At the risk of diverting off-topic...
As an offshore helicopter pilot who has worked in various far-flung places around the world, I'm just curious how it it is, say for example in Australia, where Esso helicopters have been operating in the Bass Strait oil fields for 40+ years and never had a single ditching or accident. Yet we are seeing, certainly in comparison, seemingly high accident rates in the UK offshore industry, and the Gulf of Mexico, and other places. What is it that they do down there differently to other places that the statistics tell us makes that an inherently safer operation?
I know there is not anywhere near the intensity of flight ops down there as in the NS or GoM, not anywhere near as many hours flown, different aircraft type, much fewer platforms, not as far off-shore, and other things. And bearing in mind they flew single engine, single pilot for several years, and twin-engine single pilot for many years. Perhaps the only similarity being ****e weather for 5 months of the year, I don't know. But how is it they can fly (guessing) 250,000+ hours over 40 years and not drop a single ship in the tide, but in the UK and other parts we're seeing a major accident every couple of years or so?
Is the standard of aircraft maintenance different (I wouldn't have thought so)? Are the flight standards of operating crews any different (again, I wouldn't have thought so)? Are their operating procedures any different/safer (can't imagine they would be)? Is the operating environment any different (probably not much, the platforms are built to international standards, and the weather down there can be as ****e as anywhere, although freezing is rarely an issue).
I mean, an accident rate of zero over 40 years, compared with what we see elsewhere, what is it that they do differently? I don't work for them and I'm not trying to blow their trumpet, but by any measure trying to account for long-term statistics versus reality there must be something different going on down there.