AKSAR — Could the winch mission have made sense in this case from a training perspective? Especially since the helo was onsite due to the search?
Possibly. That's how the AF and ANG rescue teams (PJs, Pavehawks, and HC-130s) justify doing civilian rescue. The USCG is mandated to do civil SAR, primarily maritime. They can easily justify maintaining winch capability on that basis. The USCG gets enough maritime missions to keep them in practice. The AF SAR folks mission is only to rescue military personnel, and they can justify maintaining the capability on that basis. But the AF/ANG wouldn't get as much opportunity to actually do it, at least when they aren't deployed down range. So for them, doing civil SAR missions is easily justified as training.
I am skeptical about the need for winch use in this case, but I believe AKSAR has nailed an important consideration - justifying the capability.
This is really the crux of the issue. How much of this sort of capability do we need in any one area? Too little, and you won't have it when you really need it. Too much, and you start using it in questionable cases. I can easily see that Ventura County could justify having a basic helo. But do they really need their own winch capability that bad? Or could they call on nearby USCG or AF assets when they really need it? I'm asking the question. I don't know the answer.
The only SAR-related memorial service I have ever attended was for a pilot and copilot who crashed while returning to base from their last mission of the day. They had just dropped off two of our group.....
Ditto for me. A helo pilot and State Trooper died, on a mission that was probably not necessary.
Previous Topic
Index
