Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rescue 116

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    I'm not convinced that it is either seemly or respectful to the memories of the crew of Rescue 116 that this thread should have degenerated into an AC slagging exercise but the comments here cannot go unanswered. I for one am not blind to the faults of the AC - both organisationally and culturally - but the key point about Top Cover is being missed by a country mile. CHC, as a commercial organisation, entered into a contract for service where Top Cover is their responsibility. The DOU with the AC does not mandate that the AC provide Top Cover, it merely commits them to assist on a 'best efforts' basis. To blame the AC, or more specifically in the case of Ropebag's comments, to blame specific AC personnel is very, very wide of the mark.

    I would, in the first instance, be asking the question of CHC ownership and management whether their TC arrangements are fit for purpose.

    However at this point we don't know what caused Rescue 116 to crash - we don't know if fixed wing TC would have helped. I would suggest that we leave the finger pointing until after the missing crew have been recovered, the report is concluded and the causes of the crash are known.

    In the meantime however I would suggest that CHC management need to review the TC arrangements they have put in place. It is a commercial contract won by public tender. I am sure the costing of TC featured in their pricing case.
    “The nation that will insist on drawing a broad line of demarcation between the fighting man and the thinking man is liable to find its fighting done by fools and its thinking done by cowards.”
    ― Thucydides

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by Shaqra View Post
      ...CHC, as a commercial organisation, entered into a contract for service where Top Cover is their responsibility.

      ..I would, in the first instance, be asking the question of CHC ownership and management whether their TC arrangements are fit for purpose.

      ...In the meantime however I would suggest that CHC management need to review the TC arrangements they have put in place. It is a commercial contract won by public tender. I am sure the costing of TC featured in their pricing case.
      if we assume you are correct, and i've no reason to believe otherwise - where are the Irish Government lawyers who should be breathing down CHC's neck for failing to honour their side off the deal?

      where is the minister standing up in the Dail and telling TD's that the Government has suspended payments to CHC for failing to provide the agreed service the Government is paying for?

      if CHC is supposed to be providing top cover, why have these things not happened?

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by ropebag View Post
        Yes, I'm not *entirely* sure that highlighting that the two CASA's were grounded for four weeks while components were removed, sent to Spain, fixed and then returned - instead of insisting that replacement parts were sent out from Spain is helping the the PR effort...

        The fact remains that either the AC knew it would be required to generate an aircraft and did nothing about it for 3 hours, and then when it tried it took them 3 hours to find a qualified crew, or it took them 6 hours to find a qualified crew.

        Which of those alternatives do you find more comforting?
        Aer Corp are not tasked to have a top cover air craft at the ready for the Coast Guard. If the Coast Guard make a request and its possible,
        then the aircraft will be diverted to give a dig out with a heart and a half. When needed for the downed aircraft they responded.

        Are air crews required to take 45 min at night from waking up and taking off for safety reasons. plus tecties arriving, plus prepping. plus distance to go ,may be the best part of three hours. ???
        Last edited by sofa; 17 March 2017, 21:11.

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by ropebag View Post
          if we assume you are correct, and i've no reason to believe otherwise - where are the Irish Government lawyers who should be breathing down CHC's neck for failing to honour their side off the deal?

          where is the minister standing up in the Dail and telling TD's that the Government has suspended payments to CHC for failing to provide the agreed service the Government is paying for?

          if CHC is supposed to be providing top cover, why have these things not happened?
          Because they were providing their own TC, with another S92.

          Dail is on holidays.

          Because the State would need up being sued before the outcome is determined by AAIU.

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by ropebag View Post
            if we assume you are correct, and i've no reason to believe otherwise - where are the Irish Government lawyers who should be breathing down CHC's neck for failing to honour their side off the deal?

            where is the minister standing up in the Dail and telling TD's that the Government has suspended payments to CHC for failing to provide the agreed service the Government is paying for?

            if CHC is supposed to be providing top cover, why have these things not happened?
            I would imagine the question of top cover is a question the families of the crew should ask CHC. not the Aer Corp.

            Comment


            • #81
              R116 departing Dublin, (At 01.40 min) (03.50 min)
              http://archive-server.liveatc.net/ei...2017-2300Z.mp3
              Last edited by sofa; 17 March 2017, 22:09.

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by ropebag View Post
                if we assume you are correct, and i've no reason to believe otherwise - where are the Irish Government lawyers who should be breathing down CHC's neck for failing to honour their side off the deal?

                where is the minister standing up in the Dail and telling TD's that the Government has suspended payments to CHC for failing to provide the agreed service the Government is paying for?

                if CHC is supposed to be providing top cover, why have these things not happened?
                Chc did honour its side of the deal and four of its employees have lost their lives whilst delivering a critical State service in difficult conditions. CHC provided its own T/C , the casevac was successful but tragedy overtook events.

                One aspect of the media reporting that is disturbing is the manner it which it portrayed the AC which declined to provide T/C in three cases this year (which it can validly decline and is under no responsibility to provide same) as having "refused" to provide T/C. The use of this term suggests an element of insubordination on the part of the AC and complete indifference to the CG crews and the victims who needed to be picked up.
                This is unfair to the AC and indeed the DF organisation and the DoD/DF are well entitled to refute this and have it withdrawn.

                Comment


                • #83
                  There is some degree of criticism of the Air Corps response in this thread.

                  The link below relates to a similar incident ...

                  http://www.military.ie/en/press-offi...8c12aad97a787c

                  In my opinion the Air Corps like any other organisation will operate within the parameters and budget as set by those who hold the purse strings

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Indeed the T/C saga has been well aired here already;

                    http://forum.irishmilitaryonline.com...1744-Top-cover

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      I see the Naval Service state in a Facebook post that LE Eithne is using her Hull Mounted Sonar in the search.
                      I though that piece of equipment haddnt been used in years?

                      https://www.facebook.com/irishnavals...80742298675330
                      Im Ron Burgendy??

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        I don't think you are correct there. Eithne is using sidescan, which is towed, and the hull mounted photo comes from L.E. Roisin.
                        German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
                        German 2: Private? I am a general!
                        German 1: That is the bad news.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          I'm only reading what the NS are posting themselves.

                          They state that Eithne is using her Hull Mounted Systems, they also mention that the picture displayed
                          Is the sidescan displayed on Rosin!

                          Have a look at the description of the third picture.
                          Last edited by tonyrdf; 18 March 2017, 10:47.
                          Im Ron Burgendy??

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by tonyrdf View Post
                            I'm only reading what the NS are posting themselves.
                            [ATTACH]8403[/ATTACH]
                            They state that Eithne is using her Hull Mounted Systems, they also mention that the picture displayed
                            Is the sidescan displayed on Rosin!

                            Have a look at the description of the third picture.
                            I see what you mean now. Last time I looked there was a large open space where the Hull mounted sonar display was kept. I also heard the retractable sonar housing was closed up some years ago. Apart from the usual depth finding sonar, unless they have upgraded the user interface.
                            German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
                            German 2: Private? I am a general!
                            German 1: That is the bad news.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              The contract will cover the provision and fit of a Multi Beam Echo Sounder/Sonar System. Where suitable, it will replace an existing system and use existing through hull apertures however it is appreciated that this may not be possible in every case.

                              The Multi Beam Echo Sounder /Sonar System will be capable of building a three dimensional profile or picture of the seabed around the ship and will be suitable for seabed and water column searches in Search and Rescue, Security and Navigation Safety functions.


                              Technical Requirements

                              a. NS has limited hull mounted underwater detection capability. This limits utility in sunken vessels searches. The equipment purchased therefore must be capable of improving the situational awareness of NS ships in relation to the undersea domain.
                              b. In particular the equipment must improve NS capacity to locate and profile obstructions and wrecks on the seabed. The system will be multi-beam. It will have a 3D sea-floor/ object modelling function and a contour mapping function. It should also improve the possibility of detecting vessels or objects submerged in the water column above the seabed.
                              c. The system should permit deductions to be made in relation to the nature of the seabed itself. The system will be have a beam spread to port and starboard of not less than 100º allowing the plotting of a swath of the seabed either side of the vessel. The beam spread will be adjustable in accordance to varying conditions, depths and search requirements.
                              d. The system will be capable of operating in waters of depth varying from 1m to not less than 500m.
                              e. The power outputs and frequencies in use should be fit for purpose but should not be of an order known to cause distress or harm to cetaceans. Frequencies in the order of 80 kHz and power outputs in the order of 100W to 1.5kW would be anticipated for the system but it is understood that these will vary based on the system tendered. The tender will include details of the operating frequencies and power and, if significantly different from those anticipated, will explain the technical reasons for those differences. Equipment provided must include all elements needed for full installation and operation of the system. The schedule will need to include all transducers, transceivers, glands, fixtures, computers, displays and connectors needed.
                              https://irl.eu-supply.com/app/rfq/pu.../PublicTenders

                              I imagine it should be technically possible to listen for the ultrasonic pings from the black box using the same or similar equipment - there's just a difference in frequency of about 40kHz
                              Last edited by pym; 18 March 2017, 12:46.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                MOD: let's leave the debate to the media (who are pre-guessing the outcome of an expert AAIU inquiry that will be lengthy, thorough and will leave no stone unturned to find out what happened).

                                Let's give the families, friends and colleagues a bit of respect.

                                Let's hope that the remaining 3 crew are recovered quickly.

                                This thread will remain open in the hope that there will be good news to post

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X