HNZ wins SAR in Oz

[rrekn]

HNZ have pulled off another big upset, snatching offshore SAR away from CHC and Bristow (who had a SAR S92 on site!).


HeliHub.com HNZ Group announces offshore SAR contract in Australia (http://helihub.com/2017/05/12/hnz-group-announces-offshore-sar-contract-in-australia/)


Now they are scrambling for crews after the government changed the 457 Visa Rules.


They approached me but want 3 week tours, no DTA and no annual leave!


Anyone else been approached?

[212man]

..and no annual leave!

Doesn't the other 26 weeks off per year offset that a little bit? Not exactly slave labour!

[Lude-og]

Yea I figured they were having trouble getting crews after they extended the EOI an extra month on their website.

But I'm pretty sure they will get a way round the 457 issue, especially with the requirements as they stand.

[chcoffshore]

Yea I figured they were having trouble getting crews after they extended the EOI an extra month on their website.

But I'm pretty sure they will get a way round the 457 issue, especially with the requirements as they stand.

I wouldn't keep your fingers crossed. CASA pilots with the right to work and live in Australia!

[GKaplan]

Maybe in a few years this CANZUK International (http://www.canzukinternational.com/) becomes reality!!

[Mark Six]

I'm not surprised they're having trouble finding pilots if this is the agreement they'll be working under:
https://www.fwc.gov.au/documents/documents/agreements/fwa/ae423097.pdf
Very short on detail and far worse than any of the competitor's offshore agreements in Australia. Casual rates, overtime, roster details, annual increment, salary level based on "performance"???

[212man]

I'm not surprised they're having trouble finding pilots if this is the agreement they'll be working under:
https://www.fwc.gov.au/documents/documents/agreements/fwa/ae423097.pdf
Very short on detail and far worse than any of the competitor's offshore agreements in Australia. Casual rates, overtime, roster details, annual increment, salary level based on "performance"???

So they do get leave after all - 6 weeks. So 20 weeks work, 32 weeks off.

[John Eacott]

So they do get leave after all - 6 weeks. So 20 weeks work, 32 weeks off.

But check how the leave must be taken: 11.3.b


(b) Where an Employee works on a roster cycle/work pattern comprising working and non-working days, the Company may require that any annual taken by an Employee be taken either:

(i) in a multiple of the working days and non-working days under the roster cycle/work pattern; or

(ii) in accordance with the roster cycle/work pattern; or

(iii) in 21 day blocks following a rostered on period.


Ideally the changes to the 457 visa could see more Australian pilots getting better opportunities in their chosen fields, but since 457 is to be replaced with another selective visa programme their is every chance that the gates will be re-opened to allow internationals with specific skills to be brought in for these sort of jobs.

[gulliBell]

..Ideally the changes to the 457 visa could see more Australian pilots getting better opportunities in their chosen fields, but since 457 is to be replaced with another selective visa programme their is every chance that the gates will be re-opened to allow internationals with specific skills to be brought in for these sort of jobs.

The gates have been re-opened. HNZ just need to pay a one-off $5000 for a visa to employ a foreign pilot, plus $1,800 per visa per year thereafter. In the overall scheme of things the cost and effort for them to bring in foreign pilots to work on this contract is nothing.

[havick]

While we're talking about offshore, any news on the Babcock H175 contract for Timor that apparently starts in January?

Crews are off to France in the coming months for type ratings.

[Twist & Shout]

It's sad to watch the "race to the bottom" with wages and conditions in Australia.
Like many places I'd imagine, it's a long hard road to get into a ME IFR job with good pay and conditions. To see the current climate/situation is very disappointing.

It appears the "new players" have either no "award" (EBA), or a pathetic one, that no current ME IFR pilot would voluntarily entertain. Then they pay as much as is required to get the pilots they need on a "secret individual basis". They can then erode these conditions over time. Again, without anyone knowing what anyone else is receiving .

When times are tough, they can get some guys for peanuts.

They just tell every pilot confidentiality, that "they are the highest paid pilot in the company", and "don't tell anyone, or they will want what you have!" Next it will be: "Yours is the smallest pay cut in the company, don't tell anyone else!"

One clueless HR department have glanced over one of the recently drafted "bottom of the barrel awards" and are, stupidly or dishonestly, (hard to tell most of the time) claiming it as the new industry standard.

An experienced, qualified, motivated, loyal, stable pilot group, is apparently valueless in the brave new world.

It's all a cycle. The big winners will be the SIM operators. A large pilot turnover makes them plenty of money.

:(

[Nigel Osborn]

Forgive me but this seems to be a SAR contract based in Broome. If HNZ had the crews living in Broome & not touring, then it would be on fixed based conditions & not touring. This is what Lloyds did in Karratha where the company provided housing & the crews had normal annual leave & a 5 day week.
If they flew to the oil rig as usual, then it is still a fixed base situation.

[PhilJ]

Brother I'm curious why now you feel it is inevitable that terms and conditions should be reduced across the industry?

A quick browse of your posting history showed a quite different viewpoint in the past.

[Twist & Shout]

Well I am with HNZ in Broome and its a positive and go ahead company, good people, supportive culture which is here to stay, not just short term as some of the Bristow blokes say.

The days of BRS 2 weeks on and 2 weeks off roster, $150 per day tax free DTA, equal time off for everything related to a duty, living in Cable Beach, seniority ruling the roost with the upcoming young guns who want to work used as hire and fire fodder for up and down industry cycles is over for pilots and engineers.

Its not a race to the bottom, its how things will be from now on. Its happened in airlines and it is happening in oil and gas helicopters.

CHC and BRS will have to change as well or they will be gone.

I'm glad you are happy. That's great.:ok:

But to list all the hard fought for remuneration and conditions you are personally happy to do without, and claim it is not a race to the bottom doesn't make any sense.

With your logic, the next company just has to reduce the accommodation standards some more, and pay a little less, win the contract on price, and "this will be how things are now" (till it goes further down). Where does it end? Sharing a tent and flying for food?

Make no mistake, it's a race to the bottom, and HNZ is winnning, for now.

A serious and easily answered question: Do you know for sure you are being paid the same as similarly qualified and experienced work colleagues?

[John Eacott]

A serious and easily answered question: Do you know for sure you are being paid the same as similarly qualified and experienced work colleagues?

Schedule 1, page 17 (Classification and Wage Rates) and Schedule 2, page 18 (Allowances) of the Award has the required rates. If the employees don't get those rates then FWA would be taking action.

[Twist & Shout]

Schedule 1, page 17 (Classification and Wage Rates) and Schedule 2, page 18 (Allowances) of the Award has the required rates. If the employees don't get those rates then FWA would be taking action.

John,

I believe most pilots are currently paid in excess of the advertised rates, via individual negotiations. Because, for now, they can't attract the required qualifications or experience for those rates.

I'm not certain, but this is the information circulating the industry.
Hence my genuine question.

[Twist & Shout]

BRS in OZ can't win a job and is losing work because they are too dear.
HNZ will be in the same position, when another company manages to find some pilots to "work for a bit less" with an even more "different roster" and start tendering. - Race to the bottom.

Confirm, or correct "different roster" means more time away from your family, traveling during your time, on weekends?

[trackdirect]

Why is it that HNZ are always asking for rated guys, is no one willing to train anyone anymore? Can't expect to pay peanuts and not invest in training staff, only trying to poach rated guys from other contracts so they can keep profits high!!

[Twist & Shout]

Brother

Don't take any of these comments as personal attacks.
I'd personally gladly take a lower paying job with a company that treated me better. (But this better treatment would probably have to include travel and accommodation standards if it were a touring position.)

You say you personally only have a 2.5hr flight. What if the next contract the company wins is in Darwin, Victoria, or East Timor? Then traveling in your time becomes less attractive.

You seem to be dodging answering some of the questions, which is one of the biggest concerns of the "new era". "Divided, and deceived we fall."
Also the crazy rumors grow, if no one will provide facts.

If you are willing to share, how many full weekends - Friday night till Monday morning, do you get at home with your family in your 6 week rotation? (3 weeks on, 3 weeks off.)

The rumors suggest at least some HNZ S92 pilots are required to travel on weekends, in their own time. This would indicate 2 weekends home every 6 weeks?

[Labpilot]

Brother,
If your able, could you check your PM.
Thanks,
LP

[Kulwin Park]

So they do get leave after all - 6 weeks. So 20 weeks work, 32 weeks off.

This is getting ridiculous! How do you stay current at only working 20 weeks?!

I'm curious to hear from older pilots about how the rosters used to be, and if they were fair?
Were they better flying days and rosters 10 years ago compared to what they are now?
Or are we just princesses that need to harden the F up, and work hard like the rest of the heli pilots overseas?

[Twist & Shout]

This is getting ridiculous! How do you stay current at only working 20 weeks?!

I'm curious to hear from older pilots about how the rosters used to be, and if they were fair?
Were they better flying days and rosters 10 years ago compared to what they are now?
Or are we just princesses that need to harden the F up, and work hard like the rest of the heli pilots overseas?

Where do you get that roster?
The best touring roster I'm aware of in Australia has you "on" 15 days, "off" 13.
Then annual leave for 29 days (42 minus 13 earned as field leave).
About 164 days in 365. (According to my late night maths)
Remember, these are 24hr days, away from home/loved ones/motorbikes/etc, not your average 8hr days.

It's been this way for a long time. A hard fought for compromise. One that has not created problems remaining current.

The "race to the bottom" is seeing people agree to travel and train in their own time.:yuk:
Watch the relationship failure rate go up.

Feel free to "harden the F up, and work hard like the rest of the heli pilots overseas?"

Just do the Aussies a favour, and do it overseas.:ok:

[ersa]

Some of you guys make me laugh , there are lots of unemployed pilots out there, would love a job with HNZ .

You need to wake up, the nose in the trough days are over

[Twist & Shout]

Some of you guys make me laugh , there are lots of unemployed pilots out there, would love a job with HNZ .

You need to wake up, the nose in the trough days are over

Some of you make me cry.
Can you remember a time when there wasn't "lots of unemployed pilots out there"?

What you call "Nose in the trough", many professional pilots call "remuneration commiserate with skills, experience and qualifications being utilized by the employer".

Some are talking like these jobs wouldn't exist if remuneration and lifestyle cuts weren't accepted. Do you think the oil companies would leave their workers on the rigs or something?
Do you see your petrol getting cheaper?
Are the oil companies accepting contracts with S76/B412/AS332 to save money?

HNZ claim they couldn't get pilots to work for what they offered, and needed to bring pilots from overseas on 457 visas as I understand it.

The current tactic appears to be: make secret "individual" offers until they get enough pilots. With no EBA protection, it's obvious these "deals" will be eroded as much as possible over time.

The logic on this thread seems to be: just tell the pilot we need to pay you less, and if you don't agree, there are plenty of unemployed pilots around.

Some pretty simplistic and short term ideas being justified on here.
Divided and deceived we fall "Brothers".

[fadecdegraded]

I'm with you ersa, for the mean time the glory days are over.
The Australian offshore were and probably still are some of the best employment conditions you would get anywhere in the world,but when things go south as they have done in the last few years why all the whinging and moaning. It's been good for a long time and now things are changing, it happens, well actually it is happened.
It's not just the helicopter industry that the oil downturn has affected yet some of the posts on here you would think the oil industry is there just to give pilots a job.
Everyone else has had a whinge on this thread so thought I would to even if it is from a slightly different angle

[ersa]

Twist and shout... do you work for Bristow ?, the gold plated deals are over, the oil companies now want value for money , they want the budget carriers not the legacy carriers.

In Oz Jetstar fly the same route as Qantas....for a 1/3 of the price using newer planes. This is happening to helicopter off shore operations....

[industry insider]

ersa is right. Lots of oil companies now looking at using boats to cut costs even further. All operating expenses need to be cut by another 20%. Its tough out there.

[212man]

Where do you get that roster?

Probably from my earlier post. If you work 3/3 that means 26 weeks work and 26 weeks off. If you get 6 weeks leave, that implies 20 weeks work.

The "race to the bottom" is seeing people agree to travel and train in their own time.
The agreement says that all training is done in time on duty......

Employees will not be required to obtain, maintain or renew any licence, rating or type endorsement required by the Company in their own time or at their own cost.

[Twist & Shout]

Probably from my earlier post. If you work 3/3 that means 26 weeks work and 26 weeks off. If you get 6 weeks leave, that implies 20 weeks work.


The agreement says that all training is done in time on duty......


There is some smoke and mirrors on most of these rosters.
E.g. The 3/3 might be 20 days at home 23 days away if you travel in "your" time. (And haven't got too far to go.) The "6 weeks leave" might include the 20 days at home you have "earned" during your 23 days away.

[212man]

There is some smoke and mirrors on most of these rosters.
E.g. The 3/3 might be 20 days at home 23 days away if you travel in "your" time. (And haven't got too far to go.) The "6 weeks leave" might include the 20 days at home you have "earned" during your 23 days away.

Seems pretty clear cut to me:
11.1 Annual leave
Full-time Employees are entitled to 42 days of paid annual leave, inclusive of weekends and public holidays, for each year of completed service with the Company.

For reference, my employer is one of the customers, and we do not get any additional leave when on equal time touring posts (including offshore).

[Same again]

For reference, my employer is one of the customers, and we do not get any additional leave when on equal time touring posts (including offshore).

Quite 212. A number of employers do not even pay their pilots on equal time tours when on time off. Others expect pilots to attend recurrency training in their time off. I know of no other country that gives pilots annual leave when they are on equal time tours.

Some people don't know when they are well off.

[megan]

Some people don't know when they are well offIn the race to the bottom I'm wondering when the helo industry will adopt a practice, I believe used in some airlines (737 & similar), of copilots paying the operator a per hour rate for the privilege of sitting in the seat and gaining "experience".

[Um... lifting...]

of copilots paying the operator a per hour rate for the privilege of sitting in the seat and gaining "experience".

Well, not precisely, but I do know of a fellow of experience who is paying for his own recurrent simulator training to take a position. Those nudge-nudge-wink-wink hints are being tested currently, apparently.

[rrekn]

Hmmm... Just heard that HNZ failed their CASA audit and Bristow have been stood up to provide SAR services...

[Hedski]

If that's the case it's down to gross incompetence. They had the option to get help from European/Canadian arms of the company when setting up the operation but were too arrogant to listen.

[Variable Load]

get help from European

Do HNZ have any European operations?

[212man]

Do HNZ have any European operations?
Not any more...

[Hedski]

But did at the time of planning...

[212man]

Hmmm... Just heard that HNZ failed their CASA audit and Bristow have been stood up to provide SAR services...
Hmmm.... Just heard that they did not fail it....

[Twist & Shout]

Hmmm.... Just heard that they did not fail it....

Well, it is a Rumour network.

One Rumour, among several, is they didn't have "winch" approved on their Operators Cerificate, hence the need for another operator to cover the SAR requirements. Pretty sad state of affairs if there is any truth to it. (But technically not "failing" an inspection.)

Maybe they are not only "second tier" in employment conditions, but other areas as well?

[rrekn]

I suppose that depends on your definition of fail.


The word was they got issued a 'Show Cause' notice potentially in relation to winching.


Also heard that they imported 2 Canadian SAR specialist pilots with validated CASA licenses, but as Canada don't have winching endorsements, they didn't allow them to perform any winching ops.

[212man]

Also heard that they imported 2 Canadian SAR specialist pilots with validated CASA licenses, but as Canada don't have winching endorsements, they didn't allow them to perform any winching ops.

They should have brought in some ex-UK Coastguard S92 pilots. Oh - wait, the UK doesn't have winch endorsements either! Sounds like a BS finding.

At least I'm sure it was entirely impartial and absolutely no prospects of any COI issues.......

[rrekn]

Knowing who the inspectors were, I'm sure there wasn't even the hint of that! ;)

[Twist & Shout]

I suppose that depends on your definition of fail.


The word was they got issued a 'Show Cause' notice potentially in relation to winching.


Also heard that they imported 2 Canadian SAR specialist pilots with validated CASA licenses, but as Canada don't have winching endorsements, they didn't allow them to perform any winching ops.

457 (or whatever) Visa is required, due the massive shortage of qualified pilots in Australia. :yuk:

[driftwood1]

Not a big deal, paperwork mostly. won't take long for it to be all up and running, it will all be sorted in a couple of weeks.

Meanwhile we are flat out busy with crew change for the new inpex facilities and now the new shell prelude floating lng has just arrived as well and inpex fpso on the way.

Failing a CASA audit is not a big deal !! Interesting....

[Hedski]

They were offered the S92 current SAR training team who were immediately available in Canada after the Halifax SAR contract had finished and most were rejected. TRI's wouldn't be allowed by CASA to transfer qualifications. And to top it all off no line trainers or SAR 92 captains with any experience on type. Sounds very much like visas or not foreigners definitely not welcome.

[Frying Pan]

Hedski, visas or not. Australia has a surplus of qualified pilots at the moment and frankly, it won't get better. You're unlikely to get a CASA official to admit that foreigners aren't welcome. As a gauge, on another thread, co-pilots are required however they must already have the B412 rating on their licence. That's a big ask for a 500 hour total time position. But there will be plenty of over qualified pilots throwing their resumes in the ring for that.

Cheers FP

[gulliBell]

...As a gauge, on another thread, co-pilots are required however they must already have the B412 rating on their licence. That's a big ask for a 500 hour total time position...

I think that job posting also required co-pilots to have a Command IR. That will filter out even more, but still, plenty of applicants who'll have a tick in every box.

[Twist & Shout]

Foreign pilots have always been welcome in Australia.
However, rightly (in my opinion) or wrongly, Australian pilots get priority in the current tough times.
I'd suspect it's similar in other countries.

[gulliBell]

Foreign pilots have always been welcome in Australia....

By employers, yes. Not by Australian pilots who have been passed over for Australian jobs by foreign pilots.

[Twist & Shout]

I personally work with many foreign pilots, almost all of whom are now Australian pilots. Some still live in Australia's most Eastern state - New Zealand. (Almost spiritual Aussies, and covered by the two way "Trans Tasman agreement".

Again, in the current employment environment, bringing pilots in on any kind of visa is a total BS move, and reflects dreadfully on any company low class enough to do it. (And reflects dreadfully on any government incompetent enough to allow it.)

[Twist & Shout]

Drifty



Didn't actually "fail" it so correct, not big deal.

So you can squash the Rumour that someone else is covering HNZs SAR contract due the "not a big deal" issue?

[driftwood1]

So you can squash the Rumour that someone else is covering HNZs SAR contract due the "not a big deal" issue?

Strikes me as a big deal when another operator is Fulfilling the contract which HNZ is meant to be

[nbl]

I hope BRS have upped the rates for the extension until the paper work issues have been cleared up.

[Hedski]

Foreign pilots have always been welcome in Australia.
However, rightly (in my opinion) or wrongly, Australian pilots get priority in the current tough times.
I'd suspect it's similar in other countries.

But when those local pilots do not have any experience on the complex type being used, or any relevant role experience in a modern glass cockpit aircraft, the pitfalls of which have grave consequences unless the proper experience and currency, and refuse to listen to those who have that experience and advice to offer at least in the short term to get things moving..... That's the first hole in the swiss cheese.

[Cyclic Hotline]

I'm certain that I heard a story once of an almost identical situation on the Brent offshore contract, years ago. North Scottish were awarded the contracted with AS365's, but had been unable to get all the crews to the required levels of experience and currency to meet Shell's demanding requirements for the contract. At the last minute, Shell approached Bristow with a request to extend the contract on an interim basis until North Scottish could fulfill the contractual requirements. Bristow responded that they certainly could, the instant that Shell signed a new multi-year year contract, or the machines would be leaving at midnight on the day of contract termination and be re-assigned to other contracts and be unavailable.

The contract was signed and continued for a good number of years and I believe that North Scottish was in some manner compensated for the investment they had made.

Of course, this may just be a good bar version of the actual events? I'm sure someone will know that real version.

[gulliBell]

But when those local pilots do not have any experience on the complex type being used...

There are plenty of qualified and experienced local pilots that get ticks in all the boxes. Operators employ foreign pilots over qualified local pilots for reasons known only to them.

[Scardy]

Operators employ foreign pilots over qualified local pilots for reasons known only to them.
Possibly one issue may be that the CDN drivers are paid far less then the local AUS crews? Just curious?

[Hedski]

There are plenty of qualified and experienced local pilots that get ticks in all the boxes. Operators employ foreign pilots over qualified local pilots for reasons known only to them.

SAR S92 pilots? Surely still employed by Bristow if they're running another SAR S92, no? Glass cockpit SAR pilots then, no? What baffles me here is not the local or not connection, it's the fact that experienced training options were offered but the local collective insisted it wasn't required when it clearly is. Just the fact that this option had foreign elements seemed to be part of the issue.

[gulliBell]

...Glass cockpit SAR pilots then, no?...

Glass cockpit helicopters have been operating in Australia for the past 20 years...SAR optioned helicopters even longer. S92 is a more recent introduction to the national fleet. But a helicopter is a helicopter so surely there is ample local experience out there to fully crew all Australian requirements without needing to import foreign labor. It's a sign of the times moving away from expatriate helicopter pilots: China, Thailand, Indonesia, Nigeria, and many other jurisdictions are gradually closing up shop to foreigners and hiring and training only national pilots.

[Twist & Shout]

Glass cockpit helicopters have been operating in Australia for the past 20 years...SAR optioned helicopters even longer. S92 is a more recent introduction to the national fleet. But a helicopter is a helicopter so surely there is ample local experience out there to fully crew all Australian requirements without needing to import foreign labor. It's a sign of the times moving away from expatriate helicopter pilots: China, Thailand, Indonesia, Nigeria, and many other jurisdictions are gradually closing up shop to foreigners and hiring and training only national pilots.

There are Australian experienced S92 SAR pilots, including the ones working for another operator, who are providing the contracted SAR service HNZ are failing to suppply. There are also numerous highly trained EC225 SAR pilots, now with S92 endorsements and experience.

I'd suggest, as mentioned by others, the reason for hiring overseas crew is down to the lower pay and conditions they might be prepared to accept. (Especially if still residing in a country with a lower cost of living.) Most experienced Australian pilots are hesitant to work for a company leading the race to the bottom.

Ironically, the rumour is; that part of the reason for HNZs inability to provide contracted service is the failure of some overseas crew to validate/convert their qualifications correctly/sufficiently.

[Hedski]

Glass cockpit helicopters have been operating in Australia for the past 20 years...SAR optioned helicopters even longer. S92 is a more recent introduction to the national fleet. But a helicopter is a helicopter so surely there is ample local experience out there to fully crew all Australian requirements without needing to import foreign labor. It's a sign of the times moving away from expatriate helicopter pilots: China, Thailand, Indonesia, Nigeria, and many other jurisdictions are gradually closing up shop to foreigners and hiring and training only national pilots.

With modern fully automated glass cockpit all weather sar aircraft your assertion is absolutely not the case, as others have found out elsewhere to great cost and sacrifice. HNZ were offered current crews flying the very SAR airframe they later received but rejected this option even as a startup assistance, this would have been the quickest and crucially safest option but was rejected in favour of nationalism. No foreign pilots have been allowed near their SAR operation so any foreign pilots not validating licences in time etc certainly has not affected this. But it is true to say HNZ have rejected applications from former employees of other companies who were type rated and local residents and experienced despite them being short on crew. Also the fact that those appointed as line trainers are new to type is a disturbing situation given the massive s92 experience brought in from elsewhere and not being utilised to its maximum.

[industry insider]

Ironically, the rumour is; that part of the reason for HNZs inability to provide contracted service is the failure of some overseas crew to validate/convert their qualifications correctly/sufficiently.

That statement is in itself quite ironic.

HNZ were offered current crews flying the very SAR airframe they later received

Strange, HNZ hasn't yet received a SAR airframe.

[gulliBell]

With modern fully automated glass cockpit all weather sar aircraft your assertion is absolutely not the case...

I include the Lloyd/CHC RAAF SAR as an example of a legitimate SAR capability, although not full glass. And we had modern fully automated glass cockpit helicopters at Esso 20 years ago. Pilots who've been flying those types of helicopters for the past 20 years, and there are plenty of them, would be perfectly capable of doing the same in an S92. And I point out, when we first got the full-glass cockpits at Esso, nobody had any experience on glass cockpit helicopters then. We just got in it, got out there, and got the job done, no drama at all. These over-blown experience requirements that Aviation Advisors mysteriously conjur up and cut and paste into contracts are a joke and shouldn't be used as an excuse for an operator to say "we can't find experienced local pilots to do the job". And I also point out, Esso have been flying helicopters in Bass Strait for 50 years without a single accident.

[Hedski]

I include the Lloyd/CHC RAAF SAR as an example of a legitimate SAR capability, although not full glass. And we had modern fully automated glass cockpit helicopters at Esso 20 years ago. Pilots who've been flying those types of helicopters for the past 20 years, and there are plenty of them, would be perfectly capable of doing the same in an S92. And I point out, when we first got the full-glass cockpits at Esso, nobody had any experience on glass cockpit helicopters then. We just got in it, got out there, and got the job done, no drama at all. These over-blown experience requirements that Aviation Advisors mysteriously conjur up and cut and paste into contracts are a joke and shouldn't be used as an excuse for an operator to say "we can't find experienced local pilots to do the job". And I also point out, Esso have been flying helicopters in Bass Strait for 50 years without a single accident.

All of my comments are in reference to the SAR S92, which was Canadian registered but is now on a VH- reg. And just getting out there etc. is the exact attitude when it comes to all weather low level ops including night that gets someone killed. Given crew change flights are day only I don't agree with what you're saying.

[[email protected]]

There are plenty of people who will claim to be SAR experienced and SAR capable - only to be caught out when the chips are down. An easy label to claim but not an easy one to own properly.

[Hedski]

Exactly. And when everyone in theatre has only flown by day as regulations prevent night ops who's got the ability to go live on a new type with more capability to get you into trouble as much as out of it operating at night when nobody there has before!!!

[Twist & Shout]

Exactly. And when everyone in theatre has only flown by day as regulations prevent night ops who's got the ability to go live on a new type with more capability to get you into trouble as much as out of it operating at night when nobody there has before!!!

I think you, like me and many on here, are making statements based on partial information.
Regulations don't prevent night ops. Most OS contracts don't allow normal passenger transfers at night. Medevacs, and even freight only flights at night are ok, and are not unusual for regular OS flight crews. Many of the Australian SAR crews are NVG qualified.

[gulliBell]

There are plenty of people who will claim to be SAR experienced and SAR capable - only to be caught out when the chips are down...

And that S92 SAR crew in Ireland who were plenty experienced and SAR capable still got caught out, and caught out in a routine aspect of what they normally are required to do. My point being, the experience being asked for to crew these S92 in Australia doesn't make sense when crew of this level of experience are still having CFIT accidents in serviceable helicopters. Precluding Australian pilots for these jobs based on there not being Australian pilots who have the "right" numbers in their logbook doesn't make sense. Unless it's cheaper for the operator to hire foreign pilots to improve their margin on a contract that they bid low on. Then it becomes a question of Industrial legality.

[gulliBell]

..Regulations don't prevent night ops. Most OS contracts don't allow normal passenger transfers at night. Medevacs, and even freight only flights at night are ok, and are not unusual for regular OS flight crews..

In Saudi Arabia passenger transfer at night offshore was a routine aspect of the job, no drama at all. I actually preferred flying at night than during the day. But yes, in Australia, the only night OS - for me anyway - was in response to some emergency (non-production related) situation. I don't recall ever flying passengers at night in Australia.

[kdj123]

Stop perpetuating the glass cockpit gotta have time on type BS mr. aviation advisor. Medium helicopters generally have 2 engines, 2 hydraulic systems, a main transmission, various gearboxes, a DC and an AC electrical system, navigation and communication equipment. Just because the information is displayed on "ooooh glass displays" doesn't change the information. Companies should be hiring experienced local helicopter pilots without time on type and giving them the ratings. This would happen more if it wasn't for bozo aviation advisors advising only to hire with "minimum xxx hours" on type

[gulliBell]

Stop perpetuating the glass cockpit gotta have time on type BS mr. aviation advisor.... etc etc

I agree with you, 100%

[Scardy]

top perpetuating the glass cockpit gotta have time on type BS mr. aviation advisor. Medium helicopters generally have 2 engines, 2 hydraulic systems, a main transmission, various gearboxes, a DC and an AC electrical system, navigation and communication equipment. Just because the information is displayed on "ooooh glass displays" doesn't change the information. Companies should be hiring experienced local helicopter pilots without time on type and giving them the ratings. This would happen more if it wasn't for bozo aviation advisors advising only to hire with "minimum xxx hours" on type

kdj123,
Are you advocating that a potential SAR crew (both FO and Capt) straight out of a simulator, even having completed the SAR Traiing course that deals with the SAR modes of the S92 both be placed directly on a contract to fulfill "all weather" SAR support? Just curious.

[heli1980]

kdj123,
Are you advocating that a potential SAR crew (both FO and Capt) straight out of a simulator, even having completed the SAR Traiing course that deals with the SAR modes of the S92 both be placed directly on a contract to fulfill "all weather" SAR support? Just curious.

This aint the North Sea or Ireland. The weather is pretty good at this time of year. Maybe come wet season they'll figure out that fancy FMS. I mean its not like we only got mobile phone technology last month or the personal computer. Smart bunch down here sometimes, we even managed to invent WIFI.

I still havnt figured out this spell check yet thou!?

This is Australia and when times are tough, we should look after local first.

[Scardy]

Maybe come wet season they'll figure out that fancy FMS.

Goodday heli1980,

It is not the fancy FMS that I was referring to. It is the complexity of the higher modes (SAR modes) of the S92. Yes, I agree AUS pilots are totally capable of figuring out the systems. What I was referring g too was the fact that does a operator wish to place two crew, new to the system together in a aircraft that both have little time on (only sim).
Regarding your all weather statement I agree that your weather may be different but I am assuming that the crew can / may be tasked at night. Were I cone from night equals dark, dark is dark and can be just as challenging as solid IF. It actually dark on a clear night sometimes leads to a false sense of "this should be easy" and crews may not be as alert as solid IMC. Been there done that:ugh:

[gulliBell]

..What I was referring g too was the fact that does a operator wish to place two crew, new to the system together in a aircraft that both have little time on (only sim)...

That never happens. The operator will have a CASA approved training manual which will describe what they need to do, in addition to the sim qualification, to put 2 crew in an operational aircraft.
Something like, the newly minted S92 SAR Captain will need x hours of supervised line operational flying with a training Captain before being released to the line with a co-pilot. Same for the co-pilot, so much supervised flying with an experienced Captain. You wouldn't get 2 newly minted S92 pilots fresh out of a zero time sim qualification being crewed together.

[SLFMS]

I think the point Gullible was trying to make has been missed.
Australia has all weather SAR experience. For 25 years the RAAFSAR contract has required an all weather capability auto hover aircraft. Granted it is a different aircraft however the principal of night operation remains the same and is not new to the country. There would be no shortage of pilots that have overwater night experience.
I personally would much prefer a new "modern glass cockpit" machine than an S76 that is under powered with a dated auto hover system that has some interesting quirks that require immediate intervention lest you get wet feet.

[gulliBell]

..I personally would much prefer a new "modern glass cockpit" machine than an S76 that is under powered...

CHC (Australia) are getting better helicopters. They just got a SAR contract with Esso using AW139. Eventually that sort of capability will take over from those under-powered old RAAF contracted S76A+.

[Ascend Charlie]

Whatever they get, it will be better than what we used in the 70s and 80s - B model Hueys, 1 engine, no autopilot, no GPS, no FMS, no radalt (though some did have one) and only a single ADF and an FM homing set.

We got the job done then, they will do a better job now.

[gulliBell]

- B model Hueys...

A real helicopter. Not many buttons to push. I only flew in one once, in 1981 out of Campbell Barracks in Perth. Lots of rides in H-models in the 80's, usually in the rain with the doors off and landing in a festering swamp. Mind you, flying in a 76 with the doors on you get just about as wet.

[rrekn]

gulliBell,


Are they bringing in new machines like the for the Navy contract?

[NumptyAussie]

gulliBell,


Are they bringing in new machines like the for the Navy contract?

Not new ones..

[gulliBell]

..Are they bringing in new machines like the for the Navy contract?

I don't know if they're bringing in a new machine for this contract. It's only for one helicopter. Esso were self-sufficient for their own SAR requirements in Bass Strait for 50 years. However since they recently replaced six S76's with four new AW139's they can no longer cover their own SAR. Hence why CHC are picking up the slack for them. I don't know why Esso just don't go and buy another AW139. The monthly standing charge on a contractor supplied SAR capability will be costing them plenty. Anyway, the cost is just barrels of oil.

[rrekn]

Cracking paint job on the Esso machines.


https://cdn.jetphotos.com/400/5/19110_1482491054.jpg?v=0

[gulliBell]

Yep. Quite a radical departure from their traditional red, white and blue paint scheme.

Good to see new helicopters being brought into Australia. I wonder if we've seen the last new S76 delivered into Australia. AW is taking over the helicopter world. Queensland Rescue, Toll, and now Esso all buying new AW139.

[rrekn]

I think we have, compared to the AW139 the S-76D is smaller, slower, more expensive and with less range.


Until the H160 comes on line, you won't see another medium coming into the country.

[NumptyAussie]

I think you will find that there will be 2 x AW189 aircraft able to be configured as LIMSAR in Australia by the end of 2017.

[fadecdegraded]

At the expense of being the only one that dosnt know what is LIMSAR I will ask, I have the SAR but sorted but don't know about the LIM.
What company is this for.

[212man]

At the expense of being the only one that dosnt know what is LIMSAR I will ask, I have the SAR but sorted but don't know about the LIM.
What company is this for.

Limited. Basically, day only and with fewer bells and whistles. Typically with a non-dedicated crew.

[P2bleed]

As this thread is in regards to the SAR contract, what requirements what does the actual contact require?
Yes its bound to be day/night and only offshore?
Is the SAR A/C going to be utilised for Medevacs.

[gulliBell]

As this thread is in regards to the SAR contract, what requirements what does the actual contact require?


One aircraft, 5 days per week, day time only. There is no night offshore flying in Bass Strait, except in an emergency. Esso can look after night standby themselves without needing a contractor, as they've always done.

[Impress to inflate]

A quick question, if HNZ were conducting winching in any form weather it be for training or for real, then if as some of you say, it wasn't on their AOC, I take it that it would have invalidated their insurance ?

[gulliBell]

...I take it that it would have invalidated their insurance ?

Just my wild guess, winching despite winching not being on their AOC probably wouldn't invalidate their insurance. No different to a pilot busting whatever rules and having a prang, the insurance still pays out the loss.

[terminus mos]

As this thread is in regards to the SAR contract, what requirements what does the actual contact require?
Yes its bound to be day/night and only offshore?
Is the SAR A/C going to be utilised for Medevacs.

Which contract? Broome HNZ SAR is 24 hour Medevac with day winch (LIMSAR) using dedicated crew. Will become 24 hour SAR Medevac Q1 2018

[NumptyAussie]

Which contract? Broome HNZ SAR is 24 hour Medevac with day winch (LIMSAR) using dedicated crew. Will become 24 hour SAR Medevac Q1 2018

If HNZ/PHI can get the relevant CASA approval for conduction 4 axis auto hover let downs in IFR conditions...

[NumptyAussie]

Numpy - Lots of HNZ knocking here. HNZ has the experience and Bristows got it so it must mean that someone in CASA can grant it.

Hey my Brother, I am not HNZ bashing...I bash all companies equally!

[Always look on the]

There are plenty of people who will claim to be SAR experienced and SAR capable - only to be caught out when the chips are down. An easy label to claim but not an easy one to own properly.

Hmmm... Just heard that HNZ failed their CASA audit and Bristow have been stood up to provide SAR services...

Maybe these two statements are linked and CASA are doing what CASA they are mandated to do.

[megan]

I don't know why Esso just don't go and buy another AW139. The monthly standing charge on a contractor supplied SAR capability will be costing them plentyThe expense and trouble of keeping crews up to speed for the task, particularly night I would guess. The company is very risk adverse.

[Mark Six]

The cost to ESSO for the contractor (CHC) would be minimal as they are just using the aircraft and crew already being provided as SAR standby for the RAAF at East Sale.

[driftwood1]

The cost to ESSO for the contractor (CHC) would be minimal as they are just using the aircraft and crew already being provided as SAR standby for the RAAF at East Sale.

So are you saying they are using one aircraft on two seperate contracts are you.........

[hookesjoint]

I'm not surprised HNZ failed the CASA audit If the latest rumour on the street in Broome is true that HNZ had an "incident" whilst winch training where the winch cable recoiled up just missing the main rotors and wrapped itself around the winch!!

[[email protected]]

What are HNZ's credentials in the SAR role? Do they have a decent track record or are they another 'anyone can do SAR' outfit?

Failing an audit would seem to answer that question.

[Always look on the]

Not a big deal, paperwork mostly. won't take long for it to be all up and running, it will all be sorted in a couple of weeks. QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Brother;9847698]Drifty

…... Its just extending a bit until the paperwork issues are cleared up. Really, no big deal as I said.

Brother, you have said that you work for HNZ. Are you employed in the PR department and do you have a direct dial straight into CASA?
Still as Rrekn opened this thread in 2016, surely it won't be long now......Will it?

[[email protected]]

So how have they been allowed to fail to meet the contract start date and fail to provide what I understood to be an all-weather 24/7 SAR service?

Glad I don't live there or run the risk of needing rescuing!

[Hedski]

It goes back to some of the previous statements which were quickly put down by the localism brigade. HNZ Oz have had plenty of offers of actual help/experience from elsewhere for setting up SAR on the S92 and everything has been knocked back with a 'we know what we're doing' attitude. Funny old thing that was the attitude in SAR for the S92 intro in CHC Ireland and look how that ended.

[[email protected]]

Hedski - :ok:

[drugsdontwork]

Fair comments I guess but in this field we all live in glass houses to some extent. The RAF SARF was hardly perfect Crab. Forty year old aircraft, committed to pretty much everything under the aircraft and some dire manning issues towards the end. Striving for excellence is great but look hard enough and you can find holes anywhere.

[barbados sky]

I'm not surprised HNZ failed the CASA audit If the latest rumour on the street in Broome is true that HNZ had an "incident" whilst winch training where the winch cable recoiled up just missing the main rotors and wrapped itself around the winch!!

Good Heavens, Watt ever next?

[[email protected]]

Drugsdontwork - drawing parallels between an underfunded Mil system with ancient aircraft (which we all knew needed replacing) and a modern SAR setup with new and shiny kit doesn't really prove anything.

The point is that if you claim to be able to provide a service, and win a bid based on those claims, you should be able to deliver - on time and to the full spec. Anything else smacks of incompetence or even fraud.

[Hedski]

I'd go with incompetence. The solution was there from before the go live date but conveniently ignored at the whim of those who just don't like foreigners and are too arrogant to listen to those with greater relevant experience. SAR 92 captains new to type who's only previous SAR experience was day only on a non all-weather BK117...!!!??? Amongst those who commented previously that there's as good experience in the Oz offshore heli community as anywhere what are their thoughts on line trainers who are new to type and the recent HNZ 139 that almost flew into the water flying day vmc?

[Mark Six]

I'd go with incompetence. The solution was there from before the go live date but conveniently ignored at the whim of those who just don't like foreigners and are too arrogant to listen to those with greater relevant experience. SAR 92 captains new to type who's only previous SAR experience was day only on a non all-weather BK117...!!!??? Amongst those who commented previously that there's as good experience in the Oz offshore heli community as anywhere what are their thoughts on line trainers who are new to type and the recent HNZ 139 that almost flew into the water flying day vmc?

HNZ might have a couple of contracts in Australia but they are a NZ company, not Oz. Most of their pilots and management are Kiwis. They do not even operate 139's in Australia AFAIK. Don't tar the entire Oz offshore community with the same brush.

[terminus mos]

Hedski

SAR 92 captains new to type who's only previous SAR experience was day only on a non all-weather BK117...!!!???

Evidently you haven't read the Clients' SAR Standard documents?

[Hedski]

Hedski



Evidently you haven't read the Clients' SAR Standard documents?

No I have not. Does that change my assertion? No.

[gulliBell]

Line trainers new to type is no big deal. Presumably the customer has specified experience requirements for the various pilot roles, and if the pilots HNZ has recruited for the contract meet those requirements then that's a tick in that box. If you scrape through with bare minimums above contract requirements it's still a tick in the box. That's all they will be aiming for, getting a tick in every box. Go cheap on the price, provide nothing more than asked for.

[Hedski]

Line trainers new to type is no big deal. Presumably the customer has specified experience requirements for the various pilot roles, and if the pilots HNZ has recruited for the contract meet those requirements then that's a tick in that box. If you scrape through with bare minimums above contract requirements it's still a tick in the box. That's all they will be aiming for, getting a tick in every box. Go cheap on the price, provide nothing more than asked for.

Yep. They had the chance for better standard but didn't take.

[[email protected]]

Ticking the 'bare-minimum' boxes is a pretty crap way of providing an all weather SAR service:ugh:

[Twist & Shout]

Ticking the 'bare-minimum' boxes is a pretty crap way of providing an all weather SAR service:ugh:

Yes. But apparently it's the brave new world we all now have to survive in.

The race to the bottom currently underway is very likely to result in undesirable consequences.


Hopefully the money saved can pay for a bigger "safety department" which can dream up some fabulous acronyms. "Bowties" will save the world. :ugh:

[tistisnot]

Tis not a brave new world; always been like it in my 30 years ..... more established companies expand training and safety at behest of aviation advisors, to gain trust and hopefully prolong contracts. Oil prices crash or new operations push aviation advisors to one side, and the bean-counters rule the roost. Crying 'snot fair doesn't help - it's probably the sort of innovative, risk taking commercial success shown by the new upstart operator that started their own company previously!

Bow ties ....... if all pilots understood the bowties (in conjunction with studying accident reports), and if the safety department could find a better way to disseminate them, pilots might understand more fully why procedures are in place or checklists are set out ...... then perhaps several of the more prevalent CRM / CFIT failure accidents might have been avoided?

[albatross]

I dislike "Bowties" as well as the overuse of "Risk Assessments" which, even though a good idea, can turn into a 1hr debate as we assess every possible concern, including asteroid hits on the planet. Some folks seem to think we start at the premiss of "We are not going!" and there is a prize for not departing.

[tistisnot]

The bowties should already be in place for any standard operation; risk assessment should there be a chance of going outside those norms. Short and sweet - agreed. Don't think I was ever accused of not wishing to depart ......

[fadecdegraded]

I think the blame for the cheap part, if it is true has to lie with the oil/gas company that has contracted HNZ.
If money wasn't an option why did they change from BHL to HNZ, especially if Bristows were so shiny with all the SAR guys to match.
The company's letting the contracts out are the ones driving the prices down so if HNZ can do it cheaper good on them but the customer gets what they pay for.

[NumptyAussie]

I suspect the rush to a cheaper service will only change when a evenings mainstream news coverage starts with pictures of a lot of people in orange being pulled from the water. Australian operators & O&G companies are fortunate in that the rest of the country has no idea what goes in in the NWS or Timor Sea.

[fadecdegraded]

Except the customer isn't getting the All-weather SAR service they asked operators to bid for! Maybe if BHL had tendered to 'deliver' by not even delivering day only SAR, 3 months after the contract start date and All-weather SAR possibly 6-12 months after that, they would have been slightly more competitive too!!

Like I said you get what you pay for, I'm sure BHL have some pretty clever marketing people that know a lot more detail of the contract than I certainly do and I suspect more than you as well and would have put in a price to reflect the service they could provide, if price wasn't an issue for the customer why would they have not chosen BHL?

[[email protected]]

I think that is the whole point here - it costs a certain amount to provide a 24-Hr all weather SAR service, BHL know what that is and will have bid with a modest (or even zero) profit on top (I think they bid at a loss for UKSAR).

It is easy enough to undercut the competition if you are prepared to cut corners or don't accurately know what the costs of that service are.

So in going for the lowest bidder, the customer has ended up with a bag of crap instead of what they asked for. Surely CASA should pull the plug on this operation or the customer should sack HNZ.

[hookesjoint]

And its completely disingenuous for HNZ to blame the regulator for being 3 months late on delivery of a SAR service. Its any operators responsibility inline with bidding a contract to ensure they have the ops manuals, maintenance systems, training procedures and practices ready to go. If the regulator does an audit and finds you completely wanting in these areas you can hardly blame CASA for not having your s#@t in a pile its complete garbage!!!

[[email protected]]

Well if another company came along and took your job away from you by underbidding and then failing to deliver, how would you feel?

[tistisnot]

Crab, it's taking you a long time to understand the commercial world! They didn't just come along, they were probably invited. And it would still hurt if the successful new bidder provided more money and a better service. Swear, curse, join management ..... but take it as an opportunity for pastures new!

[[email protected]]

No, the commercial world is very easy to understand - money talks and everything else comes second - doesn't make it good practice though.

Keynsian economics suggests that competition lowers prices and raises quality - sadly that theory doesn't survive first contact with reality where we just see lower prices and poorer standards, not a great way to do aviation.

[hookesjoint]

I don't know about that, however the shame is its bad for the whole industry when such poor performance in such a critical role is allowed to enter the fray. I don't know how you feel about doing early and late shuttles involving two hours at night overwater in an extremely remote area without any SAR coverage, doesn't fill me with joy.

[[email protected]]

Bobbin' in the Oggin in the dark - no thanks.

[Twist & Shout]

Bobbin' in the Oggin in the dark - no thanks.


What are you worried about?
Your life jacket has a light, and whistle, for attracting attention!




At least it's warm water.........

[Nescafe]

Your life jacket has a light, and whistle, for attracting attention

Yes, the attention of sharks!

[[email protected]]

Twist - have you ever done night wets? Not a nice environment even in warm water when you find yourself alone.

[ersa]

Don't worry about the sharks , its the croc's that will finish you

[hookesjoint]

Don't worry about the sharks , its the croc's that will finish you

Or incompetent SAR operators like HNZ!!:ugh::ugh:

[[email protected]]

the company with the clever marketing people that you are now defending who won sar and took your job in englandYes, but that only happened because the Govt and MoD were determined to divest themselves of costs and especially those of new helicopters.

The difference is the BHL did stand up on time, albeit not quite within the contract terms as far as aircraft were concerned.

[rrekn]

ATSB is investigating...


https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2017/aair/ao-2017-095/

[Always look on the]

Seems to have all gone quiet....

#tumbleweed

[Always look on the]

Well if another company came along and took your job away from you by underbidding and then failing to deliver, how would you feel? Crab it would appear that you are soothsayer.

Brother, I gather that there is time for you to qualify as a SAR pilot after all...:rolleyes:

I have heard that Bristow have been asked to provide (continue to provide) LIMSAR for Shell and Inpex until the end of the year, due to the ongoing ATSB/CASA investigation into HNZ's "serious training incident".

That will be at least 6 months since the proposed contract start date, which was already watered down to be LIMSAR only.

Shell and Inpex are expecting HNZ to graduate to AWSAR 24/7 in February 18. Surely that can't be a realistic possibility, with the rate of progress at the moment?

Given that there are thousands of workers off shore, with Shell's flagship vessel Prelude inplace and the Ichthys at full capacity, the imminent cyclone season must be making the management of those companies slightly nervous (or maybe embarrassed).

To think that they could have had a 24/7 solution in place from the start.

Is there a precedent of an operator wining a contract (a contract that appears to have been modified to suit them at the last minute) and then not providing the service for at least 6 months? Surely the clients would tear it up and realise their mistake.

Is there anybody in the industry who can explain this abject failing?

Surely it cant be price alone? The HNZ bid must have been really cheap in comparison to the competitors, and presumably there are penalties for not fronting up?

Anyway safety first eh.......?:oh:

[[email protected]]

It is barking mad - someone will get hung drawn and quartered if there is an incident/accident that needs a full SAR response and people die:ugh:

I think the old adage of 'If you think safety is expensive, try having an accident' applies here.

[industry insider]

It is barking mad - someone will get hung drawn and quartered if there is an incident/accident that needs a full SAR response and people die

Crab, you are speaking rubbish based on your limited industry knowledge outside England.

There is no regulatory requirement for Full SAR or any SAR in Australia. Oil companies provide Dedicated Lim SAR equipped aircraft with crew on site, 24 hour medevac cover incorporating Doctor and Paramedic on the helicopter as well as a 24 hour dedicated standby medical jet service also medically crewed.

Full SAR is a nice to have. With the above in place funded by industry on a “voluntary” basis, no one is going to get hung drawn and quartered.

[hookesjoint]

Just because it's not required by regulations doesn't make it right, I wouldn't want to bet the coroner will always take the same view!

[Always look on the]

When I saw your moniker 'industry insider' i naively thought that we might get an answer to some of the questions. :*
Its good to know that boats don't sink at night, people don't fall over board after sunset, and nobody gets ill on a vessel without a deck after 6pm. Oh yeah and the weather is always good in Australia at night too.:=

[John Eacott]

Regardless, I.I. is quite right about the SAR support here in Oz. We're not supported in any way, shape or form in the manner that you may be used to in the UK before or after CivSAR came about.

Indeed, primary responsibility for SAR in most States is held by the State police force regardless of the capability or otherwise of their air assets. The coroner would be most unlikely to make an adverse finding because of a shortfall in a private company funded system.

[hookesjoint]

On these multi billion dollar projects in places as extremely remote as the Browse basin the duty and onus of care for the welfare of the offshore workers should reside with the project leads.

Last time I flew past Browse Island I certainly didn't see a police station!

[NumptyAussie]

Shell did set a precedence with the EC 225 AWSAR. HNZ did win the tender with a transitional bid. Unfortunately for them and Shell (& lastly, in the corporate minds, the offshore worker) this service had been a little slow in getting off the ground. If Shell were serious about safety, then they would have at least a medivac aircraft stationed offshore. This would half the time that it would take to recover a casualty to the beach..

[Always look on the]

Industry Insider - a quick look at the Shell Australia website sees them (and their partner at the time CHC) proudly proclaiming an AWSAR service in Broome from 2015. Shell's contract for covering the Prelude FLNG was for AWSAR, so it appears they were willing to pay for an AWSAR service. Perhaps their partner in this joint venture doesn't agree and its them that talked the quality down?

[Always look on the]

Numpty, the UK version of that - Jigsaw - didn't really take-off (no pun unintended...). I understand that the concept was for several helos off shore but it settled with one, based a platform on occasions but more often back at Aberdeen.

[NumptyAussie]

Numpty, the UK version of that - Jigsaw - didn't really take-off (no pun unintended...). I understand that the concept was for several helos off shore but it settled with one, based a platform on occasions but more often back at Aberdeen.

It did seem to take off in Norway..

1TZ-bS_2UCE

[[email protected]]

But when they were required to do some actual SAR, they didn't perform very well.

[NumptyAussie]

But when they were required to do some actual SAR, they didn't perform very well.

You really do seem to be a bitter old man Crab....

[John Eacott]

Last time I flew past Browse Island I certainly didn't see a police station!

We never flew past: always had to land and pump fuel :p

But what that has to do with the price of fish fillets and this thread......:confused:

[hookesjoint]

Your comment John re the ridiculous situation whereby the state police having primacy for SAR response with no appropriate assets and the nearest location 400+ kms away from the Browse patch.

[hookesjoint]

None I would think, certainly of the larger or more complex contracts - the proof is in the on time delivery; as to the maturity and true capability of the organisation.

[barbados sky]

None I would think, certainly of the larger or more complex contracts - the proof is in the on time delivery; as to the maturity and true capability of the organisation. I disagree on your viewpoint.

HNZ has a global reach now with crew change contracts in Australia partnered with PHI and the now famous SAR contract. They have contracts in Asia and until recently in Halifax also teamed with PHI. Remember, HNZ is now a brand as well as just the old HNZ.

Yes, the SAR contract in Australia has been delayed by some unforeseen circumstances but to dismiss HNZ as incapable is foolhardy. Like it or not, HNZ is providing a service that its customers seem to like at a price the customers seem to like. Oil is now set at around $50, noncompetitive operators who misjudge their competition will be the losers.

[hookesjoint]

That global reach doesn’t seem to help!

[[email protected]]

Numpty Aussie - not bitter, just a SAR professional who is tired of companies/outfits claiming, under false pretenses, to have what for many of us were hard-won experiences, skills and abilities.

Barbados Like it or not, HNZ is providing a service that its customers seem to like at a price the customers seem to like that's exactly the point - they are NOT providing the service that their customers asked for.

[megan]

Your comment John re the ridiculous situation whereby the state police having primacy for SAR responseCertainly was the case in my part of Oz, they would call in the necessary assets needed to effect rescue, and exercised control. They had a unit dedicated to the SAR management role. Could have changed since my day.

https://www.amsa.gov.au/search-and-rescue/australias-search-and-rescue-system/sar-arrangements-in-australia/

[Squeaks]

Inpex aviation managers have been protecting HNZ/PHI since the start, even not allowing SHELL auditors to audit HNZ/PHI when they were in Broome auditing CHC and BRS earlier in the year.


332tiger (http://www.pprune.org/members/467691-332tiger), that statement is manifestly untrue. I'd be very careful saying such things, especially given the Announcement (http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/notice-regarding-post-responsibility-anonymity-252.html) at the head of every forum: Notice regarding post responsibility and anonymity (http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/notice-regarding-post-responsibility-anonymity-252.html) :hmm:

[Brother]

HNZ have partnered with a Japanese company (even went to trouble of getting "INPEX" embroidered on passenger seats and painted on the airframes)

332 Tiggy

I fly these aircraft every day and do the preflight pilot inspection. Theres no INPEX logo painted on them at all and no logo sewn into the seats.

[Always look on the]

Squeaks and Brother...

I’ve read the disclaimer at the top of the page and it says “pprune”, part of which I believe means rumour.

[Brother]

I’ve read the disclaimer at the top of the page and it says “pprune”, part of which I believe means rumour.

Even if there is a rumour of logos I can give you fact, no logos on seats no logos painted on the aircraft.

[Brother]

Hi Wrecker

nothing to do with overrun mate, you should stop listening the voices in your head. while chucking stones, you might want to check your aircraft, you may not know what you dont know

[Twist & Shout]

The brave new business model seems to relay on one “dinosaur company”* covering SAR, and another doing rig flights for them, while the “leaders” in the race to the bottom remind the client how cheap they are.

Or are these facts voices in my head?

* previously referred to as capable, professional, complient, etc

[rrekn]

The issue with the aircraft stuck offshore is due to a Sikorsky manufacturing non-conformance on the pump splines. Sikorsky doesn't seem to think it's a major issue, but certain people in CASA are making a big show of it...

[Brother]

due to a Sikorsky manufacturing non-conformance on the pump splines.

Correct rrekn and all aircraft are now back in Broome following the approval of Sikorsky and CASA.

I hope BRS and CHC have checked their 92s.

[Hattori Hanzo]

Correct rrekn and all aircraft are now back in Broome following the approval of Sikorsky and CASA.

I hope BRS and CHC have checked their 92s.

Why did the aircraft have to wait until there was approval from Sikorsky and CASA to get back to Broome? As I understand it (admittedly from this thread) the aircraft were grounded by their own company. Given the chamfer characteristic is widely understood not to be a safety-of-flight issue, what does this have to do with BRS and CHC?

[Twist & Shout]

Why did the aircraft have to wait until there was approval from Sikorsky and CASA to get back to Broome? As I understand it (admittedly from this thread) the aircraft were grounded by their own company. Given the chamfer characteristic is widely understood not to be a safety-of-flight issue, what does this have to do with BRS and CHC?

I’m not sure.
Maybe trying to deflect the embarrassment caused by BRS and CHC doing the flights HNZ were contracted (oh so cheaply) to do?

The brave new world “budget” model may not work so well when the premium providers are forced from the market by the race to the bottom, and no longer able to step in to get the job done.

Getting the job actually done, doesn’t seem to be a priority anymore. Not something worth paying extra for.:ugh:

Along with complying with the country’s Aviation regulations, it’s become second to “cheap”. :mad:

It’s amazing that winching without correct approval, or whatever has caused the extensive SAR contract delay, wasn’t stopped by “Bow ties”, “step back 5” or the wearing of hi vis vests!:yuk:

[[email protected]]

It will inevitably come back and bite someone in the a*se sooner or later, then there will be a witch-hunt to find a scapegoat.

Let's just hope it doesn't come at the cost of a life or lives that would have been saved if a competent operator had the contract.

[Brother]

Twisty

Getting the job actually done, doesn’t seem to be a priority anymore. Not something worth paying extra for.

I wasnt going to comment but you blokes are making me laugh so much i cant get to sleep for my early shift. PHI and HNZ, both in business 60 years incapable of providing sar and BRS the only ones who know what they are doing? and pay extra to get the job done? maybe that's why BRS is losing all its work.

Crab

this a basically a repeat of your last post, are you ok or do you need to the clock test?

[[email protected]]

Crab

this a basically a repeat of your last post, are you ok or do you need to the clock test?
because some of us think it is actually quite important and the company you say is competent, still ISN'T providing the contracted service.

I hope you are still laughing when someone ditches and needs SAR cover at night.

[industry insider]

because some of us think it is actually quite important and the company you say is competent, still ISN'T providing the contracted service.

What is the contracted service Crab?

[[email protected]]

As I understand it the contract is to provide AWSAR.

[driftwood1]

At the moment I don’t think it matters what the requirements are. They aren’t providing anything remotely SAR like.

[Always look on the]

What is the contracted service Crab?

Insider - if you remember way back at the start of this thread.....HNZ’s own press release from Don Wall, President and Chief Executive Officer of HNZ Group said -
“We are very excited to expand our S-92 operations in Broome to include full all-weather search and rescue services.”

So apparently the contracted service is for full all weather search and rescue.

You may have to scroll back some time in the thread as the “very excited” Mr Wall made that statement in May. I wonder how thrilled he is now?

[hookesjoint]

As I understand it the contract is to provide AWSAR.


As I'm reliably informed by a mate next door, BRS would have had 24/7 AWSAR in place by now. Which was certainly something I was looking forward to having available, given the number of offshore flights we are doing, to effectively the middle of nowhere, cyclone season almost upon us and thousands of workers offshore.


As anyone who has crewed 24/7 AWSAR in the past will know it is 10 times more involved and difficult than LIMSAR, given the requirements for a bunch of gap analysis, risk assessments, CASA manual approvals and CASA exemptions etc. If HNZ are struggling to get day only LIMSAR up and running some 6 months late they will be in for a big shock when they move onto AWSAR, it just ain't easy and nor should it be, compared to offshore flights it has a significantly higher risk profile.


It can take months just to get exemptions trough CASA legal and then parliament, which cant be submitted until all manuals, training material etc is fully CASA approved. I cant see the service being available until the back end of next year, which is a shame. If there is anytime its needed that time is now, as Crab rightly points out we just have to hope that no ditching occurs on one of the later afternoon runs, a man overboard offshore at night or a serious injury on one of the many support vessels without a helideck.


Personally I don't like leaving things to chance.....anyway here's hoping!! :(

[ersa]

Why is it that HNZ are always asking for rated guys, is no one willing to train anyone anymore? Can't expect to pay peanuts and not invest in training staff, only trying to poach rated guys from other contracts so they can keep profits high!!


Those days are long gone....

[Twist & Shout]

Twisty



I wasnt going to comment but you blokes are making me laugh so much i cant get to sleep for my early shift. PHI and HNZ, both in business 60 years incapable of providing sar and BRS the only ones who know what they are doing? and pay extra to get the job done? maybe that's why BRS is losing all its work.

Crab

this a basically a repeat of your last post, are you ok or do you need to the clock test?

You can debate whether HNZ are capable of providing the service. What is fact is they are relying on others to provide the service currently. Even had CHC providing basic Rig day transfers in the last few days, I understand. (Due the S92 issue)

As far as “paying extra to get the job done”.
Surely the client has paid (the “new era” cheap) price to get the job done(SAR and transfers). When HNZ can’t do it (temporarily we would assume), someone is paying (extra) BRS and CHC to do it.

[gulliBell]

Is the Broome operation/contracts unique in having an AWSAR requirement?
Of all the offshore locations I've worked, plus those of pilots who I've trained, not one of those gigs had an AWSAR requirement. Limited night offshore MEDEVAC capability was the maximum extent of any requirement, no SAR, no winching, nothing. Just fly out to the rig/s at night under IFR weather and recover a patient to shore. The offshore workers understood this, that's why they're on the big bucks.

[pilot and apprentice]

As I understand it the contract is to provide AWSAR.

Because your only source of [questionable] information is Pprune.

[pilot and apprentice]

Those days are long gone....

They have trained several for the contract in Broome, but why anyone would ask for as little experience as possible............???

:ugh:

[[email protected]]

Because your only source of [questionable] information is PPRuNe.yes, of course it is.............................:ugh:

You know the internet is bigger than just PPrune, right?

[Scattercat]

As anyone who has crewed 24/7 AWSAR in the past will know it is 10 times more involved and difficult than LIMSAR, given the requirements for a bunch of gap analysis, risk assessments, CASA manual approvals and CASA exemptions etc. If HNZ are struggling to get day only LIMSAR up and running some 6 months late they will be in for a big shock when they move onto AWSAR, it just ain't easy and nor should it be, compared to offshore flights it has a significantly higher risk profile.

I couldn't agree more Hookesjoint. Whilst the capabilities of the modern aircraft we're seeing nowadays makes overwater SAR at night & in adverse weather a much safer thing than in the past, it's still nothing to be taken lightly as has been sadly demonstrated by the loss of R116 in March (& I'm not for a moment suggesting the ICC took their job lightly)
I sincerely hope that all players keep their focus on what's important & that's staying safe out there!

[Spanish Waltzer]

Gullibell,

Shell has full AWSAR cover now on a number of its operations, Gulf of Mexico and Brunei being two examples.

[Brother]

As I understand it the contract is to provide AWSAR. Wrong Crab, no awsar until next year. You dont know this area so funny how you are such an expert sitting in England.

Twisty

When HNZ can’t do it (temporarily we would assume), someone is paying (extra) BRS and CHC to do it.

inpex uses HNZ and BRS as helicopter companies so while BRS covers limsar we are covering more offshore runs which they would be doing. So i don't think it costs extra for BRS to do limsar.

[nowherespecial]

Slightly off topic and apologies for that but with this many Aus experts, who is flying the Chevron work in the GAB at the moment? I heard a couple of rumours about that too.

[industry insider]

NWS, from Friday's ABC online

Major international energy company Chevron has announced it has joined BP in abandoning plans to drill in the Great Australian Bight on South Australia's west coast.
It said while the Bight had massive potential, low oil prices had forced it to concentrate on other projects.


Chevron said the decision to ditch its $400 million plans had nothing to do with government policy, regulatory, community or environmental concerns.


So I don't think anyone is or will be flying it.

[nowherespecial]

II, thank you Sir. I heard Babcock had it but that wasn't so much of a rumour as a press release that was publicly announced...! Fail on my part. And there was me thinking I had some gossip...

[212man]

II, thank you Sir. I heard Babcock had it but that wasn't so much of a rumour as a press release that was publicly announced...! Fail on my part. And there was me thinking I had some gossip...

Statoil are still saying they will drill before the end of 2019...

[hookesjoint]

Best they go with an operator other than HNZ if they need AWSAR (or LIMSAR at this rate) on that time frame ;)

good point I reckon they would be well into decommissioning by the time HNZ would be ready to go!!:ugh:;)

[[email protected]]

inpex uses HNZ and BRS as helicopter companies so while BRS covers limsar we are covering more offshore runs which they would be doing. So i don't think it costs extra for BRS to do limsar. so the logical thing to do would be to dump HNZ and use BRS for transfers AND you would get AWSAR as well. :E

[NumptyAussie]

so the logical thing to do would be to dump HNZ and use BRS for transfers AND you would get AWSAR as well. :E

Are you confident that BRS have the ability to hold a genuine AWSAR service out of Broome?

[Brother]

so the logical thing to do would be to dump HNZ and use BRS for transfers AND you would get AWSAR as well

Crab why would i dump the company that i work for? until this year BRS had the whole contract anyway.

[gulliBell]

The water is warm, not sure why they'd need an AWSAR capability. In Bass Strait the water is cold: for almost 50 years Esso has never had a night SAR capability, or all-WX day capability for that matter. This must be a new-age Shell driven thing.

[rrekn]

Esso do now...

[[email protected]]

Apparently you can still drown in warm water....................................

[gulliBell]

Esso do now...

Esso have a night AWSAR capability? I don't think so....if you're talking about the CHC contract to cover the Esso SAR requirement, that is 5 days per week, daytime only, right? As far as I know, if an Esso crew gets called out at night, and the unfortunate should happen and they end up floating on the tide, they continue floating until day break.

[Cyclic Hotline]

https://www.baytoday.ca/business/hnz-group-chief-executive-and-phi-to-acquire-company-and-split-up-operations-753680

HNZ Group chief executive and PHI to acquire company and split up operations


MONTREAL — HNZ Group Inc. (TSX:HNZ) is proposing a $242.4-million deal for its CEO acquire the international helicopter company and then sell its offshore operations in Australia, New Zealand, Philippines and Papua New Guinea to PHI Inc.

MONTREAL — HNZ Group Inc. (TSX:HNZ) is proposing a $242.4-million deal for its CEO acquire the international helicopter company and then sell its offshore operations in Australia, New Zealand, Philippines and Papua New Guinea to PHI Inc.

Under the agreement announced Tuesday, HNZ shareholders will receive $18.70 per share — 43 per cent above Monday's closing price at the Toronto Stock Exchange.


HNZ, which provides helicopter and related services, says its operations in Canada, the United States and Antarctica would remain with the company under the leadership of chief executive Don Wall.

The deal requires approval by a two-thirds majority vote by shareholders and a simple majority vote by shareholders excluding Wall.

It is also subject to court approval and other customary closing conditions.

HNZ shares closed up 15 cents at $13.05 on the Toronto Stock Exchange on Monday.

[lowfat]

Just leave this here.

MONTREAL — HNZ Group Inc. (TSX:HNZ) is proposing a $242.4-million deal for its CEO acquire the international helicopter company and then sell its offshore operations in Australia, New Zealand, Philippines and Papua New Guinea to PHI Inc

and the new owner is



PHI

[Canadian Rotorhead]

http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/601306-hnz-deal.html

[Always look on the]

“The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of low price is forgotten.“

Benjamin Franklin.

[barbados sky]

I heard that HNZ will start their SAR contract in Australia today, anyone confirm?

[[email protected]]

And is that AWSAR 24/7 or a lesser service?

[Brother]

Crab

in your language its a lesser service so a dedicated 15 minute LIMSAR and Medivac with AWSAR in Q1 2018 which is the same as brs was giving but brs wasn't on 15 minute sar.

[[email protected]]

Which part is the LIM in LIMSAR? Is it daylight only, VMC only, no winching or what exactly? Its rather a vague term.

[rrekn]

Well things might get easier for HNZ now that Pilots are back on the Skilled Migration List...


https://www.9news.com.au/national/2017/12/28/07/10/australia-visas-foreign-pilots-shortage

[gulliBell]

I'm not so sure about that. The news grab I saw specifically mentioned the visa was only to go to foreign pilots working for Regional Airlines, and only for 2 or 4 years. I guess at the very least it's the thin edge of the wedge to open the door for helicopter pilots to come here. HNZ are paying some of their AW139 line pilots $190k per year plus car, you'd need an armored door to hold back the flood of International applicants keen to get their snouts in that trough.

[gulliBell]

If HNZ is paying their AW139 pilots $190k it's not in Australia - they don't have any 139's in Oz.

Oh yes they are, their contract pilots flying Esso AW139 are on that deal.

[Nescafe]

HNZ wins SAR in Oz

[Same again]

Nice try Nescafe. I'll look in again next week and see if we are back on topic.

[Cable Guy]

Had the clients not gambled their personnels safety on an unapproved, low cost operator (who clearly can't deliver a genuine LIMSAR service, let alone AWSAR) then BHL would have already been delivering an AWSAR service!
You get what you pay for right?!
Too true, too true!

Out of curiosity, what percentage of the "not low cost" operator's medevacs launched in the prescribed timeframe before they were replaced.....?

[NumptyAussie]

And the copy of the ATSB report into the winching incident is now released.....

http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2017/aair/ao-2017-095/

[KiwiNedNZ]

What would cause this equipment to break.

[[email protected]]

The weak link in a hi-line is designed to do exactly that - break - so that any entanglement or snagging doesn't put an undue load on the hoist cable and snap the wire or damage the housing/drum or even pull the hook off the wire.

The fact that this one recoiled towards the rotor isn't unusual, we had one that did go through the rotor after the hook itself snagged a boat rail and then came free under tension.

This incident would be considered a Normal Operating Hazard for military SAR.

[Nescafe]

we had one that did go through the rotor after the hook itself snagged a boat rail and then came free under tension.

and another time, at band camp....😴

[[email protected]]

If I could be bothered, I'd link to the DASOR for it but it happened to a Mk3A Sea King from Wattisham about 8 years ago on a routine training sortie. I wasn't involved but was the Sqn Trg Off.

The aircraft was landed safely without any undue vibration apparent and the extent of the damage was only realised on shutdown.

[PhilJ]

Wouldn't you expect there to be a much lower recoil from a weak-link breaking than a hook snagging and releasing though?

[megan]

Our navy lost a Wessex while doing a personnel transfer to a destroyer. Seaman clipped the hook to a guard rail with the inevitable break causing the cable to fly up and tangle about the head resulting in a ditching. Ship ran over the aircraft in an attempted recovery.

[[email protected]]

That's horrendous Megan, poor sods:(

PhilJ - it's probably a compromise, like so many things in life, a weaker weak-link would break too often and make the rescues more difficult not less but I have had hi-lines part several times without such a recoil - just luck of the draw I expect.

[snakepit]

The weak link in a hi-line is designed to do exactly that - break - so that any entanglement or snagging doesn't put an undue load on the hoist cable and snap the wire or damage the housing/drum or even pull the hook off the wire.

The fact that this one recoiled towards the rotor isn't unusual, we had one that did go through the rotor after the hook itself snagged a boat rail and then came free under tension.

This incident would be considered a Normal Operating Hazard for military SAR.

Normal operating hazard YES. That much hook rebound from the tension of a 90lds weak link parting NO. I suspect the link did not function correctly hence the buckle breaking instead which must have happened at more than the rated 90lbs.
After all crab most UK mil and Civi weak links are 150lbs breaking strain and even that does not cause the violent rebound seen in this incident.

[NumptyAussie]

I missed the following section on my first read of the report

"The operator inserted a 300 ft line into a hi-line bag that was advertised as either a stand-alone
item, or fitted with a 75 ft line. In addition, the hi-line bag was a sausage shaped bag with a narrow
throat relative to the amount of line inserted. Therefore, when assembled, the hi-line equipment
presented an increased risk for restrictions during a hi-line evolution and the equipment was no
longer fit-for-purpose."

But this doesn't explain the recoil from a wire that should have only been exposed to around 40kgs of tension..

[[email protected]]

Perhaps the rebound is explained by the angle from the hoist - if the aircraft climbs to deploy the hi-line then the angle is steep and the hook has a long way to go vertically to reach the rotor.

If, on the other hand, the aircraft is moved laterally as the hi-line is deployed, the vertical distance is much lower - ISTR the report mentions the winch wire being snatched from the winchop's hand - that would correlate with the hi-line snagging and then parting.

Or it could well be a problem with the hi-line itself or a combination of the two issues.

[Hedski]

Had that issue elsewhere that despite the ops manual description and illustration certain winchops insistence of deploying the highline and remaining 1 unit at most from the overhead with the strain vertically as opposed to offsetting laterally giving me more of a chance to see what’s happening etc. Like banging your head against a wall....

[snakepit]

Had that issue elsewhere that despite the ops manual description and illustration certain winchops insistence of deploying the highline and remaining 1 unit at most from the overhead with the strain vertically as opposed to offsetting laterally giving me more of a chance to see what’s happening etc. Like banging your head against a wall....

Very true Hedski...

[Same again]

If you are not visual with what is happening on the deck/cliff then that rather defeats the object of the high line.

[[email protected]]

That is where some winchops misunderstand the object which is to get the pilot visual - they think that as long as they can see, that is all that matters without considering the pilot's references.

[Hedski]

Said winchops were/are sadly part of a self perpetuating self congratulating corps thinking they are as knowledgable and experienced or more so than those elsewhere who actually are and refuse to listen. The old “we’ve always done it that way...” scenario. Although in the corps to which I refer the same applies to quite a few pilots. And so endeth the thread creep.

That is where some winchops misunderstand the object which is to get the pilot visual - they think that as long as they can see, that is all that matters without considering the pilot's references.

[Same again]

Wherever I have worked in SAR a high line technique requires that the pilot flying has visual contact with winching events. The Winchop requests 'permission to winch' from the PF before doing so. If the PF does not have the required visual references then it is a simple matter of saying no until in the correct position.

[[email protected]]

Yes, but in this situation, the winching of the crew to the deck had already been completed and they were moving laterally away from the boat to the hi-line datum - the pilot would have been unsighted until clear of the boat with the hi-line deployed. It was during this manoeuvre that it all went 'Pete Tong'.

The winchop was already winching the cable (and hi-line) in so no extra permissions to give

[pilot and apprentice]

Perhaps the rebound is explained by the angle from the hoist - if the aircraft climbs to deploy the hi-line then the angle is steep and the hook has a long way to go vertically to reach the rotor.

If, on the other hand, the aircraft is moved laterally as the hi-line is deployed, the vertical distance is much lower - ISTR the report mentions the winch wire being snatched from the winchop's hand - that would correlate with the hi-line snagging and then parting.

Or it could well be a problem with the hi-line itself or a combination of the two issues.

I’m happy to see we can agree on some things Crab.

The hi-line snagged and as it came taut the hook was moving upward. The weak link parted with almost no load which allowed the hook to continue its upward trajectory. Momentum is a powerful force.

[What-ho Squiffy!]

So, HNZ All Weather SAR is up and running...

[Brother]

So, HNZ All Weather SAR is up and running...

yes mate, started on 7 april, seems to be going well but i m on crew change not sar.

[KernelPanic]

But this doesn't explain the recoil from a wire that should have only been exposed to around 40kgs of tension..

Look at the Weak link. Its broken apart, not pulled apart in the way designed. The weak link mechanism must have failed to release, and the weak link has broken, albeit at much greater force than designed for.

[Always look on the]

Once bitten twice shy?.......

Almost on the anniversary of this incident it would appear that HNZ have thoroughly investigated and completed their usual management of change process having identified the causal factors in yet another SAR winch training accident:

https://www.watoday.com.au/national/western-australia/report-clears-crew-after-paramedic-injured-in-training-exercise-off-broome-coast-20190412-p51dn0.html#comments

The paramedic was unable to face forward when arriving at the deck. This could be resolved by either better training of the staff - he may well have been rotating slowly ("As he was being lowered towards the boat on the winch, the paramedic was rotating slowly. When he was about three metres from the deck, he noticed the top edge of the side of the boat was close.) but he only has to face forward once in the transfer and that's immediately before he arrives at the deck. It requires technique and a little bit of physical effort.
Alternatively,

if the conditions were such that for some reason he shouldn't face forward (I can't think of any), or
he was not suitably trained/ capable to face forward and provide himself with the safety of seeing the deck coming up and being able to prepare himself for the landing

Then the answer is to use a hi-line. However, given the previous incident, perhaps HNZ are now uncomfortable/unfamiliar with the required techniques and safe use of the hi-line.

I would hope that nobody thinks that these events are completely avoidable, as SAR is a dynamic task carried out in a potentially hazardous environment. Even in training it is possible to get injured but surely it's time that there was a common standard that all companies conducting SAR operations should have to achieve.

The ATSB and CASA have a record of unfortunate incidents, some times tragic, from a mix of different operators across Australia. A national organisation with legislative power to enforce a minimum standard should go some way to improving the service that these companies provide.

After all as the HNZ eye witness - the insightful a/c captain- said:

“A post-flight brief was conducted with the crew discussing whether they could mitigate this happening again,” they said. “Given the physical nature of the work, it was agreed – ‘not likely’.”

[Hedski]

And they were offered help from elsewhere yet simply anyone from other HNZ subsidiaries with more relevant experience on type was kept out. Ozzie’s didn’t want to know. And here we are...

[[email protected]]

As I understand it, HNZ employed a very capable ex-RAF winchop to re-write all their training documents but when he and another ex-RAF winchman operated a long way above the standard of the native rearcrew, they got the hump and the poms got the push (only after all the training manuals were completed though!)

[Hedski]

Yeah. Sounds about right. Try to raise a standard and look how it ends. Bit like another S92 SAR op which had another much more tragic event 2 years ago where the potential experience available was squandered.