UKC

MCA Aviation has announced that the second generation UK SAR aviation programme is currently in a market engagement phase.

The Contract Notice is due to be published in the first quarter of 2021. That is nearly a year later than the previously published date.

The procurement cycle is due to take up to 24 months (previous contract took 16 months).

The contract award is due in December 2022.

Service commencement is due on 30th September 2024 which is 18 months later than the date stated in Schedule 2.5, Table 2.3.4 of the current contract. (An option for a 24 month extension is part of the current contract.)

===================================================

Previously:

Helicopters: Civilian versus MOD
by ScraggyGoat - on 28 Nov 2011 (Date of Contract Notice and announcement.)
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=484374

SAR Helicopter Service contract: implementation phase
by Jim Fraser - on 31 Jul 2013 (4 months after contract award.)
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=558507

SAR Helicopter Service contract: implementation phase, part 2
by Jim Fraser - on 06 Jan 2016 (as the last military SAR flight in the UK is stood down)
https://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=631925

==================================================

Over 1000 posts and over 100,000 views so far. 

Out in the real world, thousands of lives have been saved by this service.

Jim, these threads have been great - I wonder have you formed a view of the overall success of the program compared to the historic set up?

They might have saved thousands of lives, but the two chopper rescues I’ve been involved in they were both pretty useless. One Coastguard in Pembroke and another in Scotland in winter. 

Happy to hear more about those if you are so inclined. Email maybe.

Qinetiq were engaged to produce a Post Implementation Review of the current contract in 2018 and that was published in mid-2019 and referred to on the previous thread:

https://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/winter_climbing/sar_helicopter_service_co...

There are no major failings identified in the PIR. I have done a few notes about it here:

https://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/winter_climbing/sar_helicopter_service_co...

The merger between Bristow and Era is expected to complete in mid-June 2020. The current President and CEO of Era will be President and CEO  of the combined company.

As in 1955, and again in 2006, when a name was sought for a new organisation, on this occasion the dice fall in the same way and the combined company will be called Bristow.

The bits we're interested in will be run by Brits from Bristow. 

There are indications that the commitment to SAR remains undiminished. 

The process leading to a new contract for SAR aviation starting in 2024 has begun and on Tuesday 12th May the MCA held the Industry Day in the form of an online meeting. The recording of that is on gov.uk and youtube. It's over an hour long but you can get a strong flavour of what is going on by skipping from one slide to the next in the first half and the second half is a live Q&A.

GOV.UK - https://www.gov.uk/government/news/second-generation-uk-search-and-rescue-a...

YOUTUBE -  youtube.com/watch?v=KkCk-CaMJnk&

BBC news article.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-52821363

Runners and riders still marshalling themselves at the starting gate for this race probably. 

"Babcock says offshore helicopter market ‘no longer attractive’ in long term"

https://www.flightglobal.com/helicopters/babcock-says-offshore-helicopter-m...

"As a result, the firm has booked a £502 million ($633 million) write-down in its aviation business, chiefly related to the goodwill of the operation.

That is a significant increase on the impairment charge outlined in a February trading update, which at that stage was predicted to be just £85 million.

Babcock has been active in the segment since its 2014 acquisition of Avincis, which had previously bought offshore operator Bond Helicopters, a business whose roots stretched back to the early days of oil and gas support flights.
... ...
(Archie) Bethel had warned in the February trading update that it did “not intend to invest further to stay in that [offshore] market” and said it would not chase the low pricing of its rivals, most of which had shed debts via US Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection."

There is a some potential for this to have an effect on the SAR contract but we must wait to see what that might be. Normally, one would expect to see Babcock being a prominent bidder. Last time, before the Avincis-Band acquisition, they started out as part of Osprey with BIH and ERA before getting together with Bond under the Azimuth banner after Osprey dropped out. Azimuth were in the final stage along with Bristow and could easily have been operating all or part of the contract today. 

The big question might be, do Babcock see their debt-shed competitors (BHL & CHC) as a threat to the profitability of the SAR contract in the same way as in the crew-change market?

This contract is likely to include big military style drones. 

In certain cases this would be helpful in being sent up at the same time as the heli as the drone has far superior search capabilities to pinpoint people on the ground to save the heli "search" time.

https://maritime-executive.com/article/uk-coast-guard-looks-into-long-range...

It is of course up to the bidders to show that there is an effective place for a remotely piloted fleet. I am sure Elbit will be happy to talk this up regardless of which way the evidence points but there are some serious problems to consider.

There is currently no regulatory framework for these machines although that is being examined.

"On the ground" may rarely or never be part of the scenario. In the water: yes. However, it's difficult to see where these will realistically fit in when the MCA is already questioning the roles a super-medium rotorcraft for their large number of short-range jobs. The very same short-range jobs that MCA analysts are making a great fuss about bring the greatest de-confliction challenges for a remotely piloted fleet.

Out west of Ireland they can fly around at a few hundred or at 2000 feet as much as they like and all the other traffic is at 35000 feet. Out there of course having a cruise speed slower than a Sea King might be a wee problem. 

If we consider how long it took to develop the regulatory framework for SAR helicopters or how long it took to introduce the AW189SAR then it becomes more difficult to be optimistic about a remotely piloted fleet for 2024.

Fortunately, there are plenty of enhancements that fit with the MCA's technological ambitions without a remotely piloted fleet.

Enhanced sensors including hyperspectral, mobile phone detection and interaction, upgraded aircraft (AW189K? S-92B?), new hoist clutches and cables, enhanced terrain awareness systems, synthetic vision, laser obstacle proximity systems, and integrated systems on rotor and fixed wing fleets, are all out there.

Flight Global have spoken to the MCA's Aviation Technical Assurance Manager and written an article about the contract process. That is the guy whose department writes the technical specification. He's been at this for a while.

https://www.flightglobal.com/aerospace/uk-spins-up-second-phase-of-privatis...

[Registration required for full access.]

I don’t think a “drone” has far superior search capabilities to pinpoint people than a manned platform. Both manned and unmanned air systems can be mounted with the same type of sensors. The advantage of unmanned systems is that they tend to have longer range/endurance as you don’t need to cater for people, the advantage of manned systems is that decision making is taking place at the optimum location with the best situational awareness. 

For the world in general...the use of “drone“ is a pejorative colloquialism which comes from the predominantly US use of the unmanned air systems to conduct strikes against individuals...they aren’t (mindless) drones as they are very high tech and controlled by trained personnel.

MCA have conducted a SAR Stakeholder Presentation, on the morning of Tuesday 30th June, in the same format as the Industry Presentation that I posted about above. As with the Industry Presentation, it is expected that the SAR Stakeholder one will be posted on the GOV.UK site and the MCA's Youtube channel.

You'll be able to get a flavour of things once it's posted on those sites. Then if you have any questions, just stick them on here and I'll try to provide an answer. 

It was attended by representatives from police, mountain rescue, lifeboats and others.

It is worth noting that there wasn't time for any of this back in 2011/13 and that several of the SAR stakeholders had their heads in another space. In particular, police in Scotland were scurrying around preparing for unification and police in England & Wales were creating the National Police Air Service. 

This was completed on the 11th of June. 

http://ir.bristowgroup.com/news-releases/news-release-details/bristow-compl...

MCA Aviation have now created a publications page
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/second-generation-uk-search-and-...
for all further details of the UKSAR2G programme.

This new page includes PDF files with details of the industry presentation.

The Q&A document is quite revealing of industry thinking and some of the same questions that come up in the MR community appear there. 

"Baby Shark"...the new SAR drones finishing trials over Wales & to start operations.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-53600780

Time for an unmanned aerial dictionary.

RPAS  Remotely Piloted Aircraft System. Term used by the RAF, and others, for their remotely piloted fleet.

SUA  Small Unmanned Aircraft. Term used in CAA documents for aircraft of less than 20kg dry. Those under 7kg are subject to enhanced airspace restrictions. 

sUAS Small Unmanned Aircraft System.

SUSA Small Unmanned Surveillance Aircraft.

UAS  Unmanned Aircraft System. Term used in CAA regulations encompassing all systems.

UAV  Unmanned Aerial Vehicle. Term widely used but increasingly referring to only the vehicle as a component of a UAS which includes all associated systems.

Any more?

Annual statistics for year to March 2020.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/search-and-rescue-helicopter-annua...

Interactive dashboard, contract to date.

http://maps.dft.gov.uk/sarh-statistics/interactive-dashboard/

Be good to understand why

From Sea King to SAR Queen.

Commencement of service for the Norwegian All Weather Search And Rescue Helicopter project. This may well become the most capable air rescue service in the world. If not the most capable then extremely close. Something to learn from and aim for.

https://www.dagsavisen.no/rogalandsavis/nyheter/nye-redningshelikoptre-far-...

https://www.tu.no/artikler/overtar-for-sea-king-i-dag-nytt-redningshelikopt...

https://translate.google.com/?sl=no

Oh no. Here we go again. 

It's 2011 all over again and just wrong. 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/search-and-rescue-privatisat...

Operational Stakeholder Presentation and Q&A.

GOV.UK
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/second-generation-uk-search-and-...

YOUTUBE
youtube.com/watch?v=VqWJpigKhEQ&

More4, 2100h, Sunday 13th September 2020,
EMERGENCY RESCUE: Air, Land & Sea.
https://www.channel4.com/programmes/...e-air-land-sea
 

'A brand-new series that has had exclusive access to HMCG search and rescue helicopters, coastguard rescue teams and operations centres.

The 10-part series gives you a first hand look at the dramatic real life rescues HMCG and mountain rescue teams across the UK carry out.'

Hopefully, this will be a effective lesson for all those clowns out there who still think an old yellow thing with the flight performance slightly better than a lawn mower is the ultimate in SAR aviation. 

A written version of the Operational Stakeholder Q&A has been posted.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/second-generation-uk-search-and-...

Industry Event.  8th September 2020.

GOV.UK
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/second-generation-uk-search-and-...

YOUTUBE
youtube.com/watch?v=wiuHTMTOwoA&

In particular, this event makes clear that the MCA is facilitating the transfer of asset from the incumbent contractor to successful bidders if appropriate and required. Essentially, the way is clear, but not mandatory, for the next contractor, or contractors, to use the same ten bases and operate S-92A and AW189. 

The timetable of further preparatory elements of process are notified to bidders. 

Extension of the current contract is confirmed. This formalises several of the inevitable consequences of the approaching contract process. 
http://ir.bristowgroup.com/news-releases/news-release-details/bristow-conti...

An article about how the MCA is employing technology to improve aspects of the bid process. 

https://www.thedigitalship.com/news/electronics-navigation/item/6867-uk-coa...

There is new stuff on the GOV.UK page. 

One of the new videos reveals more about the data modelling being used to assist bidders. I am a little concerned about whether bidders are given an indication of what are MOUNTAIN jobs. More information may yet emerge.

Another video refers to a document that appears to be the new equivalent of the 2012 'Technical Requirements Matrix' which has been issued to "appropriate category 1 responders and Government Departments" a couple of weeks ago. This is the ongoing development of the new technical requirement that we can expect will appear in a fully evolved form as part of the final contract in 2022. 

Leonardo promoting their success in supplying AW101 for the NAWSARH project.

https://www.leonardocompany.com/en/news-and-stories-detail/-/detail/sar-que...

During October, the Coasties signed off a document called Single Statement of User Needs (SSUN) that defines their requirements and at the end of that month they sent it out to Government Departments and Category 1 Responders for feedback. Feedback was due back by the end of November. Cat1 were asked to collate feedback from their SAR volunteers. 

youtube.com/watch?v=AR-NSOlsKfE&

The SSUN is similar in many respects to the Technical Requirement Matrix issued in February 2012 as part of the previous contract process (and largely inherited from SARH25) that became Schedule 2.1 Specification of the current contract. 

Much has been made of the Government policy for a service-based contract that concentrates on outcomes and does not prescribe methodology. There is something to be said for this approach since it may provide for greater bidder innovation. The SSUN layout and style reflect this approach. 

However, it seems to me that the operator needs the customer to specify certain aviation requirements so that they have a clearly defined reason to write an appropriate safe procedure into their operating manual, which is key to approval by the regulator, who expresses that approval through the granting of an Air Operating Certificate. 

The Contract Notice for 4 lots of UKSAR2G is scheduled to be issued on 25th January 2021. 

The first part of the process is a Selection Questionnaire (like PQQ sort of thing). This will lead to what is being described as a 'down selection' in late April. A further down selection may occur in September depending upon the conditions that arise. (One might expect that a number of bidders in the range of three to five would be the comfortable numbers for entering the final stages. That leads me to think that if six were selected in April and a further two dropped out then the second selection process won't be necessary.)

The four lots, which we can expect to be defined in the Contract Notice, are now expected to be as follows.

1. Fast urgent short-range rescue with short response.
2. High endurance long range rescue with longer response.
3. Fixed wing, and potentially UAV, search and surveillance.
4. All three lots bid as a single entity. 

I am sure some of you will, like me and others, look at the Lot 1 & 2 definitions somewhat sceptically and regard them as features of the statistical analysis of jobs rather than a practical approach to response from a national integrated service. I have a vision of the usual suspects sitting opposite DfT negotiators struggling to avoid telling them not to be bl00dy silly. You just never know when a decent-sized and well-equipped platform will come in handy. 
https://s.blogcdn.com/slideshows/images/slides/770/173/1/S7701731/slug/l/no...

Final tenders are scheduled to be submitted about a year from now. A period of several months is programmed for government internal processes before contract award in the summer of 2022. 

It is now clearer how the transition-in will take place and all parts of the new contract are expected to be in operation by 31st December 2026. 

It is interesting that Lot 4 has emerged after a period of significant engagement both with industry and SAR stakeholders. Clearly, there are matters involving co-ordination and intellectual property that emerge when multiple operators are working as part of an integrated national service. Lot 4 would be attractive for the DfT because it pushes those problems, perhaps out of the picture entirely, but perhaps more likely, into the hands of the main contractor. It would be interesting to learn whether Lot 4 is most desired by the usual suspects of the SAR helicopter world or by the big bruisers of government-contracting/daylight-robbery who would just be subbing the whole thing.

Mountain Rescue organisations from across the UK, along with other public safety agencies, continue to engage with MCA Aviation, and each other, on these matters. 

This all starts for real again on Monday.

I expect it to be one of the few competent processes to occur on this government's watch.

There appears to be a small administrative hiccup. 

The tender is out: https://find-tender.service.gov.uk/Notice/001168-2021

I'm afraid that is last week's Prior Information Notice (PIN). Note the date of the Contract Notice near the end. It appears to confirm what was expressed in previous presentations about the C/N being published on Monday 25th January. 

There are some useful bits in the PIN though. You might find it useful to familiarise yourself with the Lot definitions for instance. These appear to be developing as we go forward. It will be interesting to see how they pan out when bidders try to address them in a practical and economic way.

The data has recently been making them focus on the fact that the majority of jobs are short, quick, and involve 1 or 2 persons. So what's the point of sending a 12 tonne S-92A to that they ask.  The MCA website shows that Inverness (R151) have ended up most of the way to Denmark and St Athans (R187, AW139!) have been out in the Atlantic further west than Spain. Using the current logic of the new Lots 1 & 2, these would have been S-92 jobs but in the real world situation ARCC saw fit to send AW189/139. I think a mix of aircraft types is not a bad idea but imagining that exactly the right aircraft is going to be available on the day so that the bills are kept a little lower is probably fantasy.  That R936 job 500km West of Ireland is why we have large capable SAR aircraft. A 500+km return flight is probably more than two hours in poor weather and you need space to work on a casualty during that period. That is one of the reasons we and the Irish have S-92, the Norwegians have AW101 and the Icelanders have H225. 

Still no Contract Notice but the bi-annual stats are out for Apr-Sep 2020. 
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/search-and-rescue-helicopter-bi-an...

MCA Aviation have announced a delay in the launch of the procurement process. Two short industry update videos issued during the last few days have appeared on the UKSAR2G webpage. These are about the current status of the process. A delay until later last week followed by a delay until an unknown time.

I was watching a TV programme about mountaineering at altitude and it made me wonder about the real pressure altitude at the top of our highest mountain. Pressure reduces not only with altitude above MSL but with latitude and also varies according to the type of weather system passing through. 

Why is this important? Well, just as human beings have trouble breathing at altitude, helicopters have extraordinary difficulty finding enough air molecules to push against to keep them in the air. Hover In Ground Effect (HIGE) and Hover Out of Ground Effect (HOGE) are the rotorcraft characteristics that tell us about this aspect of performance. These are based on a standard model of the atmosphere called the International Standard Atmosphere (ISA). An ability to perform a hover delivery of MRT at 4000 feet ISA +15 degC is part of the current contract.

Ben Nevis summit had a meteorological station for many years so we know what the range of pressures is. Unlike some parts of the world, it turns out that at Ben Nevis the extremes all take place in January. (Who knew?!?!) So I took the lowest and highest pressures recorded at the summit of the BenN and used an online calculator for the ICAO ISA to find the equivalent pressure altitude.

Ben Nevis maximum pressure altitude - 6900 feet

Ben Nevis median pressure altitude - 5200 feet

No wonder the Sea King struggled!

(I don't feel so guilty about getting out of breath while chopping through cornices now!)
[Insufficient data available to calculate the average so had to make do with median.]

6900 feet suggests that even a Sikorsky S-92A might struggle but of course in low pressure conditions in January in Scotland it is going to be cold and breezy! Helicopters love cold and breezy.

For the benefit of those of us who don't fly aircraft, by my reckoning that's about

2103m

1585m

That is quite striking. I'd probably assume, mind, that if the pressure was low enough to effectively raise the summit 750m the weather would be bad enough to discourage me from going up

Quite possibly. One might also conclude that those not so discouraged by the conditions around a low pressure might be more likely to need rescued. Flying conditions other than pressure might also not be ideal though. 

Add in the density altitude and it’s up to 8-9000 feet. Isa plus 15 is about 25 Celsius

not too shabby performance on a hot, still day ? 

A link to the Operational Stakeholder Interactive Map (sign-in required) was added last week but a few days later this was removed because of technical issues with access. 

The point of the Operational Stakeholder Interactive Map is that it allows the bidders to discover who the SAR Operational Stakeholders are and contact them to establish the level of training required for their particular specialism. 

So lifeboats, Coastguard Rescue Service and mountain rescue all operate in different environments and have different training needs. This facility is the bidders' chance to understand the numbers and locations involved for each type of training. 

Hopefully, they'll get this sorted out and bidders will be able to get a good understanding of the training load.

MCA Aviation have issued another Industry Update, dated Friday and posted on the USAR2G web page this morning.
Youtube location: youtube.com/watch?v=YIhEv03sAOQ&

This update is presented by Damien Oliver, Commercial and Programmes Director, senior responsible owner for the UKSAR2G programme. The core message is as follows.

"We would dearly love to have by now been able to launch the selection questionnaire for UKSAR2G. We still have one or two questions that we need to address that are posed to us by others elsewhere and we're busily doing that right now. Please again rest assured that this is not a sign of change or things to worry about; simply the nature of a complex programme like UKSAR2G in this kind of situation that we're in right now.

We expect to be able to launch the tender earliest we suspect the beginning of March so we are very grateful for your patience while we work through what we're dealing with at the moment."

In these strange times when Government spending has already soared to new heights, one might be tempted to speculate that a maybe two or more billion pound contract might get delayed while the Treasury take a very close look at it. 

However, this would be to ignore the historical reality that in the summer of 2010 the Treasury were getting nervous about SARH25 fixed costs exceeding £6bn across 25 years. Now we are faced with the prospect of doing the (helicopter) job during that period for maybe £3.6bn to £3.8bn which is nicely inside the estimated value in the SARH25 Contract Notice back in 2006.
"II.2.1)  ... ... Estimated value excluding VAT:  
Range: between 3 000 000 000 and 5 000 000 000 GBP"

"We can't all, and some of us don't." said Eeyore.

================================

A link has been added on gov.uk for an update dated the 5th. However, the link, is to a youtube address, where: "Video unavailable. This video has been removed by the uploader."

No further related items appear on the "Find a tender" site.

The UKSAR2G Contract Notice was published last night. 
https://www.find-tender.service.gov.uk/Notice/004655-2021?origin=SearchResu...

All lots have a duration of 144 months with a possible extension of 24 months. Commencement is stated as between 2024 and 2026. 

=============================

There are no official indicators for who is participating from across the industry. That may be affected by oil industry economics, recent mergers and acquisitions, how various collaborations pan out, and not least the concurrent contract process for the Irish Coastguard SAR Aviation Project which has a very similar character.
https://www.gov.ie/en/campaigns/ed653-irish-coast-guard-search-and-rescue-s...

The broken YouTube link on the gov.uk site has been fixed:  youtube.com/watch?v=L0sayx8nJOQ&

The British helicopter industry landscape is changing. Babcock International have announced that they are selling their North Sea and Australia offshore helicopter business to CHC. 

Previously, the offshore business around the UK was dominated by Bristow, Bond and then CHC. NHV then being a more recent newcomer.

Bond has always been a significant player in the air ambulance sector and helicopter support for lighthouses and defence establishments. They were bought by the major defence contractor Babcock and the branding changed to Babcock deserting the red for Babcock blue. For several years it has been rumoured that this wasn't going to work because Babcock were happier building ships and getting monster size cheques from HM Govt. So now the more volatile bit that perhaps Babcock don't really understand is being sold and they are hanging on to the steady government and charity customers. 

There is some oil & gas industry SAR in amongst that but the likes of UKSAR2G is more the domain of Babcock's onshore operation. We have yet to discover if Babcock will be participating in the UKSAR2G contract, either as a main player or partner. This change may also have some small effect on how things go for Irish, Dutch and Norwegian contracts that are also in-process in a similar period.

Personally, I find the breaking up of the old Bond empire regrettable. I was always very happy to fly with them whether offshore crew change or other contract activity. CHC know a lot about SAR but if there is one thing I hope for from this change it's that CHC should learn some communication skills from the Babcock/Bond folks. 

https://www.babcockinternational.com/news/conditional-sale-of-oil-and-gas-a...  

Talk of the town just now is the new Draken-Airbus bid team. 
https://www.flightglobal.com/helicopters/airbus-and-draken-europe-team-for-...

We can probably expect more of this sort of collaboration to emerge.

This part of Draken is a rebrand of Cobham that previously was part of the FB Heli joint venture with Bristow. They provide SAR helicopter training to the MoD and employ people who have considerable SAR experience. FB were in the previous bid process. 

What else is happening?

Norway - North (Tromso-Svalbard)
This has been awarded and went to CHC (1860 million Kroner). Previously it was done by Lufttransport.

Netherlands Coastguard
Currently NHV. This one is in the award stage and we should know the result in the next month or two. 

Irish Coastguard
Currently CHC. This should be in-process but is being kicked about at ministerial level by the Air Corps who want SAR back. 

The UKSAR2G site has been updated with Operational Stakeholder and Industry Q&As.

This appears to include several commercial questions mainly related to infrastructure and assets and the addition of a section comprising 32 questions about the Selection Questionnaire. 

I haven't gone through all the changes yet but 7.1 is revealing in that it indicates the moving morass of joint ventures and subcontracting that we are likely to see as this progresses.

The MCA have updated the outline programme timeline of the USAR2G web page and it is now clear that the recent delay shifts the entire procurement programme out a couple of months.

The commencement of service date remains 1st October 2024.

However, the contract award date shifts from July to September/October of 2022. 

A great podcast here about the CHC Irish Coastguard SAR helicopter service. They interview a pilot and winchman, and talk about the process of recruiting civilians into these roles, due to a diminishing recruitment pool from the Irish military.

https://shows.acast.com/squawk7000/episodes/chc-helicopter-in-ireland

Good find.

Manning levels almost identical to UK SAR. No mention of NVG even though there was a plan for introduction some time ago, rumours of staffing issues regarding training, and considerable discussion about the difference they would have made to the R116 accident. No mention even of rearcrew goggles (that was used in the UK for searching before full cockpit NVG were introduced).

Interesting about recruitment. Some contend that if additional bases are  proposed for UK SAR then aircrew will magically appear out of nowhere. Not so sure. After listening to that I am even less sure.

The MCA have published a link on the UKSAR2G webpage to their Interactive Operational Stakeholder Map. The map shows Police, Fire, NHS, cave rescue, lowland rescue, Coastguard Rescue Service, lifeboats and MRT across the entire UK. 

There are a few omissions and errors that need sorting and I am not yet sure how it will be addressing the detail of the original intended purpose. It should help bidders to understand the Operational Stakeholder training load and the range of joint working necessary. 

Leonardo prepares for production of their new civilian tilt rotor AW609 aircraft.

https://verticalmag.com/news/leonardo-prepares-for-production-training-and-...

Bristow are the launch partner for this and have specified SAR as a possible role (though they operate SAR in many places other than the UK). So is the CAA ready to regulate civilian tilt rotor aircraft (USAF V22 Ospreys are already flying in the UK)? Could Bristow conceivably by bidding on UKSARG2 with a new aircraft that isn't expected to be operational for at least two years? I don't know, but it's interesting times!

Babcock continue to extract themselves from the helicopter market. Following statements about the offshore market, 
https://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/winter_climbing/sar_helicopter_service_2n...
and the sale of the offshore business to CHC,
https://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/winter_climbing/sar_helicopter_service_2n...
Babcock appear to be saying that they are not capable of making any money from any part of this 2014 acquisition,
https://otp.tools.investis.com/clients/uk/babcock1/rns/regulatory-story.asp...
and with Gama now at Scottish Ambulance Service and Heliservices now at Lincoln & Notts Air Ambulance, 
https://helihub.com/2021/04/22/german-operator-scores-first-success-in-uk-e...
they seem to have already slackened their grip on this business. 

As I summarised their position elsewhere, "We are not a proper business and we are much happier sucking the blood out of the defence budget." The principal effect of their excursion into non-defence aviation has been the destruction of a really good aviation company. I think we can now be sure that no bid will emerge from that direction.

More importantly, are the hospitals ready for them?

https://www.cambridgeindependent.co.uk/news/video-shows-moment-air-ambulanc...

I don't know what anyone expected there with an aircraft with a MTOW of 27.4 tonnes which is about 20% more than a Chinook. Even monster new helipads like the excellent one at Raigmore hospital are only rated at 20 tonnes.

In contrast, the AW609 is an 8 tonne aircraft and therefore lighter on its feet than a AW189 SAR.

Probably for the best, or they'll have to update the part 1a training.

"What is foreign object debris?

 A. Loose items such as equipment and litter

 B. Large items such as vehicles

 C. Fixed objects such as trees

 **D. All of the above ** "

Blasting FOD around and tearing the matting off the ground is more about downwash (and therefore disc loading) than absolute weight. V-22 is notorious for that: CH-47 is much gentler on surrounding infrastructure. Not sure the 609 will do particularly well on downwash, that's the nature of tiltrotors. But then, the 189 seems to have a fairly high disc loading, so the contrast may not be so large. 

And tiltrotors are w-i-d-e. When I was interviewing potential oil & gas operators of 609 (yes, about ten years ago now !) they looked at the span and all the rotating blades and rolled their eyes...

Y

Canadian military picks Centum’s Lifeseeker SAR tech
https://helihub.com/2021/04/13/canadian-military-picks-centums-lifeseeker-s...

There are a few of these mobile phone searching systems around and they work pretty well. Some have different functions to suit the territory or customers they were developed for. Lifeseeker is a top candidate for any aircraft operator looking for a permanent aircraft fit. I know that Centum have been talking to UK SAR organisations about Lifeseeker and I shall be surprised if Lifeseeker, or something similar, is not available with UKSAR2G (or even sooner).

Bristow's UK SAR Director has just posted on linkedin about the Schiebel S-100 camcopter UAV, describing it as, "A highly capable force multiplier in the SAR inventory." 
https://schiebel.net/products/camcopter-s-100/

Not really news since they have had Schiebels for a while but it may point toward wider thinking and closer integration for UAV solutions as the UKSAR2G process develops.
https://schiebel.net/products/camcopter-s-100/

An agreement has been signed by the CAA and EASA about how the relationship between the UK and EU aviation regulation will work.

EASA and the CAA have agreed on the Technical Implementation Procedures (the TIP) as a basis for their future working. 

More here:  https://helihub.com/2021/05/18/easa-and-uk-caa-agree-on-technical-implement...

Probably just as well that a lot of aircraft have been parked recently otherwise we might have been hearing a lot more about this. It is certainly true that there has been uncertainty for some aircrew regarding some types of licensing.

Today, MCA Aviation have released the list of selected bidders who will be invited to tender.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/second-generation-uk-search-and-...

(EEA = CHC.)

For helicopter provision (Lots 1 & 2), there are 4 bidders.

- Bristow
- EEA/CHC
- Airbus/Draken
- Serco (+ ?)

No sign of Babcock, BIH or NHV as things stand. 

In March, I posted about CHC (the helicopter component of the EEA bid) buying part of Babcock (formerly Bond). 
https://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/winter_climbing/sar_helicopter_service_2n...

The UK Government's Competition and Markets Authority has issued an initial enforcment order in relation to this acquisition. 
https://www.gov.uk/cma-cases/chc-slash-babcock-merger-inquiry

https://helihub.com/2021/06/14/chc-merger-with-babcock-offshore-on-hold/

Serco have withdrawn from the competition.
https://helihub.com/2021/07/15/serco-withdraw-from-uk-sar-2g-contest/?fbcli...

No details of the reason are available. 

That leaves the following participants in the helicopter part of the competition.

- Airbus Helicopters UK Ltd
- Bristow Helicopters Ltd
- EEA Helicopters Operations B.V (CHC)

Drone joins HM Coastguard air, land and sea rescue teams

http://hmcoastguard.blogspot.com/2021/07/Drone-joins-HM-Coastguard-air-land...

A recent update shows that the Irish SAR contract process may be back on track. 

"27th July 2021: Department of Transport Press Release and Broadcast on eTenders
Government Decision on new Coast Guard Aviation Service"
https://www.gov.ie/en/campaigns/ed653-irish-coast-guard-search-and-rescue-s...

PQQ - Oct 2021
Award - March 2023
Commencement - ehhhh ..... 2024Q4/2025Q2?

Gone awfully quiet.

It is expected (unconfirmed) that some time during this month will be the 'Deadline for Submission of Initial Tenders'. So for remaining bid teams it is now getting very real. 

In a few weeks we can expect another short-listing (if necessary) and a period of negotiation to commence leading to an 'Invitation to Submit Final Tenders'. That final tender process might be expected to occupy Quarter 1 of 2022.

It will be another year before we know who gets this.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-58676796

: "The Old Man of Stoer is a popular location for climbers but weather can rapidly deteriorate and, particularly at this time of year as we come out of the summer months, rising waves and high winds from the North Sea present significant risks that anyone moving around the coast can expect to encounter."

….and the pilot thought the waves were from the North Sea.  Maybe the doom sayers were right and standards have dropped with search and rescue choppers being contracted out.

Either that our journalists really are thick….

I expect your final point might be the correct one.

My expectation is that the geography taught at Kingussie High School would be adequate. 

A rumour has been circulating, denied by some, re-surfaced, and been without any clear corroboration for some weeks, that Draken and Airbus have parted company and their UKSAR2G bid will end. 

This seems to have started when it became clear last month that Draken were closing their helicopter academy at Newquay. 
https://www.key.aero/article/draken-close-uk-based-helicopter-training-acad...

Since that appeared to be a key part of their SAR-related business, questions were soon being asked about their part in the Airbus bid (Lot 4, unified bid for all lots). Nothing new has appeared on the Airbus or Draken websites, the MCA pages on gov.uk, or in any of the trade press websites. 

The Editor of the magazine of the Royal Aeronautical Society has tweeted as follows.

"Tim Robinson @RAeSTimR
Breaking - Airbus Helicopters pulls out from UK Maritime & Coastguard Agency's Second Gen SAR contest for a 10-year #UKSAR2G contract, saying it is: "very disappointed to conclude that it was not in the best interests of the company to submit an offer" #avgeek"

I have searched the news pages of the Airbus and Draken websites but at this time nothing on this subject is published there. 

Airbus' withdrawal is confirmed on Helihub.
https://helihub.com/2021/10/11/airbus-helicopters-pulls-out-of-uk-sar2g-con...

EEA (CHC) are teamed up with Rafael ( https://www.rafael.co.il/ ) for their bid. Presumably this enables them to present an advanced high-capability UAV solution. It may also give them access to some seriously capable sensors for mounting on SAR helicopters.  

Clearly, there are some negative factors in the public relations sphere when involving an Israeli UAV manufacturer in UK public services but we already passed over that boundary when the MCA started working with Elbit as noted above.

This National Geographic video on facebook
https://fb.watch/8Z3UCNPP7N/
at 16min45s to 30min15s shows the Cougar 91 accident in 2009. Sikorsky are still working on some of the issues raised by that accident today and perhaps only the S-92B
https://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/winter_climbing/sar_helicopter_service_co...
will finally close those out. 

Note the reference in the video to 10 minutes run dry time when in fact SK somehow managed to get this thing approved by the FAA when the requirement was 30 minutes. 

Some metallurgical references in that video are not quite right. Because of galling (cold welding), it was always unsatisfactory to specify a Titanium fastener for a component that requires regular removal. 

The TSB report on Cougar 91
https://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-reports/aviation/2009/a09a0016/a09a0016....
is an outstandingly thorough piece of work.
youtube.com/watch?v=GnBuj_aTgeA&

The Lockheed Martin (Sikorsky) website currently proclaims Cougar as the launch customer for the S-92A+ upgrade. 

The overall accident record means that the Sikorsky S-92, along with its competitor, the Airbus Super Puma H225, remains one of the safest large rotorcraft of all time.

The MCA's data modelling examples and lot definitions have pointed towards fewer large aircraft in the fleet. Some of this could be interpreted as 2 or 3 bases being S-92 (Sumburgh, Stornoway and Newquay being the top candidates: big wets) and the rest being AW189 (or H175). An all-AW189 fleet was part of a conversation at one stage but I don't see it happening, based on the SSUN ambitions ("Objective" level). The ten base solution (actual locations could change) seems set to persist.

Looking at Bristow's latest Earning Presentation (today, 4th Nov), I am reminded of the existing ownership pattern. 

Seven of the S-92 are leased. Bristow own 11 x AW189 and 3 x S-92 which adds up to the 14 aircraft that bidders in the early part of the previous contract thought were necessary to operate 10 bases. Well that's rather convenient isn't it? 

So what else is happening?

a) The bid teams are probably taking their holidays just now since they have recently submitted bids and are waiting for the MCA to assess them. There are only two bidders left in the competition for Lots 1 & 2 which are the SAR helicopter parts. This probably means no further down-selection since the final stage is where price starts to come into play and it takes two to tango. If the full process is being exercised then a period of negotiation may be entered into soon, leading to an invitation to submit final tenders in a couple of months. 

b) The Schiebel Camcopter 100 is now said to be operational as part of the Bristow SAR fleet out of Caernarfon. I am still not clear what this aircraft will be used for but "safety overwatch and monitoring" is stated in the publicity.

c) Bristow are confirmed as the Dutch CivSAR operator after NHV's appeal against the contract award was rejected. AW189 is expected.

d) The Canadian Coastguard are trialing UAV. The Martin V-BAT can cruise at 90 knots as a fixed wing aircraft and then drop from the sky into a hover mode to hover and stare at target locations. It has an endurance of 11 hours in FW flight. One can sense an approaching capability for the entire North Atlantic to be covered by maritime safety patrols using UAV. 

e) The Irish SAR Helicopter contract process may be at long last getting underway. There are indicators for the establishment of a permanent top-cover role for the Air Corps. We shall see. Not holding my breath! 

f) Delivery and implementation continues on the NAWSARH project introducing the AW101 SAR Queen in Norway. The last of the six bases, at Banak, South of Hammerfest, should convert from Sea King to SAR Queen soon. A seventh base at Tromso is expected to be estabished next year.

Bad Day at Black Rock.

http://www.aaiu.ie/node/1551

The long-awaited final AAIU report on the Rescue 116 crash is published on the Irish Government website today.

With 350 pages and 114 pages of appendices, this is going to take a lot of digesting. There are lots of things to watch out for that have relevence to UKSAR2G including the aircraft type, the type of terrain, and the fact that the operator is a previous UK Helicopter service provider and a current final stage bidder.

71 findings and 12 contributory causes are listed in the 21 page Executive Summary. Those causes point to mapping provision, the regulator, and the operator.

https://www.independent.ie/news/actions-of-crew-who-died-in-r116-helicopter...

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2021/1105/1258054-r116-report/

I haven't really concerned myself with Lot 3 which is the Fixed Wing and UAV part of the contract. In the absence of any news to the contrary, I assume that 2Excel, EEA (CHC) and Elbit have submitted initial tenders for that. Bristow and EEA are still in Lot 4 which includes all lots including Lot 3 so that implies four irons in the fire. Whether that situation warrants a down-selection before the final tender stage is unknown.

In Lot 1, Lot 2 and Lot 4, it is down to Bristow and EEA (CHC). In the helicopter parts that we are principally interested in, lots 1 & 2, it is currently not known how a two-contractor solution could work in relation to numbers of bases. If we think back to 2011, more things were fixed and there were 5 bases in each lot. The way was clear for a two-contractor solution with Bristow getting Lot 1 and Bond getting Lot 2 in the manner mistakenly expected by myself, other observers, and quite possibly the bidders. 

In this current process, fewer criteria are fixed and, with a declared ambition on the part of the MCA to encourage innovative solutions from bidders, it is not clear how many bases will be in each lot. The scant information about John Foster's data modelling that has escaped into the wild suggests that the number of bases for each lot is up for discussion. In that case it would make it difficult to splice together a two-contractor solution. We do not know what interim conditions have been imposed of course or whether post initial tender negotiations would adjust such a fundamental factor. Speculation in the absence of real news of course!

A negotiation period was programmed to follow the initial tender stage, and we might expect Invitations to Submit Final Tenders (ISFT) to be issued in the New Year. Although the real work is expected to be complete by the spring, an extensive period of "Government internal and assurance process" has been planned for which will extend well into Q4 2022 when we can expect to see the Contract Award taking place. In the traditions of the present Government, we cannot rule out that the aforesaid extensive period may be used to totally ruin everyone's hard work and award the contract to a mate who owns a bike shop and bought a fleet of drones from Argos. 

That's the Irish contract Notice published.   

https://ted.europa.eu/udl?uri=TED:NOTICE:656958-2021:TEXT:EN:HTML

€800 000 000 estimated value for a 10 year contract with an option to extend for up to 3 years.

Remember that they operate 5 helicopters (4 + spare) from 4 bases and, like the British in recent times, they have no reliable arrangement for top cover which is one of the reasons that the R116 accident happened.

"... minimum requirements are the provision of three (3) helicopters and a fixed wing aircraft on standby for Irish Coast Guard aviation tasking."

======================

Why does this matter to UKSAR2G? Two reasons.

If they have a dedicated fixed wing top cover aircraft then that is a good thing for the support of the UK SRR to the North and West of Ireland and for joint and crossover jobs.

If they operate a three base solution then there is a chance that it will put more pressure on Prestwick, Caernarfon or Newquay.

Bristow SAR Cadet Programme 2022

Bristow have opened applications to HCPC Registered Paramedics to become SAR rear crew. As with CHC in Ireland, they don't appear to be seeing the necessary number of ex-military aircrew leaving to join the civilian SAR field.

https://www.bristowgroup.com/services/uk-search-and-rescue/sar-cadet-progra...

This was always going to be necessary in the ongoing situation. The only remaining operational UK military dedicated SAR unit is 84 Sqn RAF in Cyprus. Also, embarked Fleet Air Arm helicopter crews have a SAR function with respect to carrier air ops. That's not a huge pool of talent and the operational locations are not a fine match.

MilSAR talent does still move toward SAR and HEMS in small numbers and will always be part of the picture.

Bristow were training a few new civilian rearcrew at quite an early stage in the current contract. Several people including myself have tried to elevate this subject in a way that will drive any SAR contractor to train to a suitably high standard. My position has always been that SAR Technical Crew should be a licensed aviation trade. 

In March 2021 the CAA issued a 3rd Edition of CAP 999. Although some of that was about post-brexit admin and minor changes, the really important part of the new edition was more detailed definition of SAR Technical Crew training and the manner of their Certification. Although this stops short of my preferred option of licensed aviation trade, it is a significant step forward in the regulation SAR aviation and is most welcome. As one former MilSAR pilot and instructor once referenced the matter on another social media site, it 'recognise ... who is taking all the risks in SAR'.

A few hours ago, Bristow issued a press release about the award to them of the Netherlands Coastguard SAR contract. 

https://www.bristowgroup.com/news-media/press-releases/detail/498/bristow-g...

Bristow are also advertising for one UK SAR commander and seeking expressions of interest for SAR crews on the Dutch contract.

No news yet on the progress of the UK contract process. However, it is expected that about now invitations to submit final tenders will be issued. With only two bidders still in the competition for the helicopter lots that we are interested in, we should expect there to be no shortlisting; rather no pursuit of a single preferred bidder; and both Bristow and EEA (CHC) will submit final tenders. 

In the Irish SAR helicopter bid process, the department issued a press release yesterday clarifying the position on SAR helicopter bases. 
https://www.gov.ie/en/press-release/5b374-department-of-transport-amends-te...

"The PQQ will be amended to specify the number and location of Search and Rescue (SAR) bases to reflect the existing configuration, namely four bases at Dublin, Shannon, Sligo and Waterford."

No news on UKSAR2G. 

Next week sees the third base being changed from Sea King to AW101 as part of the Norwegian All Weather Search And Rescue Helicopter (NAWSARH) programme. Three aircraft have been ferrying from Sola to Banak in preparation.

This is at the half-way point of the original plan and we can expect Bodø, Rygge and Florø to roll out during the next year to eighteen months.

There is an additional plan to replace a civilian contractor with another military SAR base at Tromsø in 2028.

[CHC commence service at Tromsø with 2 x Sikorsky S-92A in July and also at Longyearbyen in April.]

We now know that initial bids have been evaluated and bidders are entering a negotiation phase where the MCA help bidders hone their bids ready for the final stage. This is a bit later than expected and we can expect some remaining parts of the programme to be compressed in order to get this all finished by the autumn.

I am now expecting Invitations To Submit Final Tenders to be issued at some time in March. That might lead to evaluation and a decision made in the end of May. An assurance and approval stage follows before the decision is finalised. I am not hopeful that the target of August will be met for completion and standstill (appeals period), so I suggest September is more likely. October wouldn't surprise me (and originally I think December was proposed as a likely completion date). 

Based on the information already in the public domain, the bidders remaining in the competition are as shown below. Let us know if you have heard anything different.

Lot 1: Rotary, shorter endurance with standard carriage capacity for short range rescue work
- Bristow Helicopters Ltd
- EEA Helicopters Operations B.V

Lot 2: Rotary; High endurance with larger carriage capacity for long range/multiple casualty
rescues
- Bristow Helicopters Ltd
- EEA Helicopters Operations B.V.

Lot 3: Fixed-wing, manned and potentially unmanned for rapid search, surveillance and pollution
identification
- 2Excel Aviation Ltd
- EEA Helicopters Operations B.V
- Elbit Systems UK Ltd

Lot 4: A combined solution that contains all of the requirements for Lots 1, 2 and 3 but provided
by one supplier/consortium, enabling the potential cost saving benefits of such an arrangement
to be articulated in a single bid.
- Bristow Helicopters Ltd
- EEA Helicopters Operations B.V.

 

Two tragic accidents took place during the landing of a SAR helicopter on the helipad of Derriford Hospital in Plymouth on Friday morning. Both casualties were in their 80s. One is believed to have been blown over by the downwash and suffered a fatal head injury and the other suffered a fractured pelvis after the downwash is believed to have caught a car door as she was exiting the car. 

https://www.itv.com/news/westcountry/2022-03-05/woman-dies-in-coastguard-he...

The Derriford helipad is a partially elevated pad built on sloping ground and serviced by a ramp complex. In those circumstances, air movement in the vicinity is inevitably complex and it would not be surpising if that played a role in these events. 

Flyers have pointed out that the helipad is 600m away from a disused runway and less 400m from the original end of that runway that was recently built over.

One or more warning signs are placed at the Derriford helipad but based on the available photographs those signs are pretty lame and in no way express the true nature of the risk downwash poses to hospital visitors who inevitably exhibit a greater incidence of frailty. 

These accidents emphasise, not for the first time, that helicopter operations are a high risk activity and risk mitigation requires well thought out plans for warnings and cleared areas or, when appropriate, high standards of training for attending personnel. 

It was recently announced that Bristow are to acquire British International Helicopters in a cash deal that is due to complete in the autumn which is round about the time of the UKSAR2G award. 

https://www.bristowgroup.com/news-media/press-releases/detail/503/bristow-g...

https://britishinternationalhelicopters.com/

https://helihub.com/2022/05/03/bristow-to-acquire-british-international-hel...

Those who have followed the SAR helicopter story for some time will know that BIH have the Falklands SAR contract with 2 x AW189SAR which were the first of the SAR variant to enter service. 

BIH have a long and slightly disjointed history that started in 1964 with BEA Helicopters. The first SAR contract was at Aberdeen in 1973. BA Helicopters was sold to become BIH in the 1980s. The current incarnation commenced in 2000 and included onshore elements of Scotia and CHC. 

Here's a report from 2020 in which Ireland's Auditor General rips the Coastguard a new one! 
https://www.audit.gov.ie/en/find-report/publications/2021/chapter-5-expendi...

No place for British complacency of course since NVIS was first used for helicopter SAR in the UK in 1993 but it was not until well into the current contract (that started 2015 with NVIS as a requirement) that the entire fleet was SAR operational with NVIS. Another case of several years of a coastguard organisation sitting on its hands and imagining the problem wasn't there (staring into the blackness). In the British case, we have no conclusive evidence of it killing anyone but unfortunately it cost Ireland four highly experience SAR aircrew which makes the sums in the report pale into insignificance. 

Now there is a rumour out there about nearly everything, isn't there? Even more so if it's about the helicopter industry, or about government spending, or in Ireland. Oops, looks like this one could be on a roll! No, I shall be kind to our friends across the water and not dig deeper into that bog. 

To summarise, regardless of territory, coastguards should stick to ships.

CMA DECISION

The CMA has decided that CHC must sell the offshore business that it bought from Babcock (part of what was Avincis and Bond previously).

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/cma-requires-chc-to-unwind-helicopter-se...

Reports from the R116 inquest. 

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/r116-crash-jury-foreman-emotional-as-...

Wait, ...  WHAT?!?
https://scontent-lcy1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/285893439_38927710657764...

Where was this? Is this a new CG livery or a jubilee thing perhaps?

Bristow have widespread ambitions for SAR operations across the world. In recent times, they have organised their management in a manner that addresses those ambitions.

They have recently won the Dutch coastguard contract back off NHV. Looking at recent Bristow Group Inc financials, it is not clear where the aircraft are coming from to fulfil their ambitions or even current contracts. This week, this ex-Inverness AW189SAR, plus the last O&G crew change AW189 left in Britain, moved to the Lee-on-Solent SAR Base and GN appeared on Facebook in Kustwacht colours.

It is going to be interesting to see what happens between now and November. It is still possible that these moves are not significant in relation to the UKSAR service.

However, with all AW189SAR owned by BHL, most of the S-92A-SAR leased, and potential for only 2 or 3 bases equipped with S-92  in UKSAR2G, a reduction in aircraft numbers is probably inevitable in the foreseeable future. It is also possible that if they win the Irish contract from CHC then some of the leased S-92A could go there. 

https://www.bristowgroup.com/news-media/press-releases/detail/511/bristow-a...

Some news...

https://www.facebook.com/100064678208383/posts/pfbid0fbTqVYNV1rMe7SfnTj6Qq3...

Vertical Mag are also reporting more detail on the breakdown of helicopter types:

"Bristow will be using a fleet of 18 helicopters, including nine AW189s and three S-92s, along with six new Leonardo AW139s."

https://verticalmag.com/news/bristow-wins-1-6b-uksar2g-contract/ 

This looks like a reduction in the number of helicopters from 21 (10 Sikorsky S-92s and 11 Leonardo AW189s).

Interesting; presume day light hours (12hours per day) new seasonal April-Sept bases in Fort William and Carlisle. Rationale to cover increased workload due to increased population density in tourist season.  Is this the MCA actually realising most of UKSAR isn’t wet stuff….no matter how hard they massage the stats. Or is it somebody in bristles being practical (the idea can’t have come from management, or was it in the tender scope…

Lets see how long it takes FW residents to simultaneously complain about the noise, while regarding the service as ‘their helicopter’!

Well Jim in daylight in Summer you won’t know what you’ll get over Kintail; the beast from the West (S92), the now middle weight AW189 from the East, or possibly something smaller, highly manoeuvrable (?AW139) from the South….with a standard westerly won’t be much in the flight times from each of the bases to you…..

Well, what an interesting day, spotters! 

With no competitors left, chaos in charge at Westminster, and all the ingredients for a snap election piling up, there was no point whatsoever in the DfT sitting on their hands for months, awaiting a fictional "Government Assurance" before awarding and announcing. So there it is. 

'Mysteriously', the matters of resource and positioning that mountain rescue have been raising for some time, and which MCA and Bristow staff have been pointblank denying, are now an important part of the new service. [Fights to stay calm!] 

As predicted above, the three S-92A owned by Bristow remain in service while the seven leased aircraft are now available in case Bristow win the Irish contract. Golf Delta (ex-GAPSAR) is already off to Tromso with CHC. If they don't get Ireland then back to the leasing company and it's still a win. The eleven AW189 are all owned by Bristow so at least nine of them will remain in UK service while Golf November is already on Kustwacht contract training, possibly to be followed by one other to complete the fleet required for the recently-re-won Dutch Coastguard contract. All is happy on the Bristow Group balance sheet. Who knew it was about assets and cashflow? [Rolls eyes!]

So putting those two paragraphs together, it looks like somebody has achieved a fine blend of the resources demanded by the data and the economies demanded by the Board and the Minister. Just when most of the country had become entirely convinced that fact-based governing was a fiction. 

In resourcing, positioning, aircraft capability, top cover, sensors, and UAV, the signs are that this is a good solution. It is expected that MRT and other operational stakeholders will be invited to engagement events in the coming months where more detail should be available. (Hopefully, these events will not be dominated by people who haven't done their homework asking really silly questions.)

In spite of their contractor developing a good solution based upon the data, subsequently contracted by DfT & MCA senior management, there is no prospect of rank and file Coasties abandoning their fantasy world.

Really glad it was you that wrote that and not me. I was trying not to mention it.

The current contract started out based on one per base plus spares plus training before switching to the two per base solution. Bid team members differ on how that change came about. So the current contract could easily have ended up being done with 14 aircraft (15 if an extra spare 189 was used). 

The maintenance regime for the one per base solution is more centralised and requires more ferry pilots.

Could be 18 rotorcraft. Remember there are 6 King Airs as well. With the MCA ambitions as the 'government flying service' (That's the RAF isn't it?), and 5 out of 6 King Airs in England & Wales, one has to wonder if they will be doing medical transfers. (The Scottish Ambulance Service Air Wing has its own King Air for that work.)

Could be 16 aircraft of course with FtWm and carlisle being transfers from Inverness and Preswick during the summer. Tighter logistics but still more than 14 rotorcraft! 

In reply to Jim Fraser:

Could be 16 aircraft of course with FtWm and carlisle being transfers from Inverness and Preswick during summer.

That would be a downgrade as Preswick and Inverness are 24hr based, while the proposed FW and Carlisle will be 12 hr operations. Can’t see them shuttling the craft back to Inverness / Prestwick for the ‘night time’ 12 hour shift …..as we both know Inverness and Prestwick do a lot of summer murky low cloud and low light flying at night to the Islands and the Highlands often when SAS decline medical transfer taskings when conditions are beyond their operational minimums, or for flying for traditional SAR jobs.  Plus Inverness being out of position in FW in daylight hours leaves a hole in cover/increased response over the N Sea .

So I see FW and Carlisle being in addition rather than relocations….

If not political stooshies will start imminently!

No, there are enough spare aircraft in the system to do that. It is not necessarily the way it will happen because there are some slightly higher risks involved. I expect more clarity to emerge as the months pass. 

I want to make clear that although the current 2015 to 2026 contract seemed like a ground-breaking step forward, UKSAR2G is actually the first time that this has been done thoroughly based on a proper data set.

At the start of this bid process, John Foster, who the MR community had known previously as the ARCC Commander, provided an air rescue data set and a software solution accessible to bidders that allowed them to run models to simulate their aircraft and base solutions.

This contrasts with 2011-13 when bases were "in the vicinity of" the results from November 2011's "10 Base Solution" which, although allowing some flexibility around the 10 locations, was quite a fixed solution. It made improvisations based upon an aggregate life saving capability across the UK SRR. Like all of the solutions of 2011; GAPSAR and that Main contract; these were rushed solutions that were forced upon the department and their contractors by the collapse of the 25 year PFI earlier in the year. All credit to the DfT, MCA, BHL and CHC for making all that work well in super quick time.

That is not where we are now. Witness, back to 12 bases including a part-time element, three different aircraft types, bases with different numbers of aircraft. Why? There are people dying over there and they are dying in a certain way and THAT is the solution. But over here there are people dying in a different way, at different times, and in different groups and THIS is the solution. 

Early in the process, the MCA's Asst Economist joined one of the online presentations to tell us that the economics of this contract would be based on the idea that an unnecessary death incurred a cost to the state two million pounds. This is not a new concept to me. Back in about 2018, I was asked about the cost of SAR helicopter sorties by school pupils doing a project. I replied with both actual costs per job on the DfT contract and the two million figure that was common to the thinking of the Crown Office, HSE and Network Rail at the time. 

A nation state and government that thinks its people are worth more alive than dead: that's VERY much what you want. If the recently much-discussed British exceptionalism exists then this is its existence. Somehow, in amongst all this chaos and pandemic losses and stupidity and political bitching, we have fine-tuned an already able service that comes to your aid if you are in danger in our territory even in the most extraordinary circumstances and moves you to a place of safety. Exceptional.