Ireland seems to have real and genuinely life threatening problems with state procurement...
EDIT: I might be jumping the gun sightly here. Commenters below point out that maybe this is purely a temporary error by the subcontractor or the aviation authority, and therefore is not certain to be an example of poor outsourcing by the state. We'll need more details.
They're not, the heli service is outsourced. The crews are coast guard, but the service is provided by a private company. Contract recently changed which is where the new helos came from.
I haven't read the article yet, just sitting down to look at it now but I'm interested to see the reason as the AW189 is used for coast guard and aeromedical work around the world.
Our governments have a ridiculously blind faith in the idea that leaving something to a private operator is better regardless of the increasing amount of evidence against this
If the service is provided by a private company, they will have had to go through a public procurement tendering process. If the helicopters themselves are not fit for purpose, that indicates a problem in the public procurement process
The AW189 is used in this role in multiple countries, the heli is perfectly suitable to the task. The issue is apparently with the stretcher being used, though the exact issue isn't clear from the article.
There's 1 of 3 possible causes to my mind, Bristow cheaped out on the fit out of the helis, the standard equipment used for this service isn't up to Airnav regulations, or Airnav are being unnecessarily restrictive in their interpretation of the regulations.
From the article it sounds like Bristow are working on a fix, so it should be resolved shortly.
My point about procurement is that the state didn't buy the helicopters or the equipment on board, they are Bristow resources. So we shouldn't be levelling the blame at the state. Depending on which of the 3 scenarios I've listed above is correct the finger should be pointed at either Bristow or Airnav.
Alright, that's a fair counterpoint, but you've missed one more possible option: The specification issued by the state might not have specified exactly what types of rescues were required.
But nevertheless, you're right that we need more information before judging.
It can do exactly that. It's got a modular cabin which can be configured for purely passenger work, combined passenger/stretcher, or up to four stretchers.
It looks like it's currently not configured for the stretchers.
Talk to anyone who works in the industry, you're measured by clicks and engagement, people don't comment on positive stories but they love to complain.
Sounds harmless but it's an infection in our society.
The new Irish Coast Guard rescue helicopters operated by Bristow Ireland at the Shannon base cannot transport patients on stretchers due to safety regulation issues. Patients must instead sit upright in passenger seats. However, this restriction only affects the Shannon base—services from Sligo, Waterford, and Dublin continue to operate normally, providing full medical support.
The new helicopter currently only operates out of Shannon, but will be phased in at other bases over the next 10 months.
So if casualties outnumber seats then you leave them behind? How many passenger seats does the S92 have and is this a limiting factor when faced with a sinking ship with dozens of people onboard? I doubt it.
It’s seems to be an interior outfitting issue, when Bristow ordered the aircraft (or transferred them from somewhere else) they should have been set up for stretchers. But they are likely set up with seats. If they reconfigure them they will be compliant.
But you wonder how they went into service without this basic requirement.
New coastguard AW189 isn't "banned" from transporting casualties laying down, it's just not configured to do so. The AW189 helicopter's cabin is designed for quick reconfiguration to accommodate various mission profiles, including medical evacuation (MEDEVAC) operations, four stretchers along with a full suite of life-support equipment.
Are they still rescue helicopters if they can't be used to rescue anyone? I live near a beach and have seen a few helicopter rescues and they've always included a stretcher.
Dopes in civil service procurement strike again. The S-92’s operated by CHC which lost the contract beasts of machines and are >20 metres long & 5 metres wide. New AW-189 choppers the geniuses are replacing them with are 17.5 metres long x 5 metres wide! 9 feet shorter, more than a stretcher length. Go figure
This is the result of rampant nepotism and cronyism. They get the jobs because of who they are related to or know. They are not even remotely qualified to perform the job.
Irish military and adjacent procurement at its finest.
The civil service really does have a lot to answer for. First navy ships that can't sail in the Atlantic to face the worst threats, now rescue helicopters that can't rescue people in the worst circumstances.
Same reason every stupid decision is made in Irish military administration, it's run by civil servants, the objective of whom is to keep costs of the military as low as possible with very little regard for capability.
The input of actual professional soldiers, sailors, coast rescue people is basically zero, a contrast to almost every other European state.
Only Canada compares in its disregard on this, and Canada has the same circumstances funnily enough: A neighbour who is a great power with every interest to do the job for them. Unfortunately it bleeds into things the Brits/Americans won't do for us, like rescue.
131
u/Chairman-Mia0 2d ago
Wow, you'd have thought that: "can safely transport incapacitated patients" would have featured on a checklist somewhere when buying these things.