Medevac/Air Ambulance question...

[Tom H]

Good afternoon

Been a member awhile and usually post on historical aviation events or about events at the Alberta Aviation Museum.

Personally, I grew up in aviation my father (long passed), his brothers, I am a private pilot and as you might guess being involved in an Aviation Museum I consider myself relatively informed on aviation...but I don't know everything by a long shot.

But I do have a question re: Air Ambulance so I thought what better place to ask than where the pros hang out.

I have tremendous respect for all professional pilots and a little extra for those flying Air Ambulance a) Cause someday I might need them. b) Some friends have already needed them.

I have let myself get into an aviation debate with a group of non aviation individuals that believe everything they read in on line media.

Fixed Wing vs Rotor Wing

My long standing opinion has been BOTH are extremely important and one cannot replace the other because of the very nature of their differences in intended use, design and performance.

Rotor Wing, from my perspective, is irreplaceable for short range (100-200km maybe a little more depending on source information) Air Ambulance work. They can get right to (or darn close) to the site and get directly to the hospital and do it very fast, very effectively and frankly are irreplaceable in that role.

Fixed Wing, from my perspective, is irreplaceable for mid to long range Air Ambulance work, Rotor Wing doesn't have the speed, range or same IFR capability. Fixed Wing is irreplaceable in this role...nothing else is as fast, has a range that can match it or IFR weather capability offered by Fixed Wing.

It has also been my opinion from all I have read and those I have discussed it with that there are (Province Wide, any large area province) more Fixed Wing Air Ambulance "critical need" flights than Rotor Wing "critical need" flights simply because of the distance etc involved.

Not saying one is better...just that it has worked out this way based on need.

Now the non aviation side of the debate reverses this...saying there are more Rotor Wing "critical need" operations and Fixed Wing is only "patient transfer" and the non aviation types point to the media coverage offered Rotor Wing as proof.

I have scoured independent reports and related information coming up with no definitive answer so I thought I would seek the thoughts of the professionals.

Can you share yours?

Tom

[turbo-prop]

STAR's has PR people to blow sunshine up everyones butt! Fixed wing do there jobs and you never here about it. Yes STAR's does more critical care because they won't come and get you unless you are critical. No glamour in it otherwise.

[Tom H]

Let me add a parameter to the discussion...

If we get out of a 200km range of a Metro area (where the bulk of the car accidents happen) would the trend reverse?

Could a Rotor Wing even be effective 200+km, 3/400km from a Metro centre?

Thank you for the information

Tom

[Stan_Cooper]

It's pretty simple: The speed advantage of fixed wing is negated over short distances by the need for a land ambulance ride on each end. Probably the media sex appeal of helicopters is related to their much increased visibility (the fixed wing dudes aren't landing on highways and are generally not spending as much time in and around big cities.) I have done a few pretty high priority patients in the airplane though, either because we were closest to them when the call came up, or because the distance was such that the helicopter would take too long to complete the mission.

[azimuthaviation]

90% Alberta's population is within 200km of the three STARS bases, so its not really a practical issue.

[FlyGy]

Yes, given that you're in STARS country, the unwitting public has no true understanding of the facts. I've heard far too many horror stories about that organisation and I sincerely hope they follow Ornge down the drain.

Here are some facts for your argument.

http://ircp.info/Portals/22/Downloads/P ... 202009.pdf

Such as Ornge can provide facts that is.

Boiled down to it, within 125nm rotor is faster and more efficient, beyond 125nm, fixed wing is faster and more efficient. Paramedics and Nurses are all the same, a ground ambulance, helicopter, or fixed wing are all just modes of transport for completion of the job they need to do. I like bugging my air ambulance pilot friends and call them ambulance drivers.

[NO LINK*]

Tom, I think you have a very good grasp of the Medevac systems at present. I would only add that a Rotor will be 100% effective if one life is saved 25 miles OR 250 miles from base.

[Tom H]

Tom, I think you have a very good grasp of the Medevac systems at present. I would only add that a Rotor will be 100% effective if one life is saved 25 miles OR 250 miles from base.

Thanks for the comments and I agree a life saved is the goal and I have no issue with Rotor or Fixed Wing.

I ain't out to get the Chopper guys!!!

I firmly believe in right tool for the right job...when you need Rotorcraft use rotorcraft, when you need fixed wing use fixed wing.

Which is the point of the debate I am in with my non aviation acquaintances.

They have, as do many in the public, that helicopters can do whatever fixed wing can.

Just as fast, just as far and the same way.

My point is no...you use the right tool for the right job as noted by flyguy:

Boiled down to it, within 125nm rotor is faster and more efficient, beyond 125nm, fixed wing is faster and more efficient.

I regularly fight to correct misconceptions and misinformation about aviation and that is what I am doing in this debate with non aviation types.

Everyone else...I do truly appreciate your comments and insight and would appreciate more.

Tom

[cdnpilot77]

I would Relate it back to them in their own profession.

Ie: if they are a doctor, would you use a scalpel to insert an IV? You could probably make the hole bigger and quicker than using a tiny needle....
Or if they are a fireman: would they use a garden hose to put out a house fire because it was closer to the action even if their hose was hooked up to the hydrant?

No, of course not....as you say, you use the tool that best fits the job or task needed to be done.

[KAG]

Tom
I did 5 years of medevac flying in ONT, AB, NWT on king Airs. Both fixed and rotor have their place. While it's true some fixed wing are infact patient transfers, the majority I've done were serious, some critical- babies born and people die.
The speed and range is clearly in the fixed wings corner, the rotor is the king of point to point short haul.
There both tools to be used and each has their strengths and weaknesses. I'd say though the biggest determining factor is location. Major urban centers need rotor, every medevac north of 60 is fixed wing.
Hope this helps.

[old_man]

Solution?

[Edo]

90% Alberta's population is within 200km of the three STARS bases, so its not really a practical issue.

Is that why the Provence of Alberta retains 12 Fixed Wing aircraft on permanent contract?

Both have a role to play. One thing to note is that STARS is NOT 100% funded by donations, Alberta Health still pays per trip.

Some good info here. Link to the report the Saskatchewan Government commissioned on air medical services. The report was done by Ornge (ONT fixed wing and heli provider)

http://www.health.gov.sk.ca/air-medical-review

[co-joe]

The thing about STARs is that they self dispatch independently of the Provincial Flight Coordination Centre, that all fixed wing aircraft are dispatched through. The result is that in some cases, (misinformed) Doctors call stars directly and they end up doing stable patient transfers far out of their effective range. There are a few locations well outside of that range where stars fly's out of greed and without regard for the patient's needs (ie expediency).

Otherwise, when they do stick to their original mission statement, they are an amazing tool that albertans are extremely lucky to have at their disposal.

[FlyGy]

Wasn't it just a couple of years ago that STARS flew beyond their range (Ft. Mac?) and when they stopped for refueling the patient died? Then there was the time that a woman was unlucky enough to fall off her horse and broke her pelvis right on the border between the Edmonton and Calgary base and had both of them fighting over her like a pair of rabid dogs...so much to the point that her husband said screw it and called the ground ambulance to come get her.

The only thing about STARS that isn't a joke are their spin doctors, they need far, far more public accountability.

[oldtimer]

I think one of the big objections to STARS has been that we have a commercial air carrier competing with other for profit air carriers but STARS has a society that is requesting and recieving corperate donations, hold fund raisers, hold lotteries and other funding enterprises that are not available to the for profit air carriers. Combine that with aggressive marketing, media attention and you have a companny not well liked in the aviation community but loved by the general public. Many operators feel that most operations could be conducted with fixed wing aircraft at a fraction of the cost. But fixed wing cannot do the so called "swoop and scoop" such as landing on a highway out in the boonies.

[Trematode]

I feel your frustration, Tom.

In the run-up to the decision to shut down CYXD the real concern about potential delays to medevac operations was brought up by airport advocates, and was overwhelmingly dismissed by the media and the public at large out of sheer ignorance in regards to the fixed-wing side of things.

A credit to STARS and their PR people, though -- medevac is pretty much synonymous with rotor-wing aircraft in alberta to the average joe because of them. It's not STARS' fault they are so good at being visible to the public-at-large at the expense of fixed-wing operations. Maybe it speaks more to the lack of promotion being undertaken by the alberta government and air operators to highlight the great job their fixed-wing crews do every day.

The average citizen has no concept of the differences in IFR capability, range, and cost-effectiveness between the two different categories of aircraft. Good luck with your endeavour: I hope you open some eyes!

[Tom H]

In the run-up to the decision to shut down CYXD the real concern about potential delays to medevac operations was brought up by airport advocates, and was overwhelmingly dismissed by the media and the public at large out of sheer ignorance in regards to the fixed-wing side of things.

I too was very involved with the defense of ECCA in the debate, but did not associate myself with any of the groups for a variety of reasons, and can appreciate exactly what you are saying.

Combined with the lack of real statistical data it makes having a prevailing argument extremely difficult.

The average citizen has no concept of the differences in IFR capability, range, and cost-effectiveness between the two different categories of aircraft.

Part of the goal in the debates I get into with non aviation types is to educate and not just in air ambulance. Most have zero knowledge of anything other than people tubes to Vancouver-Toronto-Vacation destinations and it aggravates the hell outa me...so I keep slugging.

But sometimes I can use some info and advise as in this case so I try to go to the source.

Good luck with your endeavour: I hope you open some eyes!

I continue to try to as does the Alberta Aviation Museum, it is simply amazing how aviation has gone from top of mind in the public to functionally "0" knowledge in what is comparatively a short period of time.

Thanks for the support and all the responses.

Tom

[StevERojJer]

Fixed wing do there jobs and you never here about it. Yes STAR's does more critical care because they won't come and get you unless you are critical. No glamour in it otherwise.

[ditar]

I would like to know who makes the decisions and what criteria are used to determine who to send. Many times I've been called for a medevac, had just finished filing the flight plan, was opening up the hangar doors, and then PFCC calls back and tells me we're stood down. Five minutes later STARS tears overhead...

[MrWings]

Yes STAR's does more critical care because they won't come and get you unless you are critical.

This is not true. I personally know of several cases where STARS responded to a non-critical event. In one of these, it was for an incident IN TOWN when the ground ambulance was out on a call out of town.

[looproll]

Didn't STARS try to run the fixed wing contractors out of the medevac business years ago by bidding to take over such operations?


If that's true, I don't blame them for having a little animosity towards the STARS establishment