Even if we could pursuade the (unpaid volunteer) civilian MRTs to do the land-based SAR for military aircrew (or indeed the requirement for military personnel worldwide) there would still be a requirement for the RAF to provide a crash guard to secure a crash scene for both evidence and for the safety of the public.
At the moment the MRTs cover that task (for crashes further than 5 miles from an airfield) for the first 24-48 hours following a crash. This enables the station responsible for the Post Crash Management of the area to generate it's crash gaurd. Take away the MRTs and each station would need to have a crash guard on a shorter notice to move (1 hour). As aircraft have an annoying tendency to crash in inhospitable places (remember the F15s that crashed in the Cairngorms) these individuals would need to be equiped and trained to operate in these environments. So rather than 4 MRTs at current - each station with a post crash management responsibility would need to have a dedicated team of crash guards trained and equiped on 1 hour's notice to move.
And that MRT commitment extends not just to crashes but also to cover military helicopters that have had to land in inhospitable/inaccessable places through technical difficulties too, as displayed in early may when one of the Sea Kings from ISL suffered a bladestrike down at Ben Nevis and was subsequently stuck on the mountainside for a few days til a Wokka could lift it off. Even then the MRT cotinued to provide a security presence til it was fetched back to Lossie. I would suggest, thinking back in particular to 2006 and this incident --> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/highlands_and_islands/6332159.stm, that your average station crash guard wont have the necessary equipment and experience to survive in certain conditions hence the MRTs are essential for this purpose.
Last edited: