Thanks Thanks:  4
Likes Likes:  27
Dislikes Dislikes:  0
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 93
  1. #51
    Major General
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    Anyone know what statutory standard other airforces and real CGs fly under for SAR/MR/CD ops where civvies might be expected to be conveyed.

  2. #52
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    22,131
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Tadpole View Post
    The Air Corps have written off over 11 of their recent fleet of 54 aircraft and severely damaged another 7 aircraft. 20.4% written off and another almost 17% seriously damaged. Is that imperical enough for you?

    Lets look at per flight hr, based on approx 6000hrs per year in the last 30years the AC will have flown approx 180,000 hrs. In the same time they have written off 11 aircraft, that's 1 aircraft written off per 16,300hrs. Including the 7 seriously damaged that's 1 serious accident very 10,000hrs. Is that imperical enough for you.

    Assuming a base line of 100 pilots and a turnover of 6 pilots per year the total pilots numbers for the last 30 years is in the order of 280 pilots. That means that IAC pilots over the last 30 years have an approx. 1 in 40 chance of being killed in an accident. Is that imperical enough for you.
    Maybe you can provide your "public knowledge" sources?

    Because if you count 11 crashes/write offs in "recent times you are going back to 1969. Since then the AC have operated 107 different aircraft!



    Quote Originally Posted by Tadpole View Post
    I've never said that the Air Corps shouldn't be doing these ops but rather that if they wish to fly missions involving civilians they should be afforded the same safety as if on a commercial flight. Some people for some reason have taken exception to this demanding that the AC are no less safe and that I am nothing more then a slanderer, hence the stats for all to see.
    I just don't see why the AC couldnt operate civil ops to civil standards and why some take such great exception to the notion.
    Military (and SAR and air ambulance) flights are more risky due to the nature of the missions/environments they operate in.

  3. #53
    Private 2* DirkinDaHerc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    24
    Post Thanks / Like
    Hi all,

    LOL @ happyman. Maybe a poll that he changes his name to unhappyman for future posts.

    Now onto more intellectual input

    Hi Gttc, I remember that tag from a while back on Irish air Pics,if its the same person I hope your well

    Quote Originally Posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
    In case it has been missed, the Don is also the first port of call for the AAIU and have been used frequently to move persons, tools and wreckage about. GttC
    Its the path of least resistance, they can provide the space required for debris inspection and cataloguing of same. Also built in security of the grounds.

    Quote Originally Posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
    but like any Military, retains the right to step outside the civvie rules to suit itself. GttC
    I think that could be part of the issue, people making decisions to work outside what is deemed "safe" which in theory could be out of their expertise level in order to complete the task......

    Quote Originally Posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
    can someone elaborate how exactly it is not flying SAR Ops to the same standard as the civvies, for me, at least, because I don't know or understand enough to know the difference. GttC
    while I am sure there is a flight technical side to this point it would seem there are those with more expertise than me in this area so ill let others sort that out, but what I do know is that the current difference in patient care in relation to current operations is that the crewmen in the corps in the back are trained to EMT (Emergency Medical Tech), there are prob only 2 remaining state registered paramedics in the don on operations. The current civi operations have 20 + paramedics in the back for patient treatment. the medical structure from the top down is AP - Advanced paramedic. P - Paramedic. E.M.T - Emergency Medical Tech. EFR, CFR, OFA. obviously the higher you go the better treatment you receive. Which prob is why the HSE paramedic will have to be part of the crews for the up coming operation out of Athlone. The Corps should have sent their crews away for paramedic training like they used to... but saving money was the theme it would seem much to their failure in this instance.


    DITH
    Hopefully the mayan's got it right and were all on a one way ticket outta here!!

  4. #54
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    907
    Post Thanks / Like
    1*PC9 (Galway)
    1*SA365Fi (Waterford)
    1*SA316B (Donegal)
    1*SA342L (Baldonnel)
    4*C172 (Clonbullogue, Finner, Shannon River, Gormanston Beach)
    3*SF260WE (Maynooth, Cavan, Dublin)


    Military (and SAR and air ambulance) flights are more risky due to the nature of the missions/environments they operate in.
    Agreed. However, Civil SAR and Air Ambulance are fully regulated and have full oversight of the appropriate authorities, military flights do not. Is there any reason that the military, when operating in civil assistance roles with civilians on board cannot operate within the same regulation / oversight? The crews are well trained and capable as are the aircraft surely this isn't a huge leap.

  5. #55
    Commandant Jetjock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,751
    Post Thanks / Like
    The point is moot Tadpole and here's why:

    No pilot civil or military takes off without the intention of coming back safely to their families that evening.

    No engineer civil or military releases an aircraft to fly unless they are happy that it can complete the flight safely.

    There are inherent risks with the type of flying involved in putting a rescue team on a mountain at night. Equipment wise(NVG) and skillset wise, the Air Corps are best equipped to do the role. Better equipped than an civilian organisation operating in the country today. And that includeds the Coast Guard operation. The helicopters are by size much more suitable for the task. The military pilots are by definition, much more experienced in it.

  6. Likes Rhodes, Pure Hover liked this post
  7. #56
    Private 2* DirkinDaHerc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    24
    Post Thanks / Like
    Hi All,


    Quote Originally Posted by Jetjock View Post
    No pilot civil or military takes off without the intention of coming back safely to their families that evening.
    No but it still happens, not just here but on a world wide basis for a variety of reasons..... human error is not just a made up word.


    Quote Originally Posted by Jetjock View Post
    No engineer civil or military releases an aircraft to fly unless they are happy that it can complete the flight safely.
    id change that to "knowingly" releases and aircraft... as this has happened to. you would not have such great shows like aircraft investigation otherwise.


    Quote Originally Posted by Jetjock View Post
    There are inherent risks with the type of flying involved in putting a rescue team on a mountain at night.
    really..... WOW nobody here realised that.


    Quote Originally Posted by Jetjock View Post
    Equipment wise(NVG) and skillset wise, the Air Corps are best equipped to do the role. Better equipped than an civilian organisation operating in the country today. And that includeds the Coast Guard operation. The helicopters are by size much more suitable for the task. The military pilots are by definition, much more experienced in it.
    LOL, NVG are a great piece of kit, but are (like many things) only as good as the person using them. And your making leaps there that your flight hours cant hold up to. This conversation came up a while back on a group I was talking with Re: NVGs, even now the CG have quite a number of SAR Captains that as individuals have more NVG time than the whole AC combined... (most are ex UK forces with NVG instructor ratings that they keep current through reserve flights) And by your own definition military pilots are more experienced in their use... (even though they are ex military)

    Dith
    Hopefully the mayan's got it right and were all on a one way ticket outta here!!

  8. #57
    I Work for a living!!!
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Way out West
    Posts
    8
    Post Thanks / Like
    Lads
    I think its good that the aircorps can have a dedicated training day were they can use a military base to carry out such training exercises with multiple MRT's. The MRT's of the north west obviously would have gained something from this and if it is only the basic's of heli operations well that can only be a good thing.

    It has been suggested by some that the air corps will be or are the first port of call for mountain rescue work, this is simply not true. First call and responsibility is firmly in the CG's hands for Search & Rescue op's, unless your talking about a MISPER that will be co-ordinated by the civil power and in more times than not they will look to the CG for assistance. The other thing people miss here is the CG part fund IMRA, obviously they are not the sole participants of money to the MRT's as allot of fund raising has to be done to fund such an organisation. But at the end of the day MRT's will by there nature turn out to incidents and training with no questions asked, this is due to the selfless individuals involved in all voluntary organisation's around the country, from MRT's, RNLI, CG units and many CRBI's. Without these people's dedication to there chosen organisation the whole SAR world in Ireland would be a mess and we would be dealing with more and more fatalitys in our mountains, rivers and seas.

    Strip back all the voluntary organisations and see what 24/7/365 units you are left with, 3 CG co-ordination centres a hand full of full time RNLI skippers & Engineers, some CG staff and four long range helicopter bases, garda SAU, maybee the Garda Heli if needed for search type work. and the air corps.

    Only problem with the list above is what does the air corps have available 24/7/365, Garda chopper does not count in my book only flown by AC and owned/crewed by the Garda & maintained by private contrator. Answer from what I can see is limited availability on CASA's not 24/7, Lear-jet not 24/7 only on an adhok basis, 139's again if servicable not 24/7, 135's probably 24/7 at a push, so a unit with 8 heli's can only provide 1 on 24/7 basis, this as a tax payer is not acceptable. Now take one 135 and put it in Athlone barracks on 10 hour call with the HSE and there is a massive drain in the AC resources, one airframe 365 out of the system, with pilots and engineers. How much flex is there in this plan? When the aircraft is not on its HEMS role can it be used for air ambulance work or is it grounded at night?

    Before the whole air corps bashing things is thrown at me please look at this from someone outside of the aircorps looking in, above is what everyone with any knowledge of the air-corps see. And as for the whole CG/CHC bitching forum issue, I was personnally at a briefing last week, and I was told by the participants that a servicing air corps officer was in 30 minutes before I arrived and was taking a chunk out of the CG & CHC, and you expect the CG/CHC people to sit back and take it, come on lads...
    Last edited by Semper Paratus; 8th February 2012 at 14:46.

  9. #58
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    907
    Post Thanks / Like
    The point is moot Tadpole and here's why:

    No pilot civil or military takes off without the intention of coming back safely to their families that evening.

    No engineer civil or military releases an aircraft to fly unless they are happy that it can complete the flight safely.

    There are inherent risks with the type of flying involved in putting a rescue team on a mountain at night. Equipment wise(NVG) and skillset wise, the Air Corps are best equipped to do the role. Better equipped than an civilian organisation operating in the country today. And that includeds the Coast Guard operation.
    I dont necessarily disagree with you. Ive never stated that the Air Corps personnel or equipment cannot do the job. Nor have I stated that these are not risky operations. The issue is mitigating the risk were at all possible. Regardless of how well trained the crews are if the oversight is lacking then accidents will happen. In my opinion self oversight in any facet of life just doesnt work.
    Now if the military wish to self regulate and oversee for military operations fair enough but why can they not have external oversight on their civil assistance tasks to minimise any risks as much as possible. Is that not reasonable?

    The only other issue I see is that your post mainly refers to NVG and night operations. Yes the Air Corps are better equipped for night mountain ops with MRTs but TBH a lot of the searches and or recoveries are complete within the 1hr 30 min callout for the AC at night and yes some of these include use of the CG.

    The helicopters are by size much more suitable for the task.
    Not sure how you get this, surely it depends on the task. MRT operations arent just lifting and dumping MRT members.

    The military pilots are by definition, much more experienced in it.
    Experienced in what. NVG ops yes as they are the only ones doing it, in MRT operations, I really dont think so. How many live MRT ops did the IAC do last year?

  10. #59
    Major General
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    Semper p,please note the fire brigades and ambulances and 999 call centres are a fulltime 24/7 integral part of the emergency services,the AC is not an emergency service,it has capability for that purpose but is neither geared nor expected to have its entire strenght on 24/7 availability.....for what purpose.Maybe if everybody in the AC in the heli sgns was on 92k pa as in CHC then you would be entitled to expect a similiar service,such expenditure would not be justified.

  11. #60
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    907
    Post Thanks / Like
    it has capability for that purpose but is neither geared nor expected to have its entire strenght on 24/7 availability.
    The CG operation doesn't have its entire strength on 24/7 either, its just properly resourced to allow 24/7 operations on 4 bases, thats about 1/4 total strength at any one time. The questions begs, if the Air Corps aren't expected to produce similar 24/7 capabilities, what are they expected to produce?

    .Maybe if everybody in the AC in the heli sgns was on 92k pa as in CHC then you would be entitled to expect a similiar service,such expenditure would not be justified.
    Maybe if the AC was cut back to necessary requirements for its operation (hint, it doesn't need nearly 800 staff to maintain and operate 25 aircraft) then all the staff could be paid double CHCs 92K! Plus, its not that long since the AC was paying 20K a year to Mahogany Bomber pilots who flew twice a year to retain their incentive scheme payments and flying pay.

  12. #61
    I Work for a living!!!
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Way out West
    Posts
    8
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by danno View Post
    Semper p,please note the fire brigades and ambulances and 999 call centres are a fulltime 24/7 integral part of the emergency services,the AC is not an emergency service,it has capability for that purpose but is neither geared nor expected to have its entire strenght on 24/7 availability.....for what purpose.Maybe if everybody in the AC in the heli sgns was on 92k pa as in CHC then you would be entitled to expect a similiar service,such expenditure would not be justified.
    Danno, I am well aware that the Fire Brigades & Ambulance service are 24/7/365 and are the main call (along with the Garda which are an emergency service also) but when's the last time you seen a fire tender or ambulance on top of a mountain or off shore!! With the exeption or MERT or MER team's, who have to get there somehow. I am talki

    Are the air corp's not all members of the defence forces 24/7/365 is that not what they sign up to? Or is it Mon-Fri. 9.00 to 16.30 with two coffee breaks and and hour and a half for lunch..

    As for you figures on what CHC are paid I think you should get a new contact in the real world to tell you what CHC are paying, maybe one of the pilots that jumped to the enemy in the last few months.

  13. #62
    Commandant Jetjock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,751
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Tadpole View Post
    it doesn't need nearly 800 staff to maintain and operate 25 aircraft
    The personnel level is consistent with not alone operating 25 aircraft but also an entire airfield with all the associated roles including ATC, Fire Service, Security, Maintenance, Air Crew, Administration, Cadet and Apprentice training. So to compare that to CHC who operate from airports without the need to contribute to airport personnel is not comparing like with like.

  14. #63
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    907
    Post Thanks / Like
    The personnel level is consistent with not alone operating 25 aircraft but also an entire airfield with all the associated roles including ATC, Fire Service, Security, Maintenance, Air Crew, Administration, Cadet and Apprentice training. So to compare that to CHC who operate from airports without the need to contribute to airport personnel is not comparing like with like.
    Jetjock, you just made my point. 90% of this cost could be got rid of by moving the AC to a civil facility or by selling / leasing Baldonnel to a third party operator and let them absorb the costs. The AC don't need a dedicated airfield, ATC, fire services etc with all the operational cost and maintenance they entail. Once you look down that path then next is farming out basic training and all aircraft maintenance. Lots of savings to be made in Baldonnel without any degradation of service if not an actual improvement.

  15. #64
    Commander in Chief Bravo20's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    The Big Smoke
    Posts
    5,277
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Tadpole View Post
    1*PC9 (Galway) - Fixed Wing - does not carry civilians
    1*SA365Fi (Waterford) - That horrific accident in 1999
    1*SA316B (Donegal) - Written off after a heavy landing in shallow water in 1995 (23 years of service)
    1*SA342L (Baldonnel) - A Gazelle, written off, a crash landing following an engine failure in 2002 no injuries, after 23 years of service
    4*C172 (Clonbullogue, Finner, Shannon River, Gormanston Beach) - These are Cessnas, I can only find 2 crashes on 1978 and the other in 2004
    3*SF260WE (Maynooth, Cavan, Dublin) - These are Marchetti's - Crashes in 1978, 1990 & 1992

    .
    I just wanted to point out from the above list which ones related to aircraft that would be involved in mountain rescue and likely to carry civlians and also wanted to explain to the uninitiated what Tadpole means as being recent i.e. in the last 30 years.
    Last edited by Bravo20; 8th February 2012 at 17:12.

  16. Likes DeV liked this post
  17. #65
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    907
    Post Thanks / Like
    I just wanted to point out from the above list which ones related to aircraft that would be involved in mountain rescue and likely to carry civlians and also wanted to explain to the uninitiated what Tadpole means as being recent i.e. in the last 30 years
    Bravo,
    Please stop trying to deflect from the fact that your were wrong. Lets just remind the readers:
    You have on this thread and on other threads consistently slandered the Air Corps safety reputation without any imperical evidence (except inuendo and opinions)
    YOU asked for imperical data and you got it, it just doesnt suit you so you try to slag me off, again. Yes these are over 30 years, as already stated in the imperical data that YOU requested:
    Lets look at per flight hr, based on approx 6000hrs per year in the last 30years the AC will have flown approx 180,000 hrs. In the same time they have written off 11 aircraft, that's 1 aircraft written off per 16,300hrs. Including the 7 seriously damaged that's 1 serious accident very 10,000hrs. Is that imperical enough for you
    WRT MRT operations this post, as you quite rightly know was to give an overall perspective, imperically, of IAC accidents and incidents which you stated I based on nothing more then
    inuendo and opinions
    .
    Now with this imperical data do you think it reflects the accident levels you would expect within a commercial operation?
    and with that in mind for the third time:
    Do YOU believe that members of the public, after all thats what MRT members are, should be afforded the same levels of safety while carrying out their jobs regardless of which aircraft they happen to be in? Its a simple yes or no question

  18. #66
    Commander in Chief Bravo20's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    The Big Smoke
    Posts
    5,277
    Post Thanks / Like
    You provided misleading data, omitting vital details such as the timeline and the aircraft involved thereby misleading the casual reader. For example if you looked at the Air Accident reports for the past 10 years you would see that the ICG helis have been involved in 3 incidents, now if you decided not to reveal the details of the incidents you could infer that the ICG helis were unsafe, but that would be wrong and misleading. A serious statement that the Air Corp is unfit to carry civilians has been made and you have attempted to back that up with misleading information. I am simply adding the relevent data that you omitted so that the casual reader can make up their own minds as to whether the accusation is true.

  19. #67
    I Work for a living!!!
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Way out West
    Posts
    8
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Bravo20 View Post
    You provided misleading data, omitting vital details such as the timeline and the aircraft involved thereby misleading the casual reader. For example if you looked at the Air Accident reports for the past 10 years you would see that the ICG helis have been involved in 3 incidents, now if you decided not to reveal the details of the incidents you could infer that the ICG helis were unsafe, but that would be wrong and misleading. A serious statement that the Air Corp is unfit to carry civilians has been made and you have attempted to back that up with misleading information. I am simply adding the relevent data that you omitted so that the casual reader can make up their own minds as to whether the accusation is true.
    Three incidents in ten years is a good thing considering the Sar environment is not an airport to airport job.

    So how many incidents have the air corps had in ten years. With 500plus rescues per year and massive training hours. Oh wait for the old opsec crap to come out. It is impossible to come up with a accurate figure of air corps incidents as it's self regulating..

  20. #68
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    907
    Post Thanks / Like
    You provided misleading data, omitting vital details such as the timeline and the aircraft involved thereby misleading the casual reader. For example if you looked at the Air Accident reports for the past 10 years you would see that the ICG helis have been involved in 3 incidents, now if you decided not to reveal the details of the incidents you could infer that the ICG helis were unsafe, but that would be wrong and misleading. A serious statement that the Air Corp is unfit to carry civilians has been made and you have attempted to back that up with misleading information. I am simply adding the relevent data that you omitted so that the casual reader can make up their own minds as to whether the accusation is true.
    What misleading info, please clarify. The timeline has now been CLEARLY stated TWICE, would you like me to quote them for you AGAIN. In addition these are not accidents, there are aircraft WRITE OFFs, if you want please feel free to add in the additional 7 accidents that badly damaged aircraft and the unknown number that only caused minor damage.
    Nor have I stated that the Air Corps is unfit to carry civilians, those are your words. I am merely proposing that WHEN carrying civilians the Air Corps should work to civil regulations with civilian oversight affording civilians the same safety barriers as with commercial operators. Nothing more. This folly into stats was brought on by you calling me a slanderer and me having to add 2+2 for you to show that the Air Corps simply does not have a safety record the same as commercial carriers.

    Considering you still haven't answered the question I can only presume there is only one answer and you wont say it because of the ramifications of that answer. Ill let everybody decide for themselves which the correct answer is.

  21. #69
    Major General
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Semper Paratus View Post
    Three incidents in ten years is a good thing considering the Sar environment is not an airport to airport job.

    So how many incidents have the air corps had in ten years. With 500plus rescues per year and massive training hours. Oh wait for the old opsec crap to come out. It is impossible to come up with a accurate figure of air corps incidents as it's self regulating..
    Semper P,
    The 3 incidents the CG had were all in training,one involved the landing of a S61 flown by two pilots who had about 20000 hours between them with no undercart down badly damoaging the craft,another involved a winchman shagging his line onthe Coningbeg Lightship which snapped and damaged a rotor and the third involved a stunt in Dublin whereby the CG hospitalised an entire NS diving team.These were all in training in benign stressless conditions and 2 were completely avoidable.
    WRT 550+ rescues,the latest CG stats referred to it saving c.125 lives,not every op is a rescue.

  22. #70
    Major General
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Semper Paratus;362839]Danno, I am well aware that the Fire Brigades & Ambulance service are 24/7/365 and are the main call (along with the Garda which are an emergency service also) but when's the last time you seen a fire tender or ambulance on top of a mountain or off shore!! With the exeption or MERT or MER team's, who have to get there somehow. I am talki

    Are the air corp's not all members of the defence forces 24/7/365 is that not what they sign up to? Or is it Mon-Fri. 9.00 to 16.30 with two coffee breaks and and hour and a half for lunch..

    Semper P
    Irish hills and mountains misted/clouded over in most cases when punters get lost and a heli cannot penetrate in those conditions and it is the MRTs who will still be the main stay for SAR.I agree the helis are invaluable for lifting off casuaties when conditions permit.The MRTs will always exist and do valualbe work regardless of the existance of CGor helis.
    The emergency ended in 1945,no need to have the ramparts manned 24/7 everywhere by everybody in DF.
    The figure I quoted originated from data within CHC (I)ltd.
    As I stated in other post the CHC people are top of their game and getting market rate.

  23. #71
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    373
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Tadpole View Post
    Nor have I stated that the Air Corps is unfit to carry civilians, those are your words. I am merely proposing that WHEN carrying civilians the Air Corps should work to civil regulations with civilian oversight affording civilians the same safety barriers as with commercial operators.
    Sorry to intrude guys but why should the Air Corps work to civilian regulations when carrying civilians as if to imply that they're at inherently greater risk under military regs. and implying that civil regs are the be all and end all. The civil helicopter world in Ireland and its practices during the Tiger years wasn't exactly the model of regulation. You don't see people clambering for the RAF & RN to be regulated by the CAA, and they have their fair share of accidents. The Governement probably could if it wanted to get the IAA to oversee certain operations but it has chosen not to do so although joint co-operation with the AAIU is generally seen as a good thing.

    Civilians don't have to travel with the Air Corps if they don't want too but yet a whole stream of civ agencies and personnel regularly do. As plenty previous posters have said the AC operate as close to JAR & EASA regs as possible under military rules. Maybe someone should ask the MRT's and the RNLI why they consistently seek AC support and training. Maybe they're not getting the service they want. An imminent Governement decision for the AC to operate a HEMS service in Athlone sounds like a ringing endorsement to me.

  24. Likes DeV liked this post
  25. #72
    C/S
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    334
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Jetjock View Post
    The personnel level is consistent with not alone operating 25 aircraft but also an entire airfield with all the associated roles including ATC, Fire Service, Security, Maintenance, Air Crew, Administration, Cadet and Apprentice training. So to compare that to CHC who operate from airports without the need to contribute to airport personnel is not comparing like with like.
    Really, do you believe that?

    Do you not think that there might be a little bit of excess in the Admin side.. One BG, two full col, 16 Lt. Col's... almost one senior officer per aircraft..

    How many current flying officers and how many hours a year do they actually do... I reckon the average is quite a bit less then 200hrs, there are some exceptions but most guys spend very little time in an aircraft.

    Seams like a lot of scrambled egg for a fairly small operation
    Last edited by Charlie252; 8th February 2012 at 23:10.

  26. #73
    Space Lord of Terra morpheus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Metropolis
    Posts
    3,146
    Post Thanks / Like
    In the US and UK... do the military operate officially under civil rules and regulations when carrying civies?
    "He is an enemy officer taken in battle and entitled to fair treatment."
    "No, sir. He's a sergeant, and they don't deserve no respect at all, sir. I should know. They're cunning and artful, if they're any good. I wouldn't mind if he was an officer, sir. But sergeants are clever."

  27. #74
    Corporal
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    69
    Post Thanks / Like
    MRT's have to train with all the air assets that they may meet as a most fundamendal premis of risk management. IAC helis work reek sunday and could well have been an AC responding to a mountain emergency in the NW durings its gorse fire response last year. Other issue of course is too many helis in the one area and the need to coordinate that overall aerial response.

  28. #75
    Corporal Mr. Tezza's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Kerry
    Posts
    233
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by chrisr View Post
    MRT's have to train with all the air assets that they may meet as a most fundamendal premis of risk management. IAC helis work reek sunday and could well have been an AC responding to a mountain emergency in the NW durings its gorse fire response last year. Other issue of course is too many helis in the one area and the need to coordinate that overall aerial response.
    I know a few members of the Kerry MRT (one of your ptes is actually a member of KMRT) and I have to say that the SAR heli based in shannon (rescue 113?) provides an invaluable capability to locate and retrieve casualties and without a doubt has saved many lives, being one of Irelands busiest MRT they have been selected for immediate training on the new SAR heli the S-92 to come up with new drills for the heli.

    The fact that the IAC are now lending themselves to MRTs for training can only be a good thing to fimiliarise the MRT members with the heli's and the drills/capabilites of the IAC and vice versa can only be a good thing for allm involved!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •