Rev,
If during these "discussions" we have with our PHI brethren....mine with a guy I have known since 1968, and who went to work for PHI upon leaving the Army and who has been there from day one of his commercial flying career, holds that view.....how can you say his perception based upon thirty years with the company is wrong...does not exist....and is without merit?
I posed the question.....if you recall my post.
I suggested the risk to an effective safety environment, caused by what we know in the industry as the "Bob Suggs School of Helicopter Management", had to be considered when asking how some safety related decisions are affected by management philosophy.
PHI has hollered about their amazing standards but I can assure you the way to failure in any endeavour is falling for the trap of believing your own propaganda.
I will give you a for instance to think about.
You remember the PHI method of moving the 206 Start Switch to the Cyclic stick.....so the pilot could always have his hands on the flight controls? Did you modify all of the other helicopters in the fleet as well?
My outfit purchased a used PHI 206 and discovered that interesting bit thinking....and kept it until the first maintenance in the shop and reverted to the Bell Standard layout. We found knees worked just as well as the PHI mod....and allowed two hands to control the start button and throttle vice a single hand. The worry on 206's was burning up engines on starts not having the rotor system flopping about the place.
You guys still fly around the GOM just before dark over cold water long distances off shore in single engine aircraft in the Winter and do not provide exposure suits to the crews.
I will bet you still not equip the pilot flotation vests with EPIRBS or Emergency Radio's....which is common kit for UK crews and has been since day one.
Excuse me if I sound like I think little of the PHI safety environment but it is based upon exposure to the UK system that for its faults is light years ahead of the GOM.