Originally Posted by
terminus mos
That's the whole point Comparator, it's about leadership and innovation. If Helicopter Company "A" introduced such a policy in a thought out and structured manner by engaging its customers and the workforce, yes, those horrible annoying passengers, pressure from those very passengers with whom you don't want to engage would soon use pressure to ensure its leadership position was rewarded. Operator B and C would be tripping over each other to follow. Before you know it, a new standard exists.
The fact that you don't see it demonstrates the very lack of leadership to which I refer. CEOs can pat their Directors of Safety on the back all they like. Target Zero is admirable, it's a good slogan. But real safety leadership involves actions not slogans.
Currently, the helicopter industry reaches Target Zero very well, Zero Innovation, Zero Action and Zero Effort. Pat yourself on the back Comparator, your bonus is coming.
Jolly good, glad to see you residing happily in commercial cloud cuckoo land!
If operator A went to the oil cos saying they wanted to cut down pax numbers, the first reaction would be "cheeky b******* just trying to make more money" because typically our interface with the oil cos is via someone who is a budget controller only interested in the bottom line of his transport budget. It would only be a "good idea" if it was invented in the oil co's office, not if it was invented in the operator's office. OK things have changed a little bit recently, but only as a result of these accidents.
Of course there is history to this - many years ago it was decided to reduce the pax numbers in the AS332L from 19 to 18 but I don't know whose initiative that was - almost certainly the oil co's for the reasons I indicate.