Air Corps SAR

roadmaster

At least we are start to be honest now

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/transport-and-tourism/air-corps-bid-for-search-and-rescue-services-would-result-in-job-losses-union-warns-1.4558591?mode=amp

Psychlops

roadmaster wrote: »

At least we are start to be honest now

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/transport-and-tourism/air-corps-bid-for-search-and-rescue-services-would-result-in-job-losses-union-warns-1.4558591?mode=amp

Because they cant, look I love the IAC & will champion them to the end of the earth but SAR is not for them.



Leave the Military to the Military taskings & SAR to the SAR Professionals, also while were at it, take the GASU fleet & let AGS fly it & free up those Mil pilots flying them back to actual Military tasks.

roadmaster

I see this morning on IRCG facebook pages tgey are sharing a statment from the Irish Mountain Rescue over a submission they made that was leaked. Has this anything to with the SAR or whats it all about?

punchdrunk

roadmaster wrote: »

I see this morning on IRCG facebook pages tgey are sharing a statment from the Irish Mountain Rescue over a submission they made that was leaked. Has this anything to with the SAR or whats it all about?

They’re pissed because an internal technical document between themselves and the Irish coastguard is being erroneously politicised by that Gob****e Craughwell in his crusade to set SAR back twenty years by giving it back to the IAC

Dohvolle

punchdrunk wrote: »

They’re pissed because an internal technical document between themselves and the Irish coastguard is being erroneously politicised by that Gob****e Craughwell in his crusade to set SAR back twenty years by giving it back to the IAC

Tell us how you really feel.

punchdrunk

Dohvolle wrote: »

Tell us how you really feel.

Am I wrong? Sergeant Wikipedia would be dangerous if the senate actually ever did anything of use

Dohvolle

punchdrunk wrote: »

Am I wrong? Sergeant Wikipedia would be dangerous if the senate actually ever did anything of use

You are.
He has drawn attention to serious questions about the operation of th ecurrent SAR contract. One which based on the interim R119 report, has already cost the lives of 4 people, and who should not be given a subsequent contract until the full accident report is released.
He has caused such a fuss that Coast Guard boss, on secondment in Somalia, has seen fit to engage in a war of words on twitter with the senator. You don't see DF CoS engaging with everyone on twitter who doesn't think the NS are amazing (and they had identical career paths, they were even in the same class).

The fact that numerous anti-air corps trolls started registering on twitter around april of this year just to troll the Senator speaks bucketloads in my opinion.

I have no interest either way. I want a proper SAR service. I don't care who does it.
But it does strike me that if the Air Corps had got the money that CHC got in the last ten years they could have equipped themselves to the same standard, if not better, and at the end of it, the state would still own the helis.

speedbird777

That senator is just a clown representing an organisation of clowns. Seen half the iac fleet flying round Europe last week, not on missions or training, but to be serviced because they dont have the skill set any more to do there own.

They cant even do right what they have atm, let alone introduce a full time sar...but yeah let's give them a billion euro and see what they can muster up.

Dohvolle

speedbird777 wrote: »

That senator is just a clown representing an organisation of clowns. Seen half the iac fleet flying round Europe last week, not on missions or training, but to be serviced because they dont have the skill set any more to do there own.

They cant even do right what they have atm, let alone introduce a full time sar...but yeah let's give them a billion euro and see what they can muster up.

We both know your first paragraph is untrue.

So you are saying that merely giving the Air Corps the same money CHC get would not provide a better service, even though the Air Corps never came close to that sort of funding in the past 40 years? Look at the report that came out today from the DoD. Annually the state spends just €21m (2020) on Air Corps Equipment and support. That's for the entire fleet! The Coast Guard contract cost €60m per year for just 4 helis, and we won't even own them at the end. Buying a bare S92 at current prices would only cost $27m, CHC say they paid €40m each.

So What could we do with an extra €600m over 10 years?

speedbird777

The fact you think it's about equipment leads me to believe you have no idea.

It's not about helis. It's about employment. Its the same reason weve brand new navy ships sitting in the naval base.

The equipment is only as good as the people using it. And until they fix wages, contracts, pensions then its doomed to fail.

And changing these conditions for everyone post 2013 when the contracts got real bad for new entrants, and bare in mind you'll have to change it for all defence forces personnel, you'll see how quickly eats into your "600 million".

Dohvolle

speedbird777 wrote: »

The fact you think it's about equipment leads me to believe you have no idea.

It's not about helis. It's about employment. Its the same reason weve brand new navy ships sitting in the naval base.

The equipment is only as good as the people using it. And until they fix wages, contracts, pensions then its doomed to fail.

And changing these conditions for everyone post 2013 when the contracts got real bad for new entrants, and bare in mind you'll have to change it for all defence forces personnel, you'll see how quickly eats into your "600 million".

And you think it's better not to give the Defence forces that €600m instead, just in case it actually fixes the current staff shortage and retention problem, while also providing a cost effective SAR service?
Because that's what you seem to be saying.
Because from 1963 to 2001 the Air Corps struggled to provide a minimum of Heli SAR, using unsuitable aircraft, while our neighbours covered our backs with suitable ones.
Then suddenly a different department is happy to give multiples of what the Air Corps got and we have the aircraft the Air Corps always wanted providing SAR, but at the end of the contract we have neither the aircraft nor the experienced people?

1874

Dohvolle wrote: »

And you think it's better not to give the Defence forces that €600m instead, just in case it actually fixes the current staff shortage and retention problem, while also providing a cost effective SAR service?
Because that's what you seem to be saying.
Because from 1963 to 2001 the Air Corps struggled to provide a minimum of Heli SAR, using unsuitable aircraft, while our neighbours covered our backs with suitable ones.
Then suddenly a different department is happy to give multiples of what the Air Corps got and we have the aircraft the Air Corps always wanted providing SAR, but at the end of the contract we have neither the aircraft nor the experienced people?

If you just give €600m to the DF, how much do you think will make it to the AC and where it is needed?
You can't just hand over 1 million or 600 more of them, because the AC or DF has no plan or idea what to do with it, it isn't organised on the lines to provide a SAR service, it was always undermined by the management style/structure/mentality of the AC, even how they procure spare parts.
You assume that hadning over that money to be spent will go towards the retention problems? or that it even matters if the State owns the Aircraft, providing an effective service is what is needed, can the AC do that as a dedicated role anymore, I don't think so.
I doubt they have any experience of dealing with finances because they don't care where the money comes from and it isn't likely to be utilised efficiently.
The only concern the DF, The DoD and Dept of Finance care is how they can reduce costs by infliciting cuts on those who then end up deciding to walk.


CHC runs one service, it is dedicated to that, the AC is at the beck and call of the State and if works anything like it did when I was there, the officer mentality (management style) doesn't work.
At one time the State had in it's capacity to have the AC run the service of SAR, they did, but they lost the people skills because they wanted to run it on a shoestring and those doing the unrecognised work were not rewarded for it, far from it they were fcuked over, thats SAR crew and Techs.
What's needed is a dedicated Coast Guard service, not for it to be one of the jobs the AC does.

Stovepipe

I totally agree. If you gave the AC a big wedge of money tomorrow and told them to head off and buy toys, it would get pissed away like snuff at a wake. Civvy SAR works, it cuts the military bull**** to a minimum and it delivers. Apart from being a million times more efficient than any military set up,it's also a convenient place for techs and aircrew to go when they leave the DF. No-one has mentioned that. If you had the faintest idea of how inefficient the AC and DF is,compared to a similar civvy outfit,you would run and never look back.Leave what works well alone.

speedbird777

Meanwhile the army are rotating the leb and Syria with budget airlines.

Dads army.

donvito99

speedbird777 wrote: »

Meanwhile the army are rotating the leb and Syria with budget airlines.

Dads army.

Those kinds of scheduled rotations do not need a dedicated strategic airlifter.

The fact that the DF has no ability to directly repatriate people from the Leb is the real scandal. A mass casualty event was narrowly avoided just a couple of years ago, and it's not good enough to entrust the Italians to weigh in in that contingency.

speedbird777

donvito99 wrote: »

Those kinds of scheduled rotations do not need a dedicated strategic airlifter.

The fact that the DF has no ability to directly repatriate people from the Leb is the real scandal. A mass casualty event was narrowly avoided just a couple of years ago, and it's not good enough to entrust the Italians to weigh in in that contingency.

Still though. Not great flying thomas cook into Beirut, and a new sar unit sitting in bal that covers quarter of the country.

Psychlops

Dohvolle wrote: »

But it does strike me that if the Air Corps had got the money that CHC got in the last ten years they could have equipped themselves to the same standard, if not better, and at the end of it, the state would still own the helis.

Here in lies the problem, it is not the IAC that get the money to use, it is the DoD, & we all know what they do, they hand it back.



And if we owned the aircraft we would be stuck with the mounting costs of ageing aircraft after years looking for spare parts etc that will get retired & then sold at the lowest possible price by the DoD as they have shown this is what they do.


The helis might be retired from the IAC but brought back to life like the Dauphins in other Militaries/Civvy US outfits & still fly to this day & then we have the time honoured tradition of saying "why didnt we do that".


IIRC the IAC wanted Blackhawks but got the AW139. Infact they wanted 6 to replace 15.


https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/air-corps-eyes-up-blackhawk-copters-26008311.html

1874

Psychlops wrote: »

Here in lies the problem, it is not the IAC that get the money to use, it is the DoD, & we all know what they do, they hand it back.



And if we owned the aircraft we would be stuck with the mounting costs of ageing aircraft after years looking for spare parts etc that will get retired & then sold at the lowest possible price by the DoD as they have shown this is what they do.


The helis might be retired from the IAC but brought back to life like the Dauphins in other Militaries/Civvy US outfits & still fly to this day & then we have the time honoured tradition of saying "why didnt we do that".


IIRC the IAC wanted Blackhawks but got the AW139. Infact they wanted 6 to replace 15.


https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/air-corps-eyes-up-blackhawk-copters-26008311.html

To be honest, I think they should have always had Pumas, Super Pumas and upgraded versions of those alongside smaller utility helis. I think the Pumas and versions are capable aircraft types and we shouldn't have to go outside the EU to buy either.
Other than one of the very latest versions of the Puma which I read had a different main rotor head assy and was potentially the cause of a crash due to some fault/crack there or in associated components, but that was of a newer version of the Puma, ie imo untested fully.

The IAC, The DoD have a different/incorrect mindset for SAR imo, they are not structured for change and they would need a complete overhaul to be organised, I dont think it's cut out for change.
I don't think the DF operates efficiently or effectively, thats not to say the people on the ground aren't capable or doing a good job with what they have, its the management and direction which is outside the control and remit of the people on the ground. There is no intent or comprehension to even treat people right, a lot of things they cant get right.

Its the FFG way, farm all work out to private contractors, I dont agree it should be so, but its necessary when an organ of the State cant,wont, doesn't have the qualifications or experience, or isnt able to do the job.

punchdrunk

1874 wrote: »

To be honest, I think they should have always had Pumas, Super Pumas and upgraded versions of those alongside smaller utility helis. I think the Pumas and versions are capable aircraft types and we shouldn't have to go outside the EU to buy either.
Other than one of the very latest versions of the Puma which I read had a different main rotor head assy and was potentially the cause of a crash due to some fault/crack there or in associated components, but that was of a newer version of the Puma, ie imo untested fully.

The IAC, The DoD have a different/incorrect mindset for SAR imo, they are not structured for change and they would need a complete overhaul to be organised, I dont think it's cut out for change.
I don't think the DF operates efficiently or effectively, thats not to say the people on the ground aren't capable or doing a good job with what they have, its the management and direction which is outside the control and remit of the people on the ground. There is no intent or comprehension to even treat people right, a lot of things they cant get right.

Its the FFG way, farm all work out to private contractors, I dont agree it should be so, but its necessary when an organ of the State cant,wont, doesn't have the qualifications or experience, or isnt able to do the job.

They were offered P242 for a bargain price after the lease ended (the chopper had been built as a one off for VIP use and the contract fell through)
They sent it back.

Over spec’ed the Dauphin and messed that up

Awarded Sikorsky a contract to finally buy a decent medium lift chopper in the S-92 and they made a balls of it and that fell through

Wanted Blackhawks but they’re far too war-y lookin for us so they bought the AW139 instead but as it’s really a civvy chopper painted green it won’t be deployed abroad supporting peacekeeping missions

Foolishly only bought two EC-135’s and when one had a prang that nearly wrote it off, it took three years to get it repaired and back in service

The DOD/IAC have been ****ing up helicopter acquisitions for 40 years!

punchdrunk

Dohvolle wrote: »

You are.
He has drawn attention to serious questions about the operation of th ecurrent SAR contract. One which based on the interim R119 report, has already cost the lives of 4 people, and who should not be given a subsequent contract until the full accident report is released.
He has caused such a fuss that Coast Guard boss, on secondment in Somalia, has seen fit to engage in a war of words on twitter with the senator. You don't see DF CoS engaging with everyone on twitter who doesn't think the NS are amazing (and they had identical career paths, they were even in the same class).

The fact that numerous anti-air corps trolls started registering on twitter around april of this year just to troll the Senator speaks bucketloads in my opinion.

I have no interest either way. I want a proper SAR service. I don't care who does it.
But it does strike me that if the Air Corps had got the money that CHC got in the last ten years they could have equipped themselves to the same standard, if not better, and at the end of it, the state would still own the helis.

He’s made a fool of himself and dragged the mountain rescue community through the mud, and damaged working relationships,
not in their interest but in his interest as part of his little crusade and against their wishes- classy stuff!

What valid questions has he asked? All I see is ill informed bluff!

Larbre34

The aircraft are almost irrelevant.

The private sector can hire pilots from all over the globe, within a window of weeks, if necessary.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, the fact that Air Corps Pilot Officers would be required to man this service and that no guarantee of sufficient manpower can be made, they are out of consideration entirely. It's simply too crucial to leave to chance, quite apart from the ridiculous notion of having the AC provide 25% of the coverage in a tiny territory like ours.

In fact, any senior manager in the DF or the DoD who thinks its a good and plausible idea, ought to take a serious look at themselves.

Larbre34

Larbre34 wrote: »

I've said it before and I'll say it again, the fact that Air Corps Pilot Officers would be required to man this service and that no guarantee of sufficient manpower can be made, they are out of consideration entirely. It's simply too crucial to leave to chance, quite apart from the ridiculous notion of having the AC provide 25% of the coverage in a tiny territory like ours.

This..

Which has been backed up time and time again with the Casa being unavailable due to lack of manpower..

Wasn't there a joke of don't even bother calling the Air Corps for help when it's dark or windy

roadmaster

speedbird777 wrote: »

That senator is just a clown representing an organisation of clowns. Seen half the iac fleet flying round Europe last week, not on missions or training, but to be serviced because they dont have the skill set any more to do there own.

They cant even do right what they have atm, let alone introduce a full time sar...but yeah let's give them a billion euro and see what they can muster up.

He might be a clown but in fairness if what he says in the clip below is true there is questions to be answered

https://t.co/Nzb2YBwnz3?amp=1

speedbird777

roadmaster wrote: »

He might be a clown but in fairness if what he says in the clip below is true there is questions to be answered

https://t.co/Nzb2YBwnz3?amp=1

What part....alot of it has no merit

roadmaster

speedbird777 wrote: »

What part....alot of it has no merit

He saying they where paid to equip the aircraft for Neonatal transfers, bambi buckets for fires and crew using NVGs which they only started training on recently

speedbird777

roadmaster wrote: »

He saying they where paid to equip the aircraft for Neonatal transfers, bambi buckets for fires and crew using NVGs which they only started training on recently

Never required for firefighting...ac job
Dont do hems transfers as not required in contract. Only do it in emergencies when ac cant provide.
Nvis done through forward looking infrared

roadmaster

speedbird777 wrote: »

Never required for firefighting...ac job
Dont do hems transfers as not required in contract. Only do it in emergencies when ac cant provide.
Nvis done through forward looking infrared

The senator is making claims that CHC was paid to allow for all ofvthe above

Dohvolle

roadmaster wrote: »

The senator is making claims that CHC was paid to allow for all ofvthe above

He wouldn't stand up in the house and say it if it wasn't fact surely?

speedbird777

roadmaster wrote: »

The senator is making claims that CHC was paid to allow for all ofvthe above

There in lies the problem. The senator is "making claims"...being fed b@%it from x iac. Just look at mri.
As an x df member I'm embarrassed that's that who is trying to lead the charge for better df conditions.

Larbre34

I would have backed Craughwell on some stuff, but he's made SAR his Moby Dick and he's dead wrong in this instance.