New helicopter air ambulance service to be introduced

Delancey

Kooch wrote: »

Delancey, apologies for breaking protocol.

I do however stand by my comment that to state as a fact that we never really needed the Air Corps is ridiculous.
Even today it is not the only federal organisation in Western Europe to be involved in Air Ambulance. Have a look at this on today's Flightglobal (http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/picture-german-federal-police-notch-up-100000-flight-hours-on-ec135-fleet-366960/). In summary it states:

"The German government operates an all-Eurocopter fleet of more than 80 aircraft throughout its Federal Aviation department. The line-up includes the EC120 for training, the EC135 T2i for air ambulance and law enforcement missions, the EC155 B for light transportation and multi-role tasks and the AS332 L1 Super Puma for long distance and VIP transportation, surveillance, maritime missions and disaster relief in Germany and abroad."

Their roles are very similar to those performed by the Air Corps today, on a much larger scale of course.
Should the Irish State not even try to maximize the utility it gets from assets it has already invested in? Especially if it will help preserve life?

Apology accepted and appreciated Kooch.

While it does seem to make sense that the state should try to maximize the utility it gets from its assets it seems that the Air Corps do not have the supporting infrastructure or indeed perhaps even the right aircraft for this role.
Being an aviation forum there is naturally a focus on the aviation side of things here but not much discussion on the medical side of the equation , i.e. do we really need an Air Ambulance service at all ? Hospital beds closures are an everyday occurence and I just think that whoever does this service be it Air Corps or outsourced it will still draw much-needed funds from an already poor Health Service.

xflyer

I think punchdrunk's comment sums it up.

they simply don't have the experience needed for this or the logistics to support it.

You can gain experience of course, not the hard way I hope but the logistics side is the real problem. Helicopters are maintenance intensive and expensive. Can a 24/7 service like this be maintained with the resources available? Possibly, time will tell.

The Air Corps are between a rock and hard place on this one, dammed if they do, dammed if they don't, to use up the cliches. They need to justify their existence in a world of cutbacks. Any organistion in the public needs to prove it's needed.

I have a suspicion that Air Corps went to the minister fully armed with a very compelling Powerpoint presentation. I suspect they emphasised their professionalism and experience, probably even brought a set of NVGs to show off. No doubt Reilly was impressed and in any case he's under pressure to deliver something. He certainly doesn't impress as health minister. Soon people will speak fondly of Harney.

The other factor is that Air Corps is at a bit of loose end, hence the comment earlier that 3 Squadron are not getting the hours in the air. Of course the reason for this is in part the cutbacks. The government has clamped down on VIP flying. Let's be honest the 139s are best at that.

To my mind this is a further de-militarisation of the Air Corps and gives more credence to those who say 'Why do we need an Air Corps?'

Klunk001

Jesus Nut wrote: »

A EC-135 or AW-139 will be based at Finner and another will be based in south west somewhere also and the rest in Baldonnel as normal.
I heard that was the plan from a mate who flys the 139 in the don.
Great news for the lads in no.3 squad. They might get to up the log book hours at long last

As I understand it, it's not to be on as big a scale as thought. Still looking like one asset stationed in the midlands.

xflyer

Klunk001 wrote: »

As I understand it, it's not to be on as big a scale as thought. Still looking like one asset stationed in the midlands.

Ah, the Irish non solution, window dressing and giving the appearance that something is being done.

savagecabbages

For anyone interested in some slightly heavy reading on the topic:
Feasibility Study on a Helicopter Emergency Medical Service (HEMS) for the Island of Ireland
Department of Health, Social Services & Public Safety (Belfast) and Department of Health & Children (Dublin) 2004

The report gives interesting findings on different structures and also cost breakdowns of each option. It also examines the claims made by both proponents and critics of such a service. It also declares that HEMS (contrywide) as being discussed here is a daylight only operation, while air-ambulance (pre prepared LZ or hospital pad) can run 24hr.

I think a HEMS service in Ireland needs to be staffed with a trauma doctor who can perform complicated procedures or administer appropriate drugs to a severely injured casualty on scene, or while in transit. Having paramedics only on board isn't a huge advantage over current setups.

Klunk001 wrote: »

As I understand it, it's not to be on as big a scale as thought. Still looking like one asset stationed in the midlands.

From that report i referenced:

• 1 helicopter only – based in the north west of the island of Ireland (approximately 50-55% of the island’s population within a 30 minute response time)
• 2 helicopters – based in north west and the south east of the island of Ireland (approximately 80-85% population ‘coverage’)႒
• 3 helicopters – based in north west, the south east and the mid west of the island of Ireland (approximately 90-95% population ‘coverage’)
• 4 helicopters – based in north west, the south east, the mid west and the south west of the island of Ireland (approximately 100% population ‘coverage’).

Klunk001

From today's Sunday Indo.


A new national helicopter ambulance service provided by the Air Corps and the HSE will be used to fly patients to hospital from car crashes and other incidents when time is critical in getting a patient urgent medical treatment.

However, the new service, which will be launched after an agreement is finalised between the HSE and the Department of Defence, will not be the long sought-after HEMS (Helicopter Emergency Medical Service) air ambulance service used in almost every other EU country.

Instead it will be a limited service using a small Air Corps EC-135 helicopter based in Custume Barracks, Athlone, to cover largely the west of Ireland.

The service, where HSE paramedics will have the ability to call in an aeromedical mission for an ill patient who needs a speedy transfer to hospital, will not be available 24 hours a day, and it will not operate at night.

EchoIndia

Klunk001 wrote: »

The service, where HSE paramedics will have the ability to call in an aeromedical mission for an ill patient who needs a speedy transfer to hospital, will not be available 24 hours a day, and it will not operate at night.

Neither would the private services that have lobbied for State involvment in their plans.

boredbaby

Neither would the private services that have lobbied for State involvment in their plans.

And from what I heard the Bond Helicopters/Air Ambulance Ireland proposal only provided for service coverage between Monday and Friday inclusive.

My AC sources have indicated that their proposal is a seven day a week service during daylight hours initially with a possible extension to night time operations following a settling-in / evaluation period.

xflyer

So a figleaf of a service, just patient transfer only this time from the accident site.:rolleyes:

Really is there any point to it?

savagecabbages

Just out of curiosity, how many HEMS outfits worldwide operate 24/7? I was of the understanding that most were daylight only ops, while hospital transfers often run 24/7

Delancey

xflyer wrote: »

So a figleaf of a service, just patient transfer only this time from the accident site.:rolleyes:

Really is there any point to it?

Nope , pure window dressing as already mentioned.

Regarding the private / charity involvement in HEMS - if this was to go ahead what's the betting that in a year or so it would run out of funds and start lobbying for a government bailout ??

balkanhawk

Delancey wrote: »

xflyer wrote: »

So a figleaf of a service, just patient transfer only this time from the accident site.:rolleyes:

Really is there any point to it?

Nope , pure window dressing as already mentioned.

Regarding the private / charity involvement in HEMS - if this was to go ahead what's the betting that in a year or so it would run out of funds and start lobbying for a government bailout ??

Declancey & Xflyer,
a. How is this new service window dressing?
b. what's with the hate for the aer corps? seriously i know they are not perfect but i can feel the disdain from here.

Is transport from crash site to hospital with medical people on board not HEMS? I was under the impression that is what it was.

It is an improvement over the current arrangement using existing resources. That to me is a good reason to do it. I would guess that once the operation is up and running with all if the kinks worked out they may go 24hrs.

xflyer

OK

a. What was needed was a fully equipped HEMS helicopter with trauma Doctor etc. Instead we get a slight expansion and formalising of the service the Air Corps already provided. Patient transport. It's merely additional to what the Coast Guard already provide. It's the all expense spared version designed so the Reilly can stand up in the Dail with tears in his eyes and proclaim that he has done something good for the people of Ireland.

b. No disdain for the Air Corps, far from it. But it's become almost irrelevant in recent years. Further civilianising it's role won't help that.

HEMS is about having a properly equipped dedicated helicopter with properly trained paramedics or a Doctor on board. What we're getting is patient transfer from the accident scene. It's barely an improvement on the current situation. I can't see it going 24 hour. The Air Corps won't be given the resources. Most likely it will be quietly dropped, citing lack of demand or something else.

no1girliegirl

Finally the government make a sensible decision. If the Coast Guard or another civilian company were to have got this role it would cost us billions. The Air Corp have the machines, have the pilots, have the experience and they also have the capability to go 24 hours with the night vision goggles if it came to it.
Why wouldn’t we use the Air Corp to our advantage, the pilots are paid the same either way, they don’t get overtime or if they are away from base.
The HEMS is a huge advantage to the people of Ireland in particular the people in the west of the country, people will now be able to get to hospital in critical emergencies.
The Air Corps has a motto of “Go Mairidis Beo” – “That Others Might Live” has been used previously for SAR and is still used in the Air Corp today and is evident in all the Air Ambulances that already take place many times each month. The HEMS will continue the tradition of the Air Corp lifesaving missions.
The 135 is used for HEMS in the UK and over Europe and it’s the perfect helicopter for landing roadside or in a tight space. As in Europe HEMS only takes place in daylight hours.
Xflyer you seem so negative against the Air Corp, why?? The HEMS is not going to be a figleaf services as you say, it will be the equivalent of any HEMS in EUROPE. And as for your question “Really is there any point to it?” then I ask you is saving lives worth it? I would have thought it was.
The air Corp will provide a Helicopter capable of landing at a crash or emergency site and taking causality on board and a Pilot that is capable of flying that sortie. The HSE will provide the Medical staff and both of those together will make up a Helicopter Emergency Medical Service
Good Luck to all from the Air Corp and HSE involved in the new Helicopter Emergency Medical Service

Klunk001

no1girliegirl wrote: »

Finally the government make a sensible decision. If the Coast Guard or another civilian company were to have got this role it would cost us billions. The Air Corp have the machines, have the pilots, have the experience and they also have the capability to go 24 hours with the night vision goggles if it came to it.
Why wouldn’t we use the Air Corp to our advantage, the pilots are paid the same either way, they don’t get overtime or if they are away from base.
The HEMS is a huge advantage to the people of Ireland in particular the people in the west of the country, people will now be able to get to hospital in critical emergencies.
The Air Corps has a motto of “Go Mairidis Beo” – “That Others Might Live” has been used previously for SAR and is still used in the Air Corp today and is evident in all the Air Ambulances that already take place many times each month. The HEMS will continue the tradition of the Air
Corp lifesaving missions.
The 135 is used for HEMS in the UK and over Europe and it’s the perfect helicopter for landing roadside or in a tight space. As in Europe HEMS only takes place in daylight hours.
Xflyer you seem so negative against the Air Corp, why??
The HEMS is not going to be a figleaf services as you say, it will be the equivalent of any
HEMS in EUROPE. And as for your question “Really is there any point to it?” then I ask you is saving lives worth it? I would have thought it was.
The air Corp will provide a Helicopter capable of landing at a crash or emergency site and taking causality on board and a Pilot that is capable of flying that sortie. The HSE will provide the Medical staff and both of those together will make up a Helicopter Emergency Medical Service
Good Luck to all from the Air Corp and HSE involved in the new Helicopter Emergency Medical Service

Slight exaggeration in your first couple of lines there girlygirl:D and please dont scare me with the big bad bold civilian company thing again.;) Having read today the report in relation to the pc9 crash, it sounds like some internal house keeping might have to be done by external house cleaners before this military operation start doing civilian work..... By the way, it will be one machine and 12 hour as I understand it.

no1girliegirl

Not trying to scare anybody and its not exaggeration.

I'm always amazed at how easily people turn against previous employers. Its a sad type of person who does that.

Im sure the Air Corp have made changes themselves, things do change with in a public organisation, they have to.

If the Air Corp weren't taking on HEMS then there wouldnt be one, the country is BROKE, it cant afford to take on an outside company, it may have been able to if it hadnt wasted money as usual on buying helicopters for outside organisations to use for a few years that will never actually belong to the country but thats another issue.

As I said good luck to all involved in the new HEMS, I hope the begrudgers dont ruin it for the people of Ireland.

Klunk001

no1girliegirl wrote: »

Not trying to scare anybody and its not exaggeration.

I'm always amazed at how easily people turn against previous employers. Its a sad type of person who does that.

Im sure the Air Corp have made changes themselves, things do change with in a public organisation, they have to.

If the Air Corp weren't taking on HEMS then there wouldnt be one, the country is BROKE, it cant afford to take on an outside company, it may have been able to if it hadnt wasted money as usual on buying helicopters for outside organisations to use for a few years that will never
actually belong to the country but thats another issue. By the way, I would find a fleet of new
helo's that are being under utilised with nothing to do and not being used for whatbthey were bought for a waste of money. That just my opinion.As I said good luck to all involved in the new HEMS, I hope the begrudgers dont ruin it for the people of Ireland

Yes, good luck to all involved and more to the point, safe flying.You've certainly pinned your colours to the mast and fair play to you. It's nice to see you hold the helo crews of the IRCG in as high regard as you do IAC helo crews. It's you that brought it up. Billions is an exaggeration, outside organisation is an exaggeration, a few years is an exxageration.

Speaking for myself, I'm a civie through and through and carrying no baggage from a previous employer, military or otherwise. All people want from the service is that it is safe, accountable, and lessons are learned, no more, no less.whether carried out by the IAC, HSE, IRCG at the end of the day that bill is paid for by the tax payer. By the way, I would find a fleet of new
helo's that are being under utilised with nothing to do and not being used for what they were
originally bought for a waste of money. If they have too many helo assets sell some of them off. Oh, last time that was done (Dauphines) someone lost a packet, someone esle made a fortune. That just my opinion.

eyeinthesky

At long last it looks like our government has seen the light to provide an Air Ambulance service. Personally i think using the Air Corps is an excellent choice. Just let us think back the excellent job they did in search and rescue with inferior aircraft compared to other countries.
The present helicopters are ideal for HEMS and with training that is done i can see not problem. At the present state of our country it is the only way a service like HEMS can be carried out. In case anybody thinks i have any affeliations I am an ordinary Joe soap who has been listening to the airwaves including SAR for many years, looking foreward to hearing the HEMS callsign.

texas12

Hi No1girliegirl. Pretty quick out of the traps about the Air Corp and private companies. With cost in mind and the country BROKE what are your thoughts on the link below.

http://www.kildarestreet.com/wrans/?id=2012-01-12.1008.0&s=air+corp#g1009.0.q

Waste of money or not. Millions over the next couple of decades.

Sterling Archer

Personally i hope this works out, but it's not very well thought out, as has been said it needs to be more than just "patient transfer" , basing in Athlone does give good coverage, also the ability to free up the IRCG i(when there extra busy) by flying to the islands... but is there a hanger at Custume Barracks? and since it's daylight only is that one or two crews.

The Air Corp need this, i hope they don't throw it away, and give the government reason to shoot down anyone else who tries to establish something similar, saying we had it and it didn't work out...

It does show how backward this country is, with so many remote parts of the country it's laughable that we do not have even one dedicated HEMS service..

So basically its
One EC135,
With a dedicated HEMS layout,
Crewed by Air Corp personnel,
Based in Athlone,
Operating Daylight only.

Did i miss anything?

Anyway more power to them Good Luck.

Klunk001

texas12 wrote: »

Hi No1girliegirl. Pretty quick out of the traps about the Air Corp and private companies. With cost in mind and the country BROKE what are your thoughts on the link below.

http://www.kildarestreet.com/wrans/?id=2012-01-12.1008.0&s=air+corp#g1009.0.q

Waste of money or not. Millions over the next couple of decades.

Wow..nice terms and conditions. :eek:

no1girliegirl

T&C's are good, not as good as they used to be but as it sayd its for the job they do and its the same for other public sector jobs such as gardai, fire fighters etc its always been out there as a fact and i dont really see why your homing in on that. I'd say the guys deserve it, they dont get paid as they would in the public sector and that id say is why many have left and prolly the reason they increased the age as pilots were probably leaving to go to civilian companies where they'de be paid way beyond anything they could imagine in the defence forces and with alot more time off.

I am in a totally different sector and i give an outsiders view although i'd loved to have had a job in something like HEMS or SAR :-(

texas12

Sorry No1girliegirl. You dont get off that lightly. Air Corp pilots have all their training paid for by the tax payer. The equipment is bought by the tax payer . They are paid by the tax payer and you believe that the scenario whereby a pilot can serve as little as 12 years after all the paid training they get and walk away with a pension payable the day they leave is ok.

We as tax payers will be paying for this exact scenario for the rest of there lives. How many pilots have left the Air Corp on this deal and joined airline all over the world in the last 15 years. Check it out. It got that bad the Dept of Defence had to put out a special payment scheme just to try and keep them from leaving. All on the back of taxpayers. And yes Air Corp pilots pay tax as well. But we are BROKE and no body has put a cost on this particular huge waste of money.

xflyer

Ok girl let's get this clear. I'm not anti Air Corps. I'm pro the Air Corps always was and alway will be. I'm even a friend of their Facebook page!

It isn't anti Air Corps to point out their failings and to see that this service is a poor compromise and basically a misuse of the Air Corps resources and by extension a waste of my tax money and the everyone else's.

We don't even know if this is going to be a real HEMS service yet. We don't even have any real details of what going to be involved. What is clear is that it's going to be a compromise and a poor substitute for a real HEMS service. No disrespect to the Air Corps people involved. They I suspect will recognise this better than anyone.

You sound young, girliegirl, and without being patronising you may be a little naive about how things work in this country. All too often the appearance of doing something is more important than the substance. Check out the Croke Park agreement for one thing.

This is what happening in this case. It's a compromise, a poor one at that.

no1girliegirl

Xflyer I am neither young nor naive and I know all about the Croke Park agreement.

Can I ask what you mean by your comment below saying it is a compromise and will be a poor substitute for a real HEMS? It is going to provide the same HEMS that is provided throughout Europe.

"We don't even know if this is going to be a real HEMS service yet. We don't even have any real details of what going to be involved. What is clear is that it's going to be a compromise and a poor substitute for a real HEMS service. No disrespect to the Air Corps people involved. They I suspect will recognise this better than anyone."


Is it the HEMS your against as a service or is it just if the IAC are providing the service, would you be happy enough if it were CHC???

You and many other posters on this forum may make out like you are a fan of the IAC but you slate nearly everything to dowith it, its as if your trying to turn people against them. And its not just on this forum its on many forums, some people on here may have different usernames on other forums but repeat themselves on nearly every forum they post on and it always seems so negative against the IAC.

Dacian

xflyer wrote: »

.........What was needed was a fully equipped HEMS helicopter with trauma Doctor etc. Instead we get a slight expansion and formalising of the service the Air Corps already provided. Patient transport. It's merely additional to what the Coast Guard already provide. .......

HEMS is about having a properly equipped dedicated helicopter with properly trained paramedics or a Doctor on board. What we're getting is patient transfer from the accident scene. It's barely an improvement on the current situation. I can't see it going 24 hour. The Air Corps won't be given the resources.....

My emphasis above


I'm not sure what part of this comment seems hard to understand.

HEMS is a specific task, if the country is getting a new patient transfer service that is being called HEMS then we are being cheated. Patient transfer already exists, as xflyer points out this is merely a formalizing of the service. The important thing is, will it actually improve the service for the country? Or merely provide another organisation that needs administrative/logistic support?

Klunk001

no1girliegirl wrote: »

Xflyer I am neither young nor naive and I know all about the Croke Park agreement.

Can I ask what you mean by your comment below saying it is a compromise and will be a poor substitute for a real HEMS? It is going to provide the same HEMS that is provided throughout Europe.

"We don't even know if this is going to be a real HEMS service yet. We don't even have any real details of what going to be involved. What is clear is that it's going to be a compromise and a poor substitute for a real HEMS service. No disrespect to the Air Corps people involved. They I suspect will recognise this better than anyone."
Is it the HEMS your against as a service or is it just if the IAC are providing
the service, would you be happy enough if it were CHC???

You and many other posters on this forum may make out like you are a fan of the IAC but you slate nearly everything to dowith it, its as if your trying to turn people against them. And its not just on this forum its on many forums, some people on here may have different usernames on other forums but repeat themselves on nearly every forum they post on and it always seems so
negative against the IAC.

No 1, would you be happy to see CHC get this service, as you put it?. This might surprise you, but people who post well thought out threads in relation to the air corps aren't necessarily pro CHC as you seem to think, speaking of which you seem to have a real bee in your bonnet for. Just to be clear, it is the IRCG who provides the service to the state while leasing from CHC. If you feel the IAC should do these jobs, well put across your arguments supported with facts, stats and figures, people on here are mature enough to make up their own minds.


By the way No1 you might want to take a look at this, there is a very interesting discussion going on, take a look at post 25 on this thread and tell me what you think.

http://forum.irishmilitaryonline.com/showthread.php?19940-PC-9-Crash-report

no1girliegirl

Dacian wrote: »

xflyer wrote: »

.........What was needed was a fully equipped HEMS helicopter with trauma Doctor etc. Instead we get a slight expansion and formalising of the service the Air Corps already provided. Patient transport. It's merely additional to what the Coast Guard already provide. .......

HEMS is about having a properly equipped dedicated helicopter with properly trained paramedics or a Doctor on board. What we're getting is patient transfer from the accident scene. It's barely an improvement on the current situation. I can't see it going 24 hour. The Air Corps won't be given the resources.....

My emphasis abov

I'm not sure what part of this comment seems hard to understand.

HEMS is a specific task, if the country is getting a new patient transfer service that is being called HEMS then we are being cheated. Patient transfer already exists, as xflyer points out this is merely a formalizing of the service. The important thing is, will it actually improve the service for the country? Or merely provide another organisation that needs administrative/logistic support?

Thats not the comment from xflyer that i was talking about, i put the quote in my post.

But Dacian the HEMS will be an improvement at present situation, today there is only hospital to hospital/airport air ambulance transport provided. And coast gaurd dont land roadside. The new HEMS will be be a roadside accident transport, if you look at any of the English tv programmes on HEMS it will be basically be like that. It will have either a doctor or Advance Paramedic on board. Like nearly every other HEMS in Europe it will be a daytime operation but the Air Corp have the capability to go 24/7, this would NOT be usual for HEMS, my friend is a HEMS pilot in the UK and its daytime only. In basic terms it will be like a flying ambulance.

savagecabbages

I think we all need to stand back a little and wait for more information on the service to be released before jumping headlong into criticising (of praising) something we only know a little about... We don't know how it will operate or be staffed - will it be a doctor, paramedic, both etc.

What information has been released so far is very vague I'll be waiting another while before deciding if the Aer Corps service will be an acceptable one...
Come to think of it, anyone know much about the rival tenders which were put in for the service? Maybe the AC were the best option??

Klunk001

savagecabbages wrote: »

Come to think of it, anyone know much about the rival tenders which were put in for the service? Maybe the AC were the best option??

Haven't a clue to be honest.

Bessarion

no1girliegirl wrote: »

......the HEMS will be an improvement at present situation, today there is only hospital to hospital/airport air ambulance transport provided. ...........it will have either a doctor or Advance Paramedic on board. Like nearly every other HEMS in Europe it will be a daytime operation but the Air Corp have the capability to go 24/7, this would NOT be usual for HEMS, .......

In think the major sticking point in this discussion is not WHO operates the service but will it have the trauma doctor onboard OR will it be a roadside accident-hospital air transport.

And any improvement on current cover is a good thing regardless of who runs it.

savagecabbages

Agreed, but i'd also have concerns about how its only using a single base to cover the whole country...

xflyer

The Air Corps have always provided a roadside/scene of accident service on request. If all this is only a formalisation of that service then it's all smoke and mirrors. IF and it's a big if, the service includes a trauma Doctor onboard and a FULLY equipped HEMS helicopter. Then it's an improvement.

If not then it's the usual Irish compromise, an illusion of an improvement. None of this can be construed as a criticism of the Air Corps. They obey orders, simple as that. Let's get away from childish assumptions that I have some kind of issue with the Air Corps. I've been in this business too long for that crap.

My biggest fear is that unlike civilian services, the military is mission orientated and not constrained by civil rules. That means they might fly into situations that will get them into trouble from sheer valour. In the US, air ambulance is one of the most dangerous jobs there is. Unsurprisingly many of their pilots are ex military.

texas12

Hi No1girliegirl
I’m against a service that is unregulated by the nation authority. In every other country within Europe HEMS is a civil operated and regulated service. The military is exempt from and JAR ops rules. So if you are a citizen of Ireland and you require HEMS retrieval from an RTA what are you getting? A very complex question when you read JAR OPS HEMS regs. How is the heli maintained? Do the IAC have JAR part 145 approvals? Does the pilot have the required P1 command hours? As your HEMS buddy in the UK about the CAA and the audit process.
That’s what I have a problem with. It’s all fine until something happens. As for tendering process I believe it went something like this" gis a job we can do that"

texas12

HEMS in the US and its dangers. This should answer a lot of questions.

savagecabbages

xflyer wrote: »

The Air Corps have always provided a roadside/scene of accident service on request.

We do know that there will be a declared asset available, as opposed to whatever might be available (or not) at the time the request is put in. That in my eyes is an improvement straight away, rergardless of staffing etc.

What remains to be seen is how much of an improvement...

Tenger

texas12 wrote: »

............So if you are a citizen of Ireland and you require HEMS retrieval from an RTA what are you getting? A very complex question when you read JAR OPS HEMS regs. How is the heli maintained? Do the IAC have JAR part 145 approvals? Does the pilot have the required P1 command hours? As your HEMS buddy in the UK about the CAA and the audit process....

If I am an RTA casualty I would probably not worry too much about the JAR ops compliance of a heli crew offering to take me to hospital.

Are you saying that a military operated HEMS service would be less regulated than a civilian service? By that do you mean less safe and more 'seat of the pants'? That is quite the assertion.

xflyer

It could be less well regulated. As tex says they are not bound by JAR ops which isn't to say they won't adhere to a very high standard. But the IAA won't be in a position to keep an eye on them. It will be entirely internal and military.

One of this issues for any pilot is the go/no go decision in marginal weather or towards the end of the day. From personal experience it's not always a black and white decision and the tension level can be quite high.

Add the pressure of someone being critically injured depending on you to come and rescue them. Worse you might have someone on the end of the phone telling you the weather is fine at their end even though they know nothing of about flying and aviation.

But you make the right decision, stay on the ground and the patient dies. What happens next time?

That's why there has to be a robust set of rules to cover those situations. Plus pilot training must be thorough and currency maintained. You can't just roster any random pilots who happen to be around.

Now maybe this is all being planned. Dedicated crews, specialised training and strict rules in place to prevent military pilots natural can do attitude from becoming dangerous. I hope so.

The last thing needed is another Tramore type accident, this time with a patient on board.

There was a case in the USA where two crews refused to take on a mission due to the weather. But the medical people persisted and eventually found a third willing to take it on. They crashed fatally.

Here in Ireland there'll be one crew!

NewSigGuy

texas12 wrote: »

HEMS in the US and its dangers. This should answer a lot of questions.

That makes very sobering reading, maybe rushing to get this service set up is not a good idea.

Lessons learned in the past and not remembered could lead to another terrible tragedy...

I really feel this type of operation requires regulatory oversight, and realistically can be provided at an affordable cost within that framework

donkey balls

xflyer wrote: »

It could be less well regulated. As tex says they are not bound by JAR ops which isn't to say they won't adhere to a very high standard. But the IAA won't be in a position to keep an eye on them. It will be entirely internal and military.

One of this issues for any pilot is the go/no go decision in marginal weather or towards the end of the day. From personal experience it's not always a black and white decision and the tension level can be quite high.

Add the pressure of someone being critically injured depending on you to come and rescue them. Worse you might have someone on the end of the phone telling you the weather is fine at their end even though they know nothing of about flying and aviation.

But you make the right decision, stay on the ground and the patient dies. What happens next time?

That's why there has to be a robust set of rules to cover those situations. Plus pilot training must be thorough and currency maintained. You can't just roster any random pilots who happen to be around.

Now maybe this is all being planned. Dedicated crews, specialised training and strict rules in place to prevent military pilots natural can do attitude from becoming dangerous. I hope so.

The last thing needed is another Tramore type accident, this time with a patient on board.

There was a case in the USA where two crews refused to take on a mission due to the weather. But the medical people persisted and eventually found a third willing to take it on. They crashed fatally.

Here in Ireland there'll be one crew!

I'm just under EMT level regarding emergency training and it's drilled into us that the scene has to be safe before attending to a person involved in a RTA safety for the crew is paramount.

xflyer

You are a civilian operating under civilian rules. In the example I made up the, conditions are suitable at the scene but it's getting late and weather on the way is poor. That's the complicating factor in aviation.

I remember sitting at a sunny airport for hours waiting for an aeroplane to turn up. The increasingly restive customers couldn't understand why it was a no show. Explaining the the poor weather at the departure field didn't help. The pilot at the other end felt under pressure but he also understood his limitations and of course no one was dying.

On the other hand, same airport only now the weather had closed in. This time it was a very young and impressionable me, weathered in unable to get out. The owner wanted his plane in Dublin. I wasn't going anywhere, it was 200 feet and low viz with mountains all around. I had no instrument time and I knew enough about IFR that any attempt to climb out through cloud would result in spatial disorientation and disaster. Yet I got phone call after phone call demanding I get airborne including one from the CFI. I refused but was under severe duress. They eventually they sent another plane flown by an Aer Lingus airline pilot who flew an illegal non precision approach down to 200 feet. Something I'd actually seen an airline flight do earlier equally illegally.

Through it all I was made to feel I had done something wrong where in fact I was the only pilot there who did the right thing on the day. Only after later consideration did I realise that I had to power to end several careers that day. But at the time, if the same scenario happened. I might have tried to get out.

The point is there are times when the only defence against doing something stupid are the rules. Too many pilots are less afraid of dying than losing their licence.

texas12

Article in this months Emergency Services magazine on the current situation.
Air Corp Pilots leaving at the moment with AW139 ratings being snapped up for world wide operations in Africa and Black Sea oil and Gas regions means the A/C have between 4-6 pilots to run the proposed unaudited non JAR OPS 3 compliant service.

xflyer

Interesting article and a good summary of the issue. Mind you the lack of any decision from O'Reilly is telling.

I note too that the Air Corps are heavily hyping their air ambulance service on their Facebook page. 17 so far this year. Of course you're not going to get any critical comments on Facebook. It's all back slapping and 'well done lads'.

Which is fine. But I can't help wondering about the costs of using the Air Corps. Last time I looked it costs over €4000 an hour for a Learjet or Gulfstream.

If it turns out that using a private air ambulance operator is less expensive and I'm pretty sure it is, then it's a scandalous waste of taxpayers money.

This will be noticed eventually and it's not good for the Air Corps future.

GoGoGadget

I think when they talk about figures of €4000 per hour to use the Air Corps jets that's calculated from the overall cost of the operation.

The planes will be there, pilots are there and all the facilities that go with the operation, all these fixed costs will be there no matter if it sits on the tarmac or not.

I suppose all they're paying for in terms of variable cost is the fuel, additional cost of maintenance and a few other relatively small expenses.

I'd imagine the actual cost of operating the Air Corps jets to be way lower than €4000 per hour.

Similar to when you charter a private jet to Monaco, as you do.. when you pay your €4000 per hour that helps to cover all the overheads, landing fees, employee wages, insurance, marketing, maintenance, loan and interest repayments of jets etc and they will still be making a profit.

I think it's good that the Air Corps are being made use of as much as possible as there's a lot of money pumped into them.

I think not using them would be a waste of money if you get me.

xflyer

I don't know what the breakdown of costs are. But if they say it costs €4000 per flying hour. Then you have to take it at face value.

This brings it back to the argument as to why we need either the Learjet or Gulfstream at all? Both air ambulance and MATS can be done more cheaply by civil operators.

Both aircraft are rapidly becoming unjustifiable. The fact that the Air Corps are playing up the air ambulance role demonstrates they are aware of this.

NewSigGuy

GoGoGadget wrote: »

I think when they talk about figures of €4000 per hour to use the Air Corps jets that's calculated from the overall cost of the operation.

The planes will be there, pilots are there and all the facilities that go with the operation, all these fixed costs will be there no matter if it sits on the tarmac or not.

I suppose all they're paying for in terms of variable cost is the fuel, additional cost of maintenance and a few other relatively small expenses.

I'd imagine the actual cost of operating the Air Corps jets to be way lower than €4000 per hour.

Similar to when you charter a private jet to Monaco, as you do.. when you pay your €4000 per hour that helps to cover all the overheads, landing fees, employee wages, insurance, marketing, maintenance, loan and interest repayments of jets etc and they will still be making a profit.

I think it's good that the Air Corps are being made use of as much as possible as there's a lot of money pumped into them.

I think not using them would be a waste of money if you get me.

I imagine the actual cost of the L45 and GIV are way above the quoted 4000 figure, I would say this just covers Fuel and standard reserves for Airframe and Engine/APU maintenance..

The actual cost of operating AC aircraft is way above those figures, the AC part of the DF vote is 15M for 2012 IF they manage 10000Hrs that would be 1500 per hour just to cover that part of the AC cost(fuel/Maintenance etc)

The capital cost of AC aircraft is never really accounted for, as far as I know, and the salary's for the 800+ staff at Bal and pension contributions also would have to accounted for. Also the capital costs of the base would need to factored into the hourly cost of the Aircraft, items such as new hangers offices & equipment.

I think in fact it costs the state around 4000 per hour for a C-172 if we were being honest...

Oscar Mike in 5 Mikes

Hi xflyer, do you get around OK?

GoGoGadget

xflyer wrote: »

I don't know what the breakdown of costs are. But if they say it costs €4000 per flying hour. Then you have to take it at face value.

This brings it back to the argument as to why we need either the Learjet or Gulfstream at all? Both air ambulance and MATS can be done more cheaply by civil operators.

Both aircraft are rapidly becoming unjustifiable. The fact that the Air Corps are playing up the air ambulance role demonstrates they are aware of this.

Yeah true it's hard to justify the Air Corps at all as a we're a neutral country and SAR is already outsourced. Ministers can and do still fly in regular airlines etc. And yes all public services are generally more inefficient than private companies.

The fact remains that they still have these jets and all the associated fixed costs whether they provide an ambulance service or not. These are the major costs and if they can utilise anything they already have then that works out cheaper for the state.

I still don't believe it costs €4000 per hour for the Air Corps to operate an air ambulance service just on variable costs.

GoGoGadget

NewSigGuy wrote: »

I imagine the actual cost of the L45 and GIV are way above the quoted 4000 figure, I would say this just covers Fuel and standard reserves for Airframe and Engine/APU maintenance..

The actual cost of operating AC aircraft is way above those figures, the AC part of the DF vote is 15M for 2012 IF they manage 10000Hrs that would be 1500 per hour just to cover that part of the AC cost(fuel/Maintenance etc)

The capital cost of AC aircraft is never really accounted for, as far as I know, and the salary's for the 800+ staff at Bal and pension contributions also would have to accounted for. Also the capital costs of the base would need to factored into the hourly cost of the Aircraft, items such as new hangers offices & equipment.

I think in fact it costs the state around 4000 per hour for a C-172 if we were being honest...

What I'm talking about is the cost of operating a Learjet per additional hour compared to if it sat in the hangar. There's no way the Learjet costs way more than €4000 per additional hour for fuel and the extra cost of maintenance. Similarly if they do an additional hour in the 172 it would prob cost around €100 for the fuel/oil etc

They still have the airport, hangars, aircraft, 800+ employees, electricity bills, all the other equipment.. the list goes on. They still pay these costs regardless of whether they provide an air ambulance service or not.

It's like saying I have this nice shiny new car that I pay fixed costs on regardless of whether I drive it or not but I'll get a taxi to do my weekly shopping and just leave my car sitting on the driveway.

If outsourced the state will need to pay a company a cost per hour which helps to cover that company's fixed costs and the variable cost per hour, we're already paying huge fixed costs for the Air Corps to exist so why not just pay for the additional variable cost per hour for a few air ambulance flights.

I know what you mean though, if you divide the total cost of the Air Corps by each hour they fly the cost is huge. But looking at it from the overall cost to the state it would be cheaper for the Air Corps to throw on an additional air ambulance flights rather than let the Learjet sit in the hangar and pay for someone else to provide the service.

whyulittle

Bit in the local paper today, but no real news.

http://www.westmeathindependent.ie/news/roundup/articles/2012/04/11/4009990-athlonebased-air-ambulance-service-will-cover-the-entire-country/

And one from last week.

http://www.advertiser.ie/athlone/article/51059/air-ambulance-to-be-based-at-athlones-custume-barracks