SAR rated pilots....Why not ??

[Guest Maj Millard]

Ok, the Majors been thinking, (This'll be good !) I have never really understood why Uls aren't called upon for SAR operations when required. Of course we do participate in searches when we can, but we usually volunteer our services (as you would of course), and are not 'officially requested' by those running the search. I feel that many ULs have SAR capabilities matched only by helicopters, at a fraction of the cost, and is a resource not being adequetly utilized.

 

Additionally I would like to suggest a new endorsement, which could actually be usefull and could save lives. How about "Endorsed Search and rescue pilot". These would be a number of selected pilots in each area who would be tested for, and have demonstrated, the following capabilities:

 

High experience pilot..1000hrs min...min 5 years in Sport...safe flying record...with radio, Cross country , passenger, and possibly L2 endorsements. Our RAA records know who these people would be.

 

Pilot must be easily contactable, and available at all times during daylight hours.

 

Not necessary instructors only.

 

Must possess high level of cross country and/or remote area flying experience.

 

Must have access to, and keep at the ready, a search capable aircraft. A search capable aircraft would possess at least the following capabilities:

 

Reliable aircraft certified type engine.

 

Fuel capacity for at least a 3 hour search time.

 

The ability to land short and depart from an unprepaired area for fuel replenishment or loading / unloading of assisting search personal.

 

Operating UHF and VHF radios, and Transponder ?

 

Ability to 'loiter' and direct other search assests.

 

Aircraft must have adequet visability from cabin for high or low level searches.

 

The ability to be refueled and launched at short notice.

 

Additionally the pilot must be prepared to recieve additional training from SAR authorities in conducting aerial searches., local rescue groups, and police, and be prepared to work in concert with search coordinators.

 

With the SAR pilot endorsement, and training with local rescue authorities, the pilot would be available as an additional usefull resource in searches, one that is not being utilized at the moment.

 

I would also suggest that some ultralights possess capabilities only matched by helicopters in search capability, at a fraction of the cost.

 

A list of possible suitable aircraft types is listed below, but is only a sample as other types may also be suitable;

 

Hornet,

 

A22 Foxbat,

 

SS4 Storch,

 

Lightwing GA, GR.

 

Tecnam,

 

912 Trikes,

 

Gazzell/Skyfox 912

 

Savannah 912.

 

Any other suitable aircraft that meet the above critera.

 

I believe that endorsements like the one above, are what our RAA leaders could be persuing for us, not some of the 'fluff' that we have had to endure lately........................

 

 

[dazza 38]

Very good ideas Maj, also how about surf patrols/shark spotting. Got to be alot cheaper than the squirrel chopper fly up and down the gold coast beaches everyweekend and holidays

 

 

[Tomo]

Low level..................Don't we all do that on take off and landing ??

High performance, Low performance, Constant speed prop,...... all have a familiar CASA ring to them somehow.

Don't won't to go against the flow Maj, but I reckon the low level, HP, and LP endorsements are worth it...

 

You get someone who's only flown low drag high performance aircraft, and put 'em in a high drag low performance acft, and you'll end up with some sort of stress filled moments I reckon! And or vice versa into HP.

 

The endorsement really just means you're capable of doing it, and an instructor thinks your confident on doing it. Don't you agree?

 

The low level one is pretty important to I think. If you get a first time low level flyer in and around some hills and places where there is plenty of mechanical turbulence etc... or they don't realize you don't look at the ground during turns etc... they should already know that, but if you don't get someone to show you, and talk you through all the things of low flying then there will be trouble! I would feel a lot better flying with someone if I knew that they've been deemed competent by an skilled and qualified instructor.... Wouldn't you agree?

 

About the S & R thing, I reckon it's a great idea!:thumb_up:

 

 

[Ewen McPhee]

I think we need Human Factors Training

 

I think some of the more obvious issues around "Human factors" should be spelled out to new pilots. We were never born to fly, our bodies aren't designed for it, and >70% of accidents are attributed to human failure. Regardless of what old salties feel there is a lot that isn't obvious and the number of people choosing Recreational aviation is growing. Not everyone will have the chance to learn by experience and perhaps then it may be their only experience.

 

 

[Relfy]

Maj, your idea has a lot of merit and there are a lot of things to be worked out to enable RAA aircraft in on SAR efforts, but it is something that could be done and would be an incredibly effective additional resource. I have thought about the exact topic everytime a SAR issue comes up and I think, "wouldn't it be great just to have some reccies to take part in this."

 

I've coordinated SAR operations and performed aircrew duties as part of those efforts. Brett will tell you that the Dorniers take on an overall EWAC type role and a transponder is a must with involved aircraft operating normally around terrible terrain in close proximity to each other, usually concentrating efforts and attention to the ground. They have the ability to coordinate and maintain an additional eye on separation, in addition to the traffic avoidance equipment on rescue choppers.

 

The main advantage of RAA aircraft over the big helos, is fuel availability and actual time on search. We were flat out with a big crew of SES volunteers keeping the fuel up to the rescue copters burning 280 and 330 litres an hour (Bell 412 & Dauphin). We drained about every FRDS fuel storage point within 300 k's! I was with my mate in an R22 and we were cruising around nicely on a fraction of the fuel and did about 15-16 hours over the two days until we found the bushwalkers on a cliff. The big helos did half of that.

 

I will disagree with you though Maj on the human factors training though. SAR is focussed very specifically on this area and if you didn't like that training, then you would hate the more involved HF areas relating to the exact same topics I covered when I did my HF course. HF is extremely important. If you don't support HF training then you wouldn't be allowed within cooee of a search op.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Yes, Human factors is crucial to safety, however I suspect most of the criticisms aired in the past relate to some of the inane test questions, and that's the area which should be addressed by RAA.

 

 

[Thx1137]

Human Factors..........C'mon really ? Many instructors even think this is crap. Replace this with something that has a direct effect like say 'Emergency/power loss proceedures training'

During my training I experienced human factors issues a few times. For some really strange reason I didn't think "gosh, I am overloaded right now, I better doo X", I was too overloaded to think about being overloaded! that to me is the greatest flaw. I know it can happen, what causes it, etc. But when it happens somehow I don't have the spare capacity to fall back on HF training!

 

The idea that we actually practice the more common problems makes FAR moer sense to me. Experience is a far better teacher than theory.

 

As for the actual topic. Dunno but it would be interesting to get some feedback from a SAR organisation on the idea!

 

 

[Guest Qwerty]

SAR rating....why. We can fly and we can look....whats a rating for???

 

I would suggest that any pilot and crew would be useful in a search op. Screw the rating (anywat it would be an endorsement wouldn't it, there is no need for it to be a rating is there), lets just do it.

 

I am.

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

ok, for starters those groups who now do the searching wont like it one little bit. a bunch of amatures trying to mussell in on their territory grab some of their govt handouts. they would scream blue murder.

 

pilots fly, crew does the looking.

 

We used to go Dugong counting for the marine parks. dopey pilot almost spun us in because he thought he could look and fly at the same time. WRONG.

 

search and rescue should be conducted by a dedicated organisation not civilians.

 

 

[facthunter]

SAR ops.

 

Done a bit of this, (way back) and it was always coastal, for me. Low level, absolutely essential, and terrain, wind,etc considerations must be covered. Human factors YES because you have to be flexible but not dangerous to yourself and others. The pilot should FLY the aircraft and someone else operate the radio. You operate best with trained observers, and you pretty much leave that aspect to them. You could envisage a situation where a suitable plane, ie a Drifter, could operate off a beach and provide a service for shark spotting/ swimmer rescue, (direction), at a surf carnival, but maybe this is covered by outboard powered inflatables, already. I am sure that the modern way of doing things involves a fair bit of technology, and cost. Nev

 

 

[Yenn]

The way it is going we won't be needing much search soon. A Victorian politician spent 2 nights on Feathertop, while he was searched for and happily found. Anyone want to take bets on how long it will be before we all have to carry a PLB when we go bush?

 

Maj's idea is a good one and I reckon it would take quite a bit of training, plus there are not all that many suitable planes around.

 

 

[Guest Qwerty]

I am betting that the nanny state will mandate the use of GPS tracking devives if we are more than shouting distance from home.

 

As for the problems stated for SAR ops. I would comment on the matters above (ie need a spotter, pilot to fly etc) that anyone who was not aware of these and able to undertake the task should not be allowed out of the house without supervision.

 

What next, a special licence and training to open a door???? I am sick to death of the nanny state and idiot politicians knee jerk reactions to every single media report.

 

Agggghhhhhh:kboom:

 

 

[turboplanner]

I don't think there is an argument when laws and penalties relate directly to injury/death statistics.

 

It's when politics and poor research gets in the way that the trouble starts.

 

 

[facthunter]

Concentration.

 

Your second paragraph qwerty, do you speak from experience? Some of the conditions that you operate in are very marginal and often at low level when doing this type of work, and I am a little surprised at your comments. The flying warrants ALL your attention in these circumstances. Nev

 

 

[Guest Qwerty]

Any pilot should be able to perform some sort of SAR operation. Lets say a low experienced pilot volunteers to fly a length of coast at 1000 ft in perfect weather. I would expect that any pilot should be able to cope with that task. Maybe there is an operation in marginal weather over tiger country, if any pilot is not capable of assessing their own abilities and comfort levels and deciding if they can undertake the task I would suggest that their flying privledges perhaps should be reviewed.

 

This sentiment goes for any pilot that nearly stalls and spins or what ever was mentioned earlier. Same thing for the other comments. All pilots should be capable of assessing their own abilities and then deciding what tasks they are capable of undertaking. This is no different to what all pilots shold be doing every time they approach an aircraft.

 

For example, If I was asked to fly in conditions that were (or deterorated to) where I felt it was were unsafe for me, my pax and my a/c I would simply about face and land.

 

What is the problem here, not enough nanny state regulation???? not enough prescription??? not enough being told what you can and can't do?????

 

I would hope that pilot's training and pilots them selves are sufficiently mentally equiped to deal with this situation without the need for yet more unneccessary regulation and control.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Tomo, no problem mate, I just put this out there for dicussion anyway and you, and everybody else is certainly entitled to an opinion, and I am more than interested in listening to them. At least I have awakened everybody up and got us talking !!...and of course what I have put out there are just my slants on things anyway.......................................................

 

THANK YOU ALL for your input on this subject, it's been very educational to me, and I do think it's a kick when everybody comes out and says exactly what they think, which is exactly the way it should work !! Cheers The Maj..................................................................................

 

 

[Guest Qwerty]

Major,

 

Congratulations on your 1000th post, I hope you 1000th post wasn't because you were feeling dumped on by me. Sorry. I just get a bit piXXed at more and more regulation and control and red tape and inspections and on and on it goes.

 

If we as pilots want to be respected for our training and skill, we need to stand up for ourselves sometimes and say " We can do this, we are trained to fly well and to make the right operational decisions in ANY situation" and we can...that is who we are. We dont need any more regulation, we are competant pilots.

 

:thumb_up:

 

Qwerty.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Thanks Querty for the congrats, I'd forgotten all about it. No I didn't feel dumped on by anyone frankly, I enjoy lively conversation as much as the next person. Like I said previous, it's a kick when everybody says thier bit, and hopefully what needs to be the outcome, is the outcome. I really must read more Darwinian Theory.

 

And I agree with you that we should be recognized for the skills we have accumulated over the years, especially those of us who have endured many years of "oh you fly ultralights, you'll kill your self in one of those!'. Well yes some unfortunatly did kill themselfs along the way, but the rest of us have managed to become skillfull pilots, and can be justified for getting just a bit XXXXed off when those who should know better try to blow wind up our arsxs !! There Querty, the 1001th was just for you mate..............................................................................................

 

 

[sain]

Personally I think the human factors thing is a bit retarded. If your instructor didn't think you were capable of making appropriate decisions do you really think they would let you even attempt the flying test?

 

As for the high performance/low performance thing... I think its better to get checked out on an aircraft type before jumping in and flying it. I realise this is difficult with single seaters, unless you don't weigh much and your instructor is a) friendly and b) light.

 

Anyway, moving on. The following article from Pacific Flyer may be of interest, its about a costal search and rescue:

 

Coastal Patrol Plane Rescue - It All Took 57 Minutes : Pacific Flyer Magazine

 

 

[turboplanner]

The basic proposal is a good one, because the assets are widely spread around Australia, but it would only be an aerial Dad's Army without substantial training in procedures, communications......and Human Factors, so there's no point in the self denial process.

 

Relfy, maybe you could explain about the Human Factors material you deal with, and it may make more sense than what we've seen to date.

 

 

[tangocharlie123]

Great subject.

 

Personnaly after flying half way around australia and a few water crossing I always kept an eye out the window isnt that why we fly for the enjoyment and fun and OK there is a serious side if need be. We have an emergency frequency on our radio does nobody monitor this channel and as airmen if you are close by would you not go to help even if it is to over fly and give position reports.

 

I also drive long distance at night and right beside me is my epirb just in case and if your outside phone range at least you will get someones attention. You just need to register it for both or all three if you have a boat .

 

Keep up the good work

 

 

[Guest Qwerty]

OK Guys, I called AusSAR and they sent me a form to fill in so they have my details for when they want me. They said that there are certain minimum requirements, radio, GPS (yes, non cert. are OK), and a few other things. They also said that they would provide one of their spotters (trained etc I suppose). All done, no problem.

 

Check them out here

 

Search and Rescue Arrangements in Australia

 

Cheers, Qwerty

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Thanks SAIN, great article, which demonstrates how usefull an eye in the sky can be....,.........................................................................

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Querty, I checked out that site and the form. It said at the top that you had to hold an AOC and have aircraft capable of carrying 3 persons plus the pilot. That's going to be a tight squeeze in the Jab ?....Did they send you another form ??..................

 

 

[David F]

Sar

 

Maybe OK for a bit of shark spotting or ops in VFR over safe country (no tiger territory)

 

SAR missions occour because some one has got lost the weather has turned bad,ran out of daylight or are injured (these are looked after by rescue choppers and we dont need to get in the way) There may be the odd occasion where if someone is on station they could lend a hand.

 

The last thing we need a bunch of self appointed part time aerial heroes being tempted to operate outside of their comfort zone and capability and bringing our sport into disrepute.

 

Dave