NSW EMS sensitive spot?

[Class Charlie]

So where did the NSW EMS contract is a LEMON thread go?

It seems that someone is unable to take criticism!

Surely if it was OK to stick the boot into the previous holders of the health contract - ie., the NGO's, particularly during the lead up to the controversial tender process, then surely it should be equally as fair to have comments made about the current contract holder and their performance? :confused:

[slats11]

I was wondering that myself. I hadn't followed the discussion for a few days. When I checked today it had mysteriously been erased! So much for free speech!

NSW ambulance look to be getting screwed over by this contract. There have been lots of paramedics resigning these past six months, and more to come I hear. The rats are starting to jump the sinking ship.

Anyway, only 6 more years to go!

[Senior Pilot]

So much for free speech

It was deleted by riadbec, the originator of the thread :oh:

[Te_Kahu]

Perhaps Riadbec might explain why?

Did the post about "career ending comments" get a bit close to home per chance?

TK

[SuperSleuth]

Glad you all had the same problem too. Thought it was just me for a little while.

Perhaps riadbec was scared that bubbafrog might find out who they are.

None the less dissappointed it is gone. Overall I thought it was one of the better threads re: NSW Helo EMS. Did start to loose it towards the end though.

Maybe we could pick it up from here.

[Oogle]

With reading this post regarding CHC in Sydney, it is interesting to see that Riadbec (the originator), Class C and Slats 11 all make their first post on Pprune by slandering someone. :confused:

A few axes to grind among these guys methinks. Why don't you try and turn around the apparent lack of operational cudos at the hangar at Bankstown rather than trowing mud??? (Notice that I said "TRY")

[slats11]

I don't think it is possible to turn this mess around.

Besides, he who lives by the sword.......

[monkeytard]

So things are no better? I was contemplating one of the jobs they got going. Sounds like I should give it a miss hey.:confused:

[Class Charlie]

Oogle - might have missed something here, but can you point out where exactly the "slander" was in my post?

The point I was making was simply that the NGO's had to deal with the criticism (deserved or not) in this public forum, therefore why not the new operator?

Seems the sensitive spot belongs to you.

[SARAC]

I heard the most experienced crewman they have in Sydney just resigned??? Anyone know why?

[slats11]

May be the rosters. May be the constant rotation of new staff (both crew and pilots). May be the customer.

[thelummox]

Speaking of operational difficulties, any truth to the rumour regarding an engine start two days ago at YSBK with the tail rotor still tied down ? :}

[SARAC]

I have heard they are working the same roster as backseat crew in other bases... what is the problem??? Is Sydney really that bad??? There doesn't seem to be too many positive comments going around.:confused:

[Igor13]

Starting with the rotor tied down, noone is ammune, it can happen to the best of us, and the worst. Don't pass judgement to quickly or you may find it happens to you.

I know you didn't pass any judgement, you just threw it out there for comment, but I know what you were thinking!

[helo1]

Can someone post his initails who resigned

[Vie sans frontieres]

Speaking of operational difficulties, any truth to the rumour regarding an engine start two days ago at YSBK with the tail rotor still tied down ?

I refer the honourable gentlemen to the reply I gave some moments ago. (On the previous thread.) LET HE WITHOUT SIN CAST THE FIRST STONE! You guys are unbelieveable. With a culture where you seem to revel in each other's misfortunes/errors to such a degree, is it any wonder you've got problems?

[irh]

It's concerning that the Bankstown crowd are starting to get a bit of an incident history.

I hope they are able to curtail it before something happens.

[baffler15]

riadbec, riadbec, where art thou riadbec?

[Bubbafrog]

Riabec

THought you were on leave, you should be relaxing instead of posting...watching you

[PPRuNeUser0212]

can't be Bubbafrog, no accent.

can't blame the provider, all and sundry know it's ASNSW and they couldn't even run a chook raffle on a Friday night at the local. They used to get a lot of free services from the NGO's but now days improvements cost them.

[slats11]

Hi VSF

There is a long and complicated history to this sorry tale. The two previous Non Government Organisations (LifeSaver & CareFlight) provided exemplorary service to the people of NSW over two decades. They did this at minimal cost to the taxpayer due to tremendous community spirit - which translated into significant corporate and community financial support. In addition, individuals from both organisations over many many years collectively donated many thousands of unpaid hours - because they were proud of what they did and because they believed in what they did.

In 2006, the ASNSW and the state government announced that all this was to be overturned and that the contract for the next 7 years was awarded to CHC. Without criticising CHC (who are without doubt a professional and competent organisation), this was a mighty kick in the guts to all these professionals from both organisations. To make matters worse, the tender process was not transparent and there are still widespread suspicions that it was designed to produce a pre-determined outcome.

Now, response times are dramatically increaesed compared to previously. I would not have believed that it would have been possible to configure a 412 such that it was too small for one stretcher patient! Flight crew often have limited local knowledge of the Sydney area as they are constantly rotating from other parts of the country.

"Bigger, better, faster" was the simple and arrogant mantra of ASNSW in 2006. Please forgive some of us if we can't help noticing that the reality seems to be "Bigger yes, but more expensive and less capable".

[Vie sans frontieres]

Thanks Slats11

What I find depressing though is the willingness of aviation professionals to indulge in playground tale-telling so they can score points over one another and the organisations they represent.

[ApocalypseThen]

Where were you when the NGO`s were being slandered by multi-national commercial interests ? Working (still?) for those interests I suspect .

[slats11]

True. What goes around tends to come around.

However, I agree that we should not be having cheap shots at our colleagues - our argument is not with them. Every organisation that has been around for long enough has experienced minor incidents such as this. Pride goeth before the fall!

[Bubbafrog]

GJ You know I am watching you too, but I agree with your statement...B

[PPRuNeUser0212]

Bubbafrog, watch away mate :)
I'm out of the NSW ems loop now and having a grand time. :ok:

[Senior Pilot]

riadbec,

Congratulations! That's the 23rd post that you have made and deleted, including the original thread that you started.

I think that you have the current record, but it really doesn't achieve much in the long run :rolleyes:

[Nomex]

The most senior Aircrewman didn't resign.......he just went home and is happily working at his normal place of residence.:ok:

[wineboy]

Slats11, maybe the reason that the ASNSW changed operators from the 'exemplorary service to the people of NSW' was exactly that... 'for a good reason' I don't know?

Careflight and Livesaver did a great job, now the times have changed. Contracts come and go. CHC may not win it back next time. I'm sure who ever wins it will attempt to do what CHC are doing I guess, they will try to provide the best service possible.

WB.

[ApocalypseThen]

CHC will certainly try to provide the best service possible to their foreign shareholders , and they do this by providing the bare minimum possible service to the government client under the terms of their contract .

[PPRuNeUser0212]

And from the rumour network out west, the job rate seems to have dropped from when the "smaller, slower and not as good" operator was on the job. Apparently due to the "drop dead hour" as dictated by the FAID system. Jobs knocked back because they will go past 1845 local. Overnights in Sydney (who pays for that) because of the same. At least the VFR Koala could and would fly in the dark (weather permitting).
Also sounds like at least one of the ASNSW employees has bailed and gone to work for an NGO.

stirring the pot :ouch:

LHS

[thelummox]

Well the fiasco is a classic case of "be careful what you wish for"
or in terms my thrice married mate says,
Yes the grass is greener on the other side of the fence, but it doesn't taste any sweeter.

Falling service standards, and surprise bloody surprise, ASNSW now trotting out the standard line re a better, faster service, its all bollocks. We sacrificed a NGO based service, which could have easily been changed, modified, improved to meet the new contract standards, a service delivery model that cost the community 1/10th of SFA compared to what we shell out now for a service that still doesn't come close. ( In fact scrub my last, the existing operators did meet all the benchmarks in the contract anyways!)

Remember all that BS about newer, faster bigger machines which was the reason ASNSW used to axe the existing NGO operators - that is the Canadian Woodpecker Co. promised new machines ahead of the rest (contrary to evidence provided by Careflight and Lifesaver). Where are they - The 412's so derided by some are now the mainstay of the fleet - Plenty of 139's in service elsewhere, so why the delay here ?

Bring back the dedicated providers - dedicated as in providing a genuine service to our community and regional areas, not shareholders on the other side of the world. Even the biggest champion of the new regime, Nozza, a gent with shall we say, real and genuine insight into aeromedical retrieval in NSW, has, apparently, seen the light and realised all is not smelling of roses after all. God forbid a similar debacle when the northern ops come up for review !

And re the start up - not pointing the bone, however surely the current housing and hangaring arrangements at BK increase the pressure on crews to get moving - we obviously aren't dealing with joyflights here! Again a second rate start up proposal that was accepted over existing proven base arrangements - I guess the woodpecker was hoping Lifesaver would fall over and get dibs on the new Cape Banks site, and perhaps the Westmead one as well!

Rant over - This is after all about enhancing service delivery to our citizens who are at a very real risk of carking it - not embarking on some ideologically driven reform campaign by bureaucrats who are neither healers or aviation professionals.

[riadbec]

The comment by the moderator in relation to my behaviour is noted.

[Breeze 29900]

In respect to the Quote:
The most senior Aircrewman didn't resign.......he just went home and is happily working at his normal place of residence.

Is the Sydney base so short of Aircrewman that they have to reside permanently on base? Sounds like a great roster.

[Breeze 29900]

One other thing I've heard recently is that a Sydney Crewman was bragging about the 15K in overtime he's made in the past eight months. He's now thinking of buying a Big Screen TV. Apparrently someone said to him that he should install in the crewman's bedroom at BK so he will be able to get some use from it.

[riadbec]

My source tells me that the new boys on the block have at least solved the problem of transporting obese patients by helo. The Sydney NGO's could only manage patients around 120 kg's in the BK's whereas the 412's are rated to carry patients up to 220 kgs.

A sad indictment on the the growing obesity problem in Aus - but then again all people deserve an equal opprtunity for care

[Bubbafrog]

You dont suggest that the change in providers was done for the sole purpose of moving Bariatric patients around the state, if that was the case we could have started a special service called fat flight.

I am sure that money could be better used to educate the public of the dangers of obesity so they make an educated decision and accept the fact that if they get sick they go by road in a fat truck sorry mega lift.

Keep grabbing at straws and you may make a hay stack.

It is obvious to all involved that certain decision makers had their own agenda with regards to deciding who won this contract and the decision is made and either deal with it and try to make it work or leave and find something else.

But dont pretend or bull**** and say these decisions were based on service delivery.

BF

[Doors Off]

I read this thread and the associated aggressive comments with some embarressment as a rotorhead. I understand that some people lost their jobs and I know that can hurt.
I wonder how many foreign pilots, crewman, engineers etc are employed by the current contractor in NSW, are there any?
There is quite a bit of reference about increase in cost to the community, as a taxpayer I do not feel that I should have to reach into my pocket to support a community organisation providing a great service that ultimately my government should use my taxes to provide. I am not criticising community organisations or volunteers, we need them, however I do question the relevance of the gripe about the increase in cost to the community. Have our taxes increased? The money provided by big corporations as sponsorship I am pretty sure counted as a great tax break for said corporations (reduced taxation income to the government), probably also reflected in increased fees for car,house insurance, banking fees etc by said corporations?
I think that it is very easy to suggest theories (as I have done), but a little deep thought may force us to question ourselves whether our suggested facts, really are facts? Food for thought.
It seems sad that there is some underlying and not so underlying delight and wish about aviation related incidents or possible incidents (I know it is a rumour network) in relation to this contract. A lot of us on here are aircrew or engineers, it is a shame that some of us can take delight in other people making errors in a dangerous job. We should all be careful what we wish for. We have all made and will continue to make mistakes in our aviation operations, as long as we do not break rules deliberately, then it would be nice and fuzzy if we could stick together sometimes.
I am all for the best service being provided to the community, if some of us feel that it is not, then we should take our politicians to task with sensible, factual unemotive letters to our local members. :sad:

[SuperSleuth]

Lummox,

Helo review for rest of NSW is all done & dusted. A closed tender with all exisiting providers contracted for a further five years.

Looks like powers that be have reconsidered their positions in light of experiences in Sydney. They were definately dead set on having one provider only right across the state.

[SuperSleuth]

BF,


It is obvious to all involved that certain decision makers had their own agenda with regards to deciding who won this contract and the decision is made and either deal with it and try to make it work or leave and find something else.


So are you tired of trying to make it work & hence is that why you're currently working out of YWST?

[folald]

riadbec, Your source is poorly imformed. The fact is that currently the heaviest patient able to be carried is ~110kg. The wieght of a patient is nearly always underestimated by refering staff which does at times result in heavier patients being transfered but 220kgs....forget about it! Hit the road jack.........

[Bubbafrog]

As they say a change is as good as a holiday, but I still support the efforts and believe that there is no choice but to make YSBK work for the communities sake.

Regardless of who the client is....You know what I mean

Its important to put the end user first.... are you saying you disagree.???..


I think Drs still take the
Hippocratic Oath

Not Hypocrite....lol

BF

[riadbec]

BF, Seems that the NSW "community" = end users regardless of who they are ...... except fat people who deserve to be disadvantaged because they eat a lot.

Maybe we should exclude other people who indulge in risky behaviours... smokers, rock climbers .... you know what I mean ....lol

[folald]

:ugh:'The server is too busy at the moment. Please try again later'.:ugh:

It's driving me Crrrrrrraaaaazzzzyyyyyyyy:eek:

[folald]

raidbec, I'm sure you're just being prevocative :cool: but it should be said, it isn't that overwieght folks deserve to be disadvantaged, they don't, neither do obstetric emergencies or a patients sick in the wrong part of the state during bad weather. It's just that we currently have no safe means of transfering these patients by helicopter. I hope this changes. We'll see. :ok:

[w_ocker]

Just a thought guys. Usually when the above sorts of rant-posts are made, a caveat is made to the tune of "we are against the system and it's decisions, not those opperating under those decisions at the front line". As it doesnt seem that a lot of those posting the above agressive and bitter posts are willing to make this acknowledgement I shall.

To ALL EMS crews out there, at least some of us thank you for being there ready to get airborne in short order, single pilot, IFR, bad weather, little planning to often un-surveyed sights/tiger country. Always limited by their equipment (whatever they fly), and regardless of what colour zoombags they wear or what motto is painted on the tail.

Note. I am not making any comment for/against the present system, just strongly FOR those working within it. As someone too close to the subject to say more, I'll just say that perhaps we should start playing the ball instead of the man.

[LHSboy]

For your information Folald, our current Ferno stretchers have a maximum weight of 160 kg, which includes the patient, bridge and medical equipment.

Our DHS megalift stretcher has a 200 kg capacity. Doesn't get a lot of use at the moment but it's there when it's needed for our ever expanding population.

Just thought I'd add my two bobs worth.

Cheers :)

[PO dust devil]

Well said W-ocker.

It's a smaller world by the minute.....Slag our own talent you slag yourselves and us all.

Maybe in the future some of the aforepublished aviation gonzos will miss a job or suffer adverse comment in a forum somewhere and wonder...."How come everyone thinks we are amateurs and clowns"

Work to do it better...... but don't let the sour grapes of contract rivalry damage our standing in the wider industry.

BTW I am not connected with NGO or the present contractors. Just affected by the damage you stalk beaters are inflicting upon our reputation/s.

[Bald Rock Frog]

Hey LHS, Yes I have bailed to work with a ngo & so far so good, although they do have their own problems. :cool:

[PPRuNeUser0212]

BRF,
I hear you there Brother, it's the same here. Good luck and hope it goes well for you there.

[folald]

We must be bored!
Folks, surely we can get onto something more interesting than a debate over 10kgs either way, but hey I'm up for it, lets bounce this around a little shall we?
160 kgs you quote.
~110kg patient + 40kg gear/bridge = 150kg......with 10kg left over to allow for the fact that many patients are 10kg or more heavier than quoted by the refering hospital. Now as you can tell I'm no rocket scientist but that = ~ the 160kgs you quote the stretcher being rated at.

Boring!!!! If you're still awake. :zzz:

The 'mega lift' stretcher may well be an under utilised option as you suggest, but why is that so?

May I be so bold as to suggest that 4 flight crew, assisted by 2 (untrained) orderlies being asked to lift wieghts of greater than 160kg (lets say the 220kgs 'they' say is OK) to chest height in order to load the patient/bridge/gear into the back of an aircraft is in my humble opinion placing the patient and crews at an unnecessary risk of injury, when there is no evidence of these patients experiencing a poorer outcome as the result of travelling by road. What's the basis of all this haste to move the patient and is it worth injury to your crew?

Basic maths says we're talking about an awkward lift at about 26 to 40kg per man/woman.

If you think the risk is minimal do a survey on how many of your colleagues have experienced back injuries and hernias from these types of activities.

If folks reckon they know better and that I'm sounding a little 'soft' then why are bags of cement/concrete only 20kgs and not more. I doubt that brickies labourers are soft!

It's not the job of Medical/Flight crews to accept responsibility for every Patient that a hospital decides can't wait for a road ambulance to transfer.

You just don't need to take that responsibility. :ok:

As I suggested previously if patient is delayed due to weather causing and unacceptable risk, it is accepted and an other means of tranfer is arranged and no there's harm is done.

I'm sure that there are folks out there that will feel the need to have the last say on this but quite frankly I'm more than a lttle over it!:hmm: But go ahead.

Better still though, If you know how it is being done better elsewhere great! Post a picture or an idea and lets do it better too.

Otherwise lets all move on and get onto some ways of improving what we do. We can even have a laugh :D

That's my 99cents worth...you can keep the change.

folald (flat out like a lizard drinking)

[riadbec]

Apparently CHC's WA CREWIES are the COOLEST tourist at Bankstown - totally professional (without being over the top) and good blokes as well.

[riadbec]

My source is wondering

Can the 139's land at Bankstown Airport?

Are all hospital helipads in Sydney rated for 139's

How long before the 145 arrives?

[riadbec]

Accountability is nigh

[tistisnot]

Firstly - thanks to Mr Ponting for being so sporting as to lose the cricket for the sake of the game ....

But what intrigues me most about this thread ... is accountability - riadbec posts three times in a row ... and yet his tally stays at 6 .... surely should be minimum 8 ..... dead reckoning?



The post tally is total posts, and is reflected in all posts made by the Rotorhead. There is no magic way of making the posts number sequentially!

Go back and look at your own tally ;)

Senior Pilot

[spinwing]

And why pray tell should AW139s not be able to operate out of Bankstown???

:confused:

[Igor13]

Spinwing

I agree, its a helicopter.

Find a piece of ground big enough and land on it. I am sure an airport would be bigger than the 139, and that is about the only requirement for a helicopter.

With statements like that this thread is moving towards the ridiculous.:ugh:

[Breeze 29900]

I'm just waiting for the day a 139 lands on a beach or in a boggy park and sinks.

It's unfortunate that when the pressure is not to get the medical crew to the scene and the SOPs say land and don't winch that it would still come back as pilot error. The pressure on the pilot would be even more intense with a dobber amoungst the crew.

There is a lot to be said for skids

[Class Charlie]

It just shows the lack of understanding of aviation on this thread? Full of uneducated posts methinks!

The AW139 has a very high wheel pressure. Runways have a maximum wheel pressure figure for each runway. It will probably be able to land at Bankstown (I haven't bothered to check) but it may not be able to land at other regional airports? :ugh:

The AW139 has a high downwash, this could cause serious issues with light aircraft parked or maneouvering at airports close to the landing / take off area of the AW139 :ugh:

Hospital pads in NSW, the ones that are made of concrete, elevated or not, have been designed to B412EP weights, not the weight of an AW139. Lets not forget that the all up weight of the AW139 seems to be ever expanding!:ugh:

Elevated helipads require G-force loading in case the helicopter lands hard. If this cannot be achieved then a number of floors below the helipad need to be evacuated prior to landing and taking off. Remember, these pads were designed for B412EP's weights, just ask the man who designed them, health assumed that nothing would ever replace the B412 :ugh:

Then there are the hospital pads and unprepared landing sites (don't forget roadways as the AW139 may just leave a calling card each time they land on our underfunded roadways) etc. The AW139 is likely to leave an imprint in a lot of place. Hope there is not too much rain ahead. Soggy ground could add other issues like dynamic rollover!

RAIDBEC makes an interesting comment about the availability of the EC145.

Remember when the health department was using their spin doctors (no pun intended) to deceive the mums and dads about the new supplier. In case you have forgotten, here's a link:

http://amwac.health.nsw.gov.au/pubs/2006/pdf/helicopter_service_fs.pdf

Well, apart from a load of lies, predominantly written by a small doctor with axes to grind, they also supplied a timeline of the new aircraft. That's right, the new aircraft that could only be supplied by the new provider, no one else could supposedly match or better there supply rates.

Well, it states that the EC145 should be here by now! :ugh:

I have nothing against replacing providers, what is criminal is when you hoodwink the public, through spin doctors, into thinking they are getting a better system, when in reality they are not. This comes down to many reason and all players concerned are to blame in some ways.

Sorry to rant on, going back to the big plasma:ok:

[baffler15]

There is a lot to be said for skids

Professional pilots have been landing wheeled helicopters (ones much bigger and heavier than the usual EMS bird too, I might add) on "beaches" and "boggy parks" for many years now. I don't possess a massive brain for crash statistic recall, however I'm pretty sure that most aircraft that end up-side-down in the mud or sand did not do so because of the condition of the surface!

Might I suggest that it is probably because the pilot in command, for that split second (or longer duration, in some cases!:eek:), was an idiot and allowed external factors (such as perceived pressure from people NOT in a position to comment on how a flight should be conducted) to get in the way of safe aviating?

Like all organisations, things change with the times. If the "old faithful" B412 has to give way to a more modern type in the future, this is called progress. Aircraft types will change, and so will the way they are flown in their various roles. So be it - we don't buy them, we just fly them!

Anyway, given the background of a lot of EMS pilots these days (military pilots with solid experience flying 22,000lb wheeled helicopters), I'm sure that they, and the other professional pilots out there who worked through the GA ranks, will have no trouble working out how not to crash a 14,000lb AW139.

The Baffler:ok:

[Igor13]

Thanks Baffler

I personally have been landing a 18000 - 22500lb machine (with high ACN) for the last 9 years. On regional strips all around Australia and overseas, including paddocks, beaches, swampy ground school ovals etc etc etc.

Yep I have gone through a couple of surfaces but we are always ready for it, if it doesn't look sound you land carefully. Some places can't handle it with low PCN, so we land on the grass straight to a point away from the other acft we may damage or next to the apron. There is always a way to perform it safely and if there isn't you think laterally and find an alternative. We always do the job and do it safely.

The 139 will do the job and do it well. It is about time we got rid of the aging 26000+ hr 412's and get into some new toys. God forbid another type rating to do, we might have to get back into the books.

Times they are a changing, get on board or fossilise in the corner.

[riadbec]

Thanks for the info - good to know the 139 can land on Bankstown Airport runways

[Igor13]

Riadbec

I didn't say it can land on the runways, I really said they would be able to find a way to operate safely.

Thinking more about it I have faith that the head honchos making these grand plans with decisions for acft types would be experienced aviation professionals, or at least have consulted them. They are probably a lot smarter than you or I.

Anyway, I had a look at ERSA and it turns out BK has bloody strong runways that will handle high tyre pressures and a fair bit of weight.

I think the rears on the 139 are a little hard but concessions are available.

It is hard but light so it should work into the numbers somewhere thats acceptable to all concerned.

Anyway it is a sexy machine, should give the crews some fun and after all thats the main thing. You have got to enjoy it.

[Breeze 29900]

Yes, a new machine should be good, although summer in one of the new CHC AW139's without aircon! I can't wait to hear some opinions.

Would you buy a new car without air con?

What page / paragraph of the tender document was the air conditioning requirement listed? Just something else the spin doctors will have to spin.

[thelummox]

I'm sure the 139's will be absolutely superb in the inter hospital transfer role, and some rescue tasks, but for many primary medicals, such as MVA's and the like the niftiness of the BK, and to a lesser extent the 412, being able to get into tight spots will be lost when the 139's finally come on line. The ability to turn a narrow rural road, or roads in places like the Royal into a suitable LZ will be a thing of the past, which can only mean an increase in down the wire ops.

On that basis, any perceived speed benefit will be eroded by increased times to get the paramedics and doctors on the ground. Surely we still have a place in our network for a mixed fleet operation ? Horses for course as the saying goes - I think Lifesaver, Polair and Careflight all demonstrated that BK's perform very effectively in that role.

>>>Goes back to corner to hit head on wall in response to goverment bureauracracy - Second thought - Are Reba Meagher's grubby fingerprints anywhere near this ?

[riadbec]

IGOR13,

Sorry about that - misread your last post

The 139's appear to be a fantastic machine from all accounts. As for the airconditioning aspect (recently raised) - My source tells me that some of the Wollongong pilots are are worried that their machine won't have airconditioning - not so much from a comfort point of view - something to do with avionics. Any clues?

[riadbec]

It seems that the "Aircraft airconditioning" proviso was overlooked in the Sydney contracts

Why does that song by Britney keep popping up in my head?

[folald]

http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,155898,00.html?ESRC=dod-bz.nl

Interesting link re. EC145 air con. issues.:\

Some cool videos on this site also.:ok:

Stay safe folks

[Bubbafrog]

Through my consultation with the ERSA Airport pavements are rated in gross aircraft weight and psi of tyres, Bankstown gross weight is 20000kgs with a max psi of 152, the 139 has a tyre psi of 252/ wollongong airport is rated to 145 psi but as you all have indicated I am sure these issues have been addressed in the planning for the new aircraft.


Not being a driver, if anyone has any other information...

[whispers]

That the ASNSW were not given any extra money to commence 24hr ops at the gong so they had to find some money so they looked at what could be taken off the 139 and still be operational and that was the Aircon I guess with enough industrial pressure from the paramedics they may the first to retro fit aircon in a 139 if it is possible....the first one goes to the gong anyway...I guess if they are prepared to except sub standard accom they will except anything

anyone have any whispers to add???

[riadbec]

Leaks everywhere .... Accountabililty is nigh

[riadbec]

Are they "legal"???

[Te_Kahu]

Legal for what?

Admissable in a court of law - not likely.
Publishable by the media - in some circumstances it could be argued that it would be in the public good.

That way be dragons

TK

[thelummox]

Riadbec, I assume we're talking NSW here......... If the tapes/recordings were made without the informed consent (ie the other party/parties were aware of the conversation being recorded and consented), then make sure you're fingerprints and other indentifying info is no where near them! And if there were only two or three people in the room anyways, well it narrows it down if PC Plod comes a calling!

See NSW Listening Devices Act 1984.
www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/lda1984181/ (http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/lda1984181/)

There are a very limited number of legal justifications for covert recording, but these are very narrow and you'd be paying a barrister good $$$ to weasel a way out for most purposes. And public interest is certainly not a defence to illegal recordings - Be aware that this is not an administrative offence - It carries up to 2 years in the bin, so be very careful if anyone was going down this path, well intentioned or otherwise! However if the info obtained was used to leak leads and pointers to journos, well that may be safer for your friend! It is a large can of worms that would be opened.

[Bubbafrog]

As Lum stated:
It is illegal Recording conversations by means of a listening device is an offence under the Listening Devices Act 1984 (NSW) unless both parties consent.


You started this ****, if I remember correctly lemon man now running scared because you let the cat out of the bag, welcome back from leave anyway. How does your voice sound on the recording?:mad:

BF

[Senior Pilot]

Having watched this turn into something that wouldn't even last on JH, enough is enough. What a sad inditement of the NSW industry :bored:

Thread closed.