the important stuff and indeed in one horrible night, putting their counterparts from Prestwick into the shade.
I'm sure many will recall footage of the Bristows S61 in action on the Braer - these guys can do it when it matters.
 
OK, a few facts.

1. SAR provided by HMCG has always been private - and for most of those (30+) years, operated by Bristows. They have an enviable record of achievement, airframe availability, and innovation. The S61s were a huge improvement on SeaKings because they didn't have to be dual purpose - the new S92s, already in operation in Scotland, will be another leap again - in fact, pretty close to being flying ED units.

2. Crews- Bristows have for years recruited and trained their own SAR crews - not all ex military by any means.

3. Military SAR never was for the public - they just happened to do it as an offshoot. It's primary means was always retrieving downed aircrew - and for this, training will continue at RAF Valley and RNAS Culdrose, and and both services operational units.

This new contract brings a generation of airframes to service that the MoD would (could) never have provided - and operational control of those cabs will be in the hands of the SAR coordinators who need them, not the MoD with other budgetary concerns.

The MilSAR pilots and crews have done fantastic work over the years, and will continue to do so for their respective services.

But in all, this is very good news for UK SAR.

I'm also astounded that people think the old S61 was more comfortable than the 92s - do you really not mean the other way round? Especially for the casualty, the 92 is a far more capable aircraft.
 
Worth remembering that SAR began with RAF and Fleet Air arm rescue boats during WW2
As well as rescuing downed airmen they also served off the Normandy beaches on D day(my Uncle commanded a Fleet Air arm one)-picking up wounded and dead personel etc.from the armed forces and generally helping to keep the beaches clean and tidy so to speak.
 
chanelyacht said:
I'm also astounded that people think the old S61 was more comfortable than the 92s - do you really not mean the other way round? Especially for the casualty, the 92 is a far more capable aircraft.
Click to expand...

Give me an S61 ANYDAY !!! Mind you, that is only my view as a passenger and not a casualty, so not really relevant. The old bird was as spacious as a bus and built like a tank. Though a bit slower, I always felt completely safe in them
 
chanelyacht said:
I'm also astounded that people think the old S61 was more comfortable than the 92s - do you really not mean the other way round? Especially for the casualty, the 92 is a far more capable aircraft.
Click to expand...

To be honest if i was drowning i would even accept a lift from the Hindenburgh
However, as i was reading this thread a news article came on look east on the same subject
From their comments they seem to be promising a faster response & a wider zone.
Some yachties are concerned about the lack of familiarity with various areas.
Personally i do not feel this is a problem
 
Daydream believer said:
To be honest if i was drowning i would even accept a lift from the Hindenburgh
However, as i was reading this thread a news article came on look east on the same subject
From their comments they seem to be promising a faster response & a wider zone.
Some yachties are concerned about the lack of familiarity with various areas.
Personally i do not feel this is a problem
Click to expand...

As part of their daily routine, SAR crews have to log a certain number of daily practice flying hours. Any local knowledge gaps will be addressed via this issue.

To be honest, the new crews are likely to have a significantly higher degree of local knowledge, given that they won't be subject to the 2 / 3 year rotation military crews have.
 
Daydream believer said:
Some yachties are concerned about the lack of familiarity with various areas.
Personally i do not feel this is a problem
Click to expand...

Some people will complain about any change, on principle. It seems to be a natural human response.

I can't see why they think this will be a problem just because the pilot isn't paid by the Queen. If anything it should be better, as military folk get moved around every few years whereas a civilian SAR pilot will presumably spend his whole company career at the same base.

EDIT: Pipped at the post :)

Pete
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top