SARS issues for MRT’s

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
 colinakmc 02 Nov 2018

This: https://www.walkhighlands.co.uk/news/mountain-rescue-teams-criticise-search... 

It seems the cracks are beginning to appear in the plasterwork of the new private SAR service. I’m guessing the teams have been getting the rubber ear from government and contractor. Anyone know more about the background to this and would letters to mp’s help?

Post edited at 20:44
 mountainbagger 02 Nov 2018
In reply to colinakmc:

Yes, I just read about it on Facebook. I can't say I am surprised. Replacing a long standing relationship (and all the implicit understanding that goes with that) with a private service run by people who don't understand (and may be more concerned with economics) was always going to be tricky.

The saddest part is MR feeling as if their hard work and well-being isn't valued. And the appalling insinuation that they might be lazy!

 Alan Breck 02 Nov 2018
In reply to colinakmc:

Covered pretty comprehensively in: https://www.grough.co.uk/magazine/2018/11/02/scottish-teams-say-rescue-heli...

I've always been impressed by the expertise and commitment of the teams and their members. Pretty sad that these volunteers are now apparently dismissed as almost disposable.

On another tac I had thought that any deceased "casualty" was not considered deceased until the doctor in the hospital said so. Apparently that isn't so.

In reply to Alan Breck:

Just read the same report on walk highlands (linking to it again here: https://www.walkhighlands.co.uk/news/mountain-rescue-teams-criticise-search...). The following, in particular, made me despair "The teams in iSMR have seen an increasing unwillingness to deploy the aircraft to assist in this final phase of a rescue throughout the term of the contract. Often because the Agencies see that the ‘person in distress’ has been already uplifted." It seems to have been forgotten by these private contractors that the brave people that form our mountain rescue teams are volunteers, sacrificing a huge amount to help those in need. An inevitable consequence of privatisation in seems.

 Luke90 04 Nov 2018
In reply to OneBeardedWalker:

> An inevitable consequence of privatisation in seems.

Exactly. To a certain twisted mindset, the fact that they're volunteers is direct evidence that they and their skills are inferior.

1
 phizz4 04 Nov 2018
In reply to colinakmc:

I wonder if the RNLI are experiencing the same issues?

 Matt Taylor 05 Nov 2018
In reply to Luke90:

Isn't the issue that the Public agency who control the assets refuse to help rather than the private contractors being unwilling to the work? The impression I got is the helicopter crews are fully willing to do whatever the situation demands but are being blocked by their controllers.

 Snowdave 05 Nov 2018
In reply to Matt Taylor:

> Isn't the issue that the Public agency who control the assets refuse to help rather than the private contractors being unwilling to the work? The impression I got is the helicopter crews are fully willing to do whatever the situation demands but are being blocked by their controllers.

Its the dispatch/Air controllers who are telling the heli crews to not help the MRT's.....occasionally the heli crews have told the "controllers" to get stuffed & heli'd the MRT into get bodies & flew them back out ..MRT/deceased/equipment...

 

like the RAF used to do..its called "clearing the hill"...final phase of MRT ops..& always has been..& the private contract was supposed to provide "continuity of service"...

 

 rogerwebb 05 Nov 2018
In reply to Snowdave:

>

> like the RAF used to do..its called "clearing the hill"...final phase of MRT ops..& always has been..& the private contract was supposed to provide "continuity of service"...

Not always. I think it is best to avoid a 'rose tinted spectacle' view of the past. I can remember the long walk out with the RAF as well as with the Coastguard.

 

 Snowdave 05 Nov 2018
In reply to rogerwebb:

> Not always. I think it is best to avoid a 'rose tinted spectacle' view of the past. I can remember the long walk out with the RAF as well as with the Coastguard.

 

I know a few current & ex MRT members of three of the MRT teams which complained...& I knew/dealt with one of the RAF MRT teams, amongst others. Long walk outs usually happen when the casualty is heli'd straight to hospital & has always been like this. If the casualty is heli'd to a waiting road/ambulance the heli's use to "clear the hill" if they had time...now they are told to get back to base. Some heli crews are disobeying aircontrol/dispatch & carrying out what they used to do "clear the hill".

 

You also have the problem of heli's NOT helping in removal of bodies as its not a "casualty"...& the MRT don't now get lifts in or lifts out in this situation either. So if a body is reported found at "X", the MRT team is not dropped in & the body recovered & heli'd out along with the MRT...nice & quick...the MRT's are having to walk in, recover & walk out with the body.

 

We are coming up to the main winter season which involves busy times, short light hours, winter weather etc...& three of the biggest teams which have to deal with the worst weather/landscapes/idiots etc have decided to speak out...& please remember these people do NOT like publicly voicing criticism..UNLESS it directly affects their abilities to carry out rescues safely..((in relative terms)

 

 

1
 rogerwebb 05 Nov 2018
In reply to Snowdave:

I am aware of the issues. I am not commenting from the outside. 

 

Post edited at 17:05
3
 PaulGraham 05 Nov 2018

So what happens if there’s another callout whilst the MRT are ‘clearing the hill’?

Presumably a huge delay and a shagged team. Not great for either the second casualty or the MRT.

 

 JoshOvki 05 Nov 2018
In reply to Snowdave:

> the MRT's are having to walk in, recover & walk out with the body.

I was on a MRT taster day not long ago, and one of the things we had to do was recover someone with "a broken leg" which involved carrying them out on a stretcher. I couldn't believe how awkward, heavy (no offence meant if our victim is reading), and tiring it was carrying a person down hill and across moderately uneven terrain. I was knackered, totally knackered, and couldn't imagine going back out straight off. I know in this case the person was alive and okay, but I cannot imagine for a second a MRT would read anyone that was dead without as much care. Perhaps the people making these decisions should try a simular sort of exercise, never mind the prat that hinted they might just be lazy.

 Snowdave 05 Nov 2018
In reply to PaulGraham:

> So what happens if there’s another callout whilst the MRT are ‘clearing the hill’?

> Presumably a huge delay and a shagged team. Not great for either the second casualty or the MRT.

 

Exactly..it has happened in the past due to say first casualty being heli'd straight to hospital....but its happening more now due to the dispatch/controllers instructions even if the heli crew has the time spare "free"......this is why those MRT teams are complaining now.....more chance of a totally "shagged" knackered team....which is then not fit for purpose...but they would continue on as its in their blood...& they feel duty bound...

 

TBH if I was to be 100% cynical..I see a taxi meter on the air controllers desk with a total hour run & cost/hr meter...& he's looking at it & thinking "if the casualty is now safe that's it get the hel'i back to base as its costing too much"...

Post edited at 19:26
1
 mp3ferret 06 Nov 2018
In reply to Snowdave:

This was always going to be the outcome unfortunately.  A private company on a fixed contract are always going to maximise their profits - in this case by spending less time in the air.

 

Perhaps the contract should have been on a per rescue basis - I bet they'd come out at the drop of a hat then.

4
 Rip van Winkle 07 Nov 2018
In reply to mp3ferret:

Ah, the 'Himalayan trekking' model.

 Snowdave 07 Nov 2018
In reply to mp3ferret:

> This was always going to be the outcome unfortunately.  A private company on a fixed contract are always going to maximise their profits - in this case by spending less time in the air.

Again you & others are NOT understanding the situation 100%

 

It is NOT the private company of Bristows who own & run the heli's & the Bristows crews who are refusing to do the work.

 

It is the Gov agency's of the Air control dispatch lot etc who are telling/ordering the privately employed Bristows crews to NOT do certain things..

 

Sometimes the privately owned crews of Bristows are disobeying their orders from the Gov agency & helping the MTR's...

 

 

 mp3ferret 07 Nov 2018
In reply to Snowdave:

I'm pretty sure I do understand - As an active member of MRT.

The crews are largely the same people as we've always worked with.  ARCC are the same people as before - the only differences ( apart from the aircraft ) is the contract agreed between Bristow (the private company ) and our government.

4
 ScraggyGoat 07 Nov 2018
In reply to mp3ferret:

In March 2016 ownership of tasking search and rescue aircraft transferred from the RAF (at Kinloss) to HM Coastguard based at the National Maritime Operations Centre (NMOC) in Fareham, Hampshire.

I have no knowledge of how many staff transferred from Scotland to Hampshire, but it seams reasonable to infer there will have been some change of personnel. So the ARCC are most likely not always the same people.......whether we like it or not its the Coastguard that are co-coordinating heli land jobs ~ at the request of the Police. 

The SAR-H contract is written so that there is no benefit to Bristows to not fly.....

I have no knowledge of the behind the scenes workings, but always prefer to consider culture / cock-up ahead of conspiracy.

Post edited at 15:00
 wintertree 07 Nov 2018
In reply to ScraggyGoat:

> The SAR-H contract is written so that there is no benefit to Bristows to not fly.....

As an outsider to all this, I did wonder about something I haven’t seen discussed.

Somewhere in the organisation of the system, there will be consideration to the liability (financial and publicity) of deaths caused due to flight incidents and accidents.  Not carrying MRTs as much as possible would I imagining significantly reduce this liability. 

Has the organisation or people responsible for assesssing this liability changed with the privatisation?

 Snowdave 07 Nov 2018
In reply to mp3ferret:

> I'm pretty sure I do understand - As an active member of MRT.

You're the second person who has contradicted me on this thread & qualified your statements as "I'm MRT"...

 

You fail to read & fully understand what was written by the four teams that did complain...go back & read & understand it please...

 

They quite clearly state that its the ARCC etc/gov agencies who have been instructing the privately run Bristows helicopters to NOT do certain tasks....& they go on to give an example of when the privately run Bristows Heli crew told the ARCC to get stuffed & they disobeyed direct instructions & heli'd the MRT into the location, retrieved the body & heil'd them out...

 

I know serving & ex-members of three of those MRT's in the letter...& I also know people who actually service/work on the helis at Bristows in Aberdeen & Inverness....Bristows isn't an angel, but 99% of the blame they are getting is people "thinking" they know whats going on..

Either you are in a different MRT area & have no problems, or you aren't MRT...

 

Post edited at 15:45
2
 Snowdave 07 Nov 2018

Just to add to my above post:-

Quoting from here as listed near start of thread:-

https://www.grough.co.uk/magazine/2018/11/02/scottish-teams-say-rescue-heli...

QUOTE:- 

""The decision not to assist was not made by the crews or operators of SARH, but by ARCC, who are located at Fareham in the South of England.”"

 

The incident where the SAR heli crew disobeyed the ARCC instructions:-

"""The letter also detailed Glencoe MRT’s ‘long technical recovery’ of a body; the Tayside team’s retrieval of a walker’s body during which an all-terrain vehicle they were using overturned. While Lochaber MRT members were preparing to be airlifted to Knoydart to recover the body of walker Ian Stalker, the crew was ordered by ARCC not to undertake the mission but ignored the controller’s instructions and flew the rescuers out to the remote site and helped brought the deceased walker back.""

 

That's NOT Bristows heli crews sodding around......thats the Gov agency......certain people on this forum need to go read the FACTS….

 

2
 mp3ferret 07 Nov 2018
In reply to Snowdave:

different area.  Same problems - but less frequently.

As I acknowledged earlier - I know that the crews aren't to blame.  If you read my reply rather than just wanting to have a fight then you may have understood that.  

 

The problems started with the new contract - plain and simple.  If you really believe that that the problems aren't related to the new contract then there's not much point in continuing. 

 

And unless you are sitting at the table making these decisions then you are just guessing at the real reason too - just like I was when i blamed it on the greed of private companies.

 

 

 

 

Post edited at 16:20
3
 Snowdave 07 Nov 2018
In reply to mp3ferret:

> different area.  Same problems - but less frequently.

> As I acknowledged earlier - I know that the crews aren't to blame.  If you read my reply rather than just wanting to have a fight then you may have understood that.  

> The problems started with the new contract - plain and simple.  If you really believe that that the problems aren't related to the new contract then there's not much point in continuing. 

> And unless you are sitting at the table making these decisions then you are just guessing at the real reason too - just like I was when i blamed it on the greed of private companies.

I know that the there are more problems since it moved from RAF/MOD to Bristows/ARCC etc...but you are blaming (even just by implying) the private company (Bristows) is the problem...………..

 

Its NOT Bristows or the heli crews fault....its the Gov agencies...& it does not matter the "contract" as before it was still Gov as RAF/MOD...& the original "contract" for SAR was to just rescue downed RAF pilots...everything else was (99% of all the work they did therefore) was deemed "training exercises"...

 

The contract is NOT the problem....its the attitude of the jobsworths at ARCC who don't know what a fecking mountain in Scotland in winter is like...

 

They need to be put on a MRT "taster" course this winter....at Cairngorm/Lochaber....

 

 

1
 John2 07 Nov 2018
In reply to Snowdave:

The new helicopter service does not seem to work as well for cliff rescues as the RAF one did. Here's a photo of what happened when a climber with a broken ankle needed to be rescued from Bosherston Head in Pembroke https://www.westerntelegraph.co.uk/news/16601538.injured-climber-rescued-fr... .

We waited 20 minutes for the helicopter to arrive, once they arrived they spent 10 to 15 minutes assessing the situation and deciding whether to attempt the rescue or not. They decided that the situation was outside their risk parameters and gave up. The climber was recover by a roped coastguard team. We (the coastguard) have now been informed that there may well be situations in future in which a rescue will not be possible.

 Snowdave 07 Nov 2018
In reply to John2:

> The new helicopter service does not seem to work as well for cliff rescues as the RAF one did. Here's a photo of what happened when a climber with a broken ankle needed to be rescued from Bosherston Head in Pembroke https://www.westerntelegraph.co.uk/news/16601538.injured-climber-rescued-fr... .

> We waited 20 minutes for the helicopter to arrive, once they arrived they spent 10 to 15 minutes assessing the situation and deciding whether to attempt the rescue or not. They decided that the situation was outside their risk parameters and gave up. The climber was recover by a roped coastguard team. We (the coastguard) have now been informed that there may well be situations in future in which a rescue will not be possible.

 

What heli are they using?....up here we have the S92...the big bird...

 

Heli type & crew experience makes a lot of difference....the S92 up here only problem is downwash....if you read the original article Cairngorm who deal with the S92 all the time don't have a problem with the crew...its the ARCC....

 

Maybe you have a new crew..maybe they were not the old Sea King crew that transferred over...as some did...

 

Years of experience handling the same heli day in day out is worth huge amounts...

1

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...