Search & Rescue going private
- Thread starter macd
- Start date
[70521]
Well-Known Member
A very sad day. So how are the fantastic military SAR pilots going to train now? How are Bristow going to get well trained SAR pilots in the future?
Cantata
Well-Known Member
Excellent that there will be a base once again at Manston. Big hole in the coverage for years.
chanelyacht
Well-Known Member
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.
alant
Well-Known Member
Gordonmc
Well-Known Member
While I do wonder about what benefits this move will bring, it is an improvement in the half-baked nonsense which preceded it.
Bristows will keep some of the existing SAR bases, including Prestwick which covers the Clyde and as far North as Fort William. Under the previous plan Prestwick was to close and a new base would be set up at Glasgow airport.
Lossiemouth's RAF flight will be replaced by Bristows' new Inverness base which will be cheek by jowl with Raigmore Hospital.
Of course the main benefit will be a modern fleet of Sikorskis and AgustaWestland helicopters replacing RAF and RNAS Sea Kings which should have been replaced years ago. The fact that the government(s) avoid providing the services with decent kit by going for PFI is short-termism at its worst.
There will still need to be a Navy presence at Prestwick, for example, as an operating base for Merlins to provide anti-submarine cover for the Clyde bases and Western Approaches. So not much saved there.
I am sure Bristows will do a good job, but at the back of my mind at least is that the company's priority will be to shareholders and the bean counters in Texas.
The services' ethos was different.
Its in the name.
Bristows will keep some of the existing SAR bases, including Prestwick which covers the Clyde and as far North as Fort William. Under the previous plan Prestwick was to close and a new base would be set up at Glasgow airport.
Lossiemouth's RAF flight will be replaced by Bristows' new Inverness base which will be cheek by jowl with Raigmore Hospital.
Of course the main benefit will be a modern fleet of Sikorskis and AgustaWestland helicopters replacing RAF and RNAS Sea Kings which should have been replaced years ago. The fact that the government(s) avoid providing the services with decent kit by going for PFI is short-termism at its worst.
There will still need to be a Navy presence at Prestwick, for example, as an operating base for Merlins to provide anti-submarine cover for the Clyde bases and Western Approaches. So not much saved there.
I am sure Bristows will do a good job, but at the back of my mind at least is that the company's priority will be to shareholders and the bean counters in Texas.
The services' ethos was different.
Its in the name.
emsworthy
Well-Known Member
Great to have a bit of perspective from the coal face, not all privatisation is about money grabbing by the companies concerned or penny pinching by Government... sometimes it's a no-brainer that the private sector can deliver a better more modern service at a reduced cost.
chanelyacht
Well-Known Member
I'm sorry, but that's wrong.
In years of working with Bristows (and CHC) as well as MilSAR crews, the ethos has been one thing - the casualty.
Juniperskip
Well-Known Member
Other than the the issue of whether the S-92 will be fit for purpose (see the Canadian experience of 4+ years late) the biggest issue will be the lack of second line jobs for military pilots. Elementary and Basic training privatised, communications and now SAR. As front line tour follows front line tour and the sea/shore ratio gets to unacceptable level aircrew will vote with their feet. That said I'm sure Bristow will do a professional job.
[70521]
Well-Known Member
I tend to look on the paraffin budgies with rose tinted spectacles; I will always have a soft spot for the Whirlwind. I went to school near Fort William and would often see them flying on Ben Nevis, at the time mum was a nursing Sister in the Belford Hospital so often treated the casualties that were taken off the hill. Later in life when I started climbing and became a member of a MRT I trained with the new fangled Sea Kings.
I agree that times move on, and am fully aware that military SAR was never for the public, but everybody knew that it was fantastic training. I will always recall the lecture given by the RAF Valley MRT on what to do if we found an aircraft down and the advice not stand astride the canopy to extract a pilot if the ejector seat had not functioned still gives me a chuckle.
Last edited:
Bilgediver
Well-Known Member
Just visit Bristows web site and re assure yourself. They are one of the biggest Helicopter Operators in the North sea as well as world wide and have been operating
world wide SAR services for years. They probably have one of the best Training set ups world wide.
I prefer to see the Bristow logo on a chopper than certain others when travelling offshore.
[70521]
Well-Known Member
The company are well know to me
puddock
Well-Known Member
,
Although a little dubious of the privatisation (probably more to do with previous privatised ventures), I must admit that like BilgeDiver, seeing the Bristows logo on the side of a chopper is definitely a prefered option for me.
I have flown with them in countries such as Israel, Egypt, Angola, Nigeria, Equatorial Guinea, Australia .... on every occassion I have been impressed by their proffesional approach.
Grumpybear
Well-Known Member
This isn't about privatisation so much as finishing the job which started years ago.
As for second line jobs for military aircrew, is that really a justification for having separate SAR organisations or keeping military personnel and equipment to do a non military job? People who join the military to fly should be prepared to fly on military operations. We can no longer afford to provide long term careers for service personnel whose skills are generally fully used only in the first half of their careers. I am really thinking of the legions of passed over majors and their equivalents who drive desks doing jobs of minimal military value until they have built up a good pension (I was one myself, but baled out ten years before they would have kicked me out to try to do something useful), but if the taxpayer is to get the best value from the defence budget a much more hard nosed approach is necessary. If nothing else it would be easier to pay the men and women on the front line a better wage while they are actually defending us, and perhaps even give them some decent weapons and other kit. Jobs for life are an anachronism.
As for second line jobs for military aircrew, is that really a justification for having separate SAR organisations or keeping military personnel and equipment to do a non military job? People who join the military to fly should be prepared to fly on military operations. We can no longer afford to provide long term careers for service personnel whose skills are generally fully used only in the first half of their careers. I am really thinking of the legions of passed over majors and their equivalents who drive desks doing jobs of minimal military value until they have built up a good pension (I was one myself, but baled out ten years before they would have kicked me out to try to do something useful), but if the taxpayer is to get the best value from the defence budget a much more hard nosed approach is necessary. If nothing else it would be easier to pay the men and women on the front line a better wage while they are actually defending us, and perhaps even give them some decent weapons and other kit. Jobs for life are an anachronism.
Other threads that may be of interest
