Aberdeen oil consortium contract
Chief PPRuNe Pilot
Charterguy and Strap-In made allegations on this thread and were challenged to substantiate those allegations. Strap-In chose not to reply to my request to update the email address in his/her profile so that the challenge to his/her unsubstantiated allegatons could be forwarded.
I have now deleted all posts by Strap-In. Charterguy was sent a challenge to the allegations and chose not to substantiate the original allegation and so the posts by Charterguy were also deleted.
Anyone who makes the concious decision to make allegations, especially from behind the cloak of anonymity still has to be prepared to back those allegations up when challenged whether that is done publicly on the forum or privately through email. I sugget everyone re-reads the rules they agreed to when registering to use this bulletin board.
I have now deleted all posts by Strap-In. Charterguy was sent a challenge to the allegations and chose not to substantiate the original allegation and so the posts by Charterguy were also deleted.
Anyone who makes the concious decision to make allegations, especially from behind the cloak of anonymity still has to be prepared to back those allegations up when challenged whether that is done publicly on the forum or privately through email. I sugget everyone re-reads the rules they agreed to when registering to use this bulletin board.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I remember there was a Capt at BMA that was fired for calling the ATP a Skoda back in the late 80s.
Capt PPRUNE, Sir, can you explain why your heavy approach wasn't used on the people giving the Guv a hard time a while back? Is this because it concerns BWA with which some mods are/were affiliated?
Capt PPRUNE, Sir, can you explain why your heavy approach wasn't used on the people giving the Guv a hard time a while back? Is this because it concerns BWA with which some mods are/were affiliated?
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: The Land in the Sand
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They should never have got rid of the Dash 7 Operation. They offered a robust & reliable service to the oil consortium.
Between us and the Fleet Captain in ABZ, we'd always try and do our upmost to fly wherever and whenever possible to suit.
For sure YA & YD used to have technical problems but what aircraft doesnot?
The grass seemed greener on the other side hence we lost the contract after around 15 years of service. Real shame <img src="frown.gif" border="0">
Good luck to whoever suceeds this time around.
With Brymon now under the Citi Express Wing & Dash 7 days long gone, I'd say it's unlikely they'd return. Will find out though for you.
Between us and the Fleet Captain in ABZ, we'd always try and do our upmost to fly wherever and whenever possible to suit.
For sure YA & YD used to have technical problems but what aircraft doesnot?
The grass seemed greener on the other side hence we lost the contract after around 15 years of service. Real shame <img src="frown.gif" border="0">
Good luck to whoever suceeds this time around.
With Brymon now under the Citi Express Wing & Dash 7 days long gone, I'd say it's unlikely they'd return. Will find out though for you.
Alba Gu Brath
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Merseyside
Age: 55
Posts: 738
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was my understanding that one reason (not the only one) that the ATR's were pulled off the route was the bad feedback that BWA & the oil consortium were getting from the rig workers. I seem to remember a delegation from BWA doing a tour of some of the North Sea platforms to reassure the guys (& gals) that the aircraft were safe and that it was perfectly normal to approach a runway at an angle of 45 degrees in a strong crosswind !
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Shetland
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jetgirl
I did hear a rumour at work today that there are tenders still being submitted. The ones that I know of are Danish Air Transport, New Air, Flightline, Silver City Airways plus one or two others that I can't remember. I did hear that the closing date is tomorrow.
I never believe rumours though until I see them in black and white. <img src="cool.gif" border="0"> <img src="cool.gif" border="0"> <img src="cool.gif" border="0">
I did hear a rumour at work today that there are tenders still being submitted. The ones that I know of are Danish Air Transport, New Air, Flightline, Silver City Airways plus one or two others that I can't remember. I did hear that the closing date is tomorrow.
I never believe rumours though until I see them in black and white. <img src="cool.gif" border="0"> <img src="cool.gif" border="0"> <img src="cool.gif" border="0">
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: The Land in the Sand
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have heard from a 'reliable' source today that Brymon/Citi Express have put forward a Dash 8, three aircraft operation proposal to cover the contract .. can anyone confirm that ??
This is my understanding of the timescales. I further understand that those bidding to use the ATP's (again) stand a better than even chance....
14th – 25th JANUARY 2002
Detailed review takes place.Individual parties may be contacted to provide additional information or clarification if required.
28th JANUARY – 1st FEBRUARY 2002
Confirmation of shortlist of candidtes for negotiation process.
4th FEBRUARY – 8th FEBRUARY 2002 Negotiations complete and selection of successful contractor.
4th MARCH 2002
Start flying boys and girls.
Good luck to all.....
14th – 25th JANUARY 2002
Detailed review takes place.Individual parties may be contacted to provide additional information or clarification if required.
28th JANUARY – 1st FEBRUARY 2002
Confirmation of shortlist of candidtes for negotiation process.
4th FEBRUARY – 8th FEBRUARY 2002 Negotiations complete and selection of successful contractor.
4th MARCH 2002
Start flying boys and girls.
Good luck to all.....
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Further to the debate about ATP/ATR/146.
Cross winds: The ATR has a narror track U/C and a high wing; this leads to difficulties in cross winds and a general feeling of insecurity when on the ground, one chap put it thus 'You've got to fly it until you apply the park brake'! The ATP was much better in that the wide track U/C and low wing made handling much more predictable but one had to be careful about who handled the landing. Due to poor erganomics the left seater did the landings when the (strong) Xwind was from the right and visa versa. Why?, because ones left hand (for left seater)soon ran out of room - options - control trying to hold the wing down when flareing (fist and conrol wheel in the crutch). The 146 is easily the best in a cross wind provided the final yaw/roll/flare input are separated; wing sweep and anhedral can lead to unpredictable results.
Reliability: I have to say that the ATP was easily the most unreliable aircraft type I have flown, even when the aircraft were fairly new and with excellent engineering backup. The 146 and ATR were both very reliable.
IMHO the 146 is the best choice for this contract and I suspect that the pax will all vote for it.
Cross winds: The ATR has a narror track U/C and a high wing; this leads to difficulties in cross winds and a general feeling of insecurity when on the ground, one chap put it thus 'You've got to fly it until you apply the park brake'! The ATP was much better in that the wide track U/C and low wing made handling much more predictable but one had to be careful about who handled the landing. Due to poor erganomics the left seater did the landings when the (strong) Xwind was from the right and visa versa. Why?, because ones left hand (for left seater)soon ran out of room - options - control trying to hold the wing down when flareing (fist and conrol wheel in the crutch). The 146 is easily the best in a cross wind provided the final yaw/roll/flare input are separated; wing sweep and anhedral can lead to unpredictable results.
Reliability: I have to say that the ATP was easily the most unreliable aircraft type I have flown, even when the aircraft were fairly new and with excellent engineering backup. The 146 and ATR were both very reliable.
IMHO the 146 is the best choice for this contract and I suspect that the pax will all vote for it.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sure the BAe146
Max Demonstrated X-wind:
T/O 30Kts (200 series)
35Kts (300 series)
Landing 35Kts
It is very easy to control, even in gusty conditions and the trailing link undercarriage is a dream.
Max Demonstrated X-wind:
T/O 30Kts (200 series)
35Kts (300 series)
Landing 35Kts
It is very easy to control, even in gusty conditions and the trailing link undercarriage is a dream.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Planet Earth for a short visit
Posts: 614
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATP X-wind limits
TO 36 kts
Land 34 kts
However Scatsta limit due terrain and RW width 25 kts only. Remember it is only a Cat C field.
Just a small point, the pax do not get to vote for which a/c will be appointed. The accountants take care of that and as already demonstrated over the last few years the a/c that can carry the required number of pax in and out of SCS at the cheapest cost is without doubt, the queen of the Shetland skies, the beautiful, the gorgeous, the delight to fly, my baby, THE BAe ATP!
Pratt and Whitney do it again!
TO 36 kts
Land 34 kts
However Scatsta limit due terrain and RW width 25 kts only. Remember it is only a Cat C field.
Just a small point, the pax do not get to vote for which a/c will be appointed. The accountants take care of that and as already demonstrated over the last few years the a/c that can carry the required number of pax in and out of SCS at the cheapest cost is without doubt, the queen of the Shetland skies, the beautiful, the gorgeous, the delight to fly, my baby, THE BAe ATP!
Pratt and Whitney do it again!
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Planet Earth for a short visit
Posts: 614
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATP demonstrated X-wind limits
TO 36 kts
Land 34 kts
However Scatsta limit due terrain and RW width 25 kts only. Remember it is only a Cat C field.
Just a small point, the pax do not get to vote for which a/c will be appointed. The accountants take care of that and as already demonstrated over the last few years the a/c that can carry the required number of pax in and out of SCS at the cheapest cost is without doubt, the queen of the Shetland skies, the beautiful, the gorgeous, the delight to fly, my baby, THE BAe ATP!
Pratt and Whitney do it again!
TO 36 kts
Land 34 kts
However Scatsta limit due terrain and RW width 25 kts only. Remember it is only a Cat C field.
Just a small point, the pax do not get to vote for which a/c will be appointed. The accountants take care of that and as already demonstrated over the last few years the a/c that can carry the required number of pax in and out of SCS at the cheapest cost is without doubt, the queen of the Shetland skies, the beautiful, the gorgeous, the delight to fly, my baby, THE BAe ATP!
Pratt and Whitney do it again!
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: UK/Spain
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Steady on there Silver...you'll make me shed a nostalgic tear in my beer 
Gloria- i've never heard of this left seat landing with the wind from the right thingy....maybe thats where i've been going wrong
Always found the stronger the wind only enhanced my legendary and world famous x-wind landing technique...which ever side the wind was coming from <img src="eek.gif" border="0"> <img src="eek.gif" border="0">
Gloria- i've never heard of this left seat landing with the wind from the right thingy....maybe thats where i've been going wrong
Always found the stronger the wind only enhanced my legendary and world famous x-wind landing technique...which ever side the wind was coming from <img src="eek.gif" border="0"> <img src="eek.gif" border="0">
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Europe
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATR 42:
WIND LIMITATIONS
Take off
Dry RWY max. X-wind 45KTS
Wet RWY max. X-wind 38KTS
Landing
Dry RWY max. X-wind 38KTS
Wet RWY max. X-wind 30KTS
Take off & Landing
Tailwind max. 15KTS
And not really applicable for this:
CAT II OPERATIONS
Max. headwind component 25KTS
Max. tailwind component 10KTS
Max. X-wind component 20KTS
WIND LIMITATIONS
Take off
Dry RWY max. X-wind 45KTS
Wet RWY max. X-wind 38KTS
Landing
Dry RWY max. X-wind 38KTS
Wet RWY max. X-wind 30KTS
Take off & Landing
Tailwind max. 15KTS
And not really applicable for this:
CAT II OPERATIONS
Max. headwind component 25KTS
Max. tailwind component 10KTS
Max. X-wind component 20KTS
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Planet Earth for a short visit
Posts: 614
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sabre Aviator
just how do those figures pose an advantage for an ATR when the field limit at SCS is 25kts crossed?
Remember- minimum acceptable pax load 56.
I do however admit that the prop-brake-APU thing is a nice touch.
ATP was built for short haul, larger pax numbers and economy. Can't be bettered ( except for the Jetstream 61-----alas poor Yorick).
just how do those figures pose an advantage for an ATR when the field limit at SCS is 25kts crossed?
Remember- minimum acceptable pax load 56.
I do however admit that the prop-brake-APU thing is a nice touch.
ATP was built for short haul, larger pax numbers and economy. Can't be bettered ( except for the Jetstream 61-----alas poor Yorick).
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: uk
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seems to be a general feeling of dismissal of the BA Citi-Express boys pulling one out of the bag here. Previous experience of running a ABZ-SCS schedule, with the experienced crew still within the company.
3 Off The Tee, I'd love to know who you're reliable source is, but we'll talk about that one over a Bullfrog!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Chins Up, It Could Be Worse..... <img src="eek.gif" border="0"> <img src="eek.gif" border="0"> <img src="eek.gif" border="0"> <img src="eek.gif" border="0">
3 Off The Tee, I'd love to know who you're reliable source is, but we'll talk about that one over a Bullfrog!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Chins Up, It Could Be Worse..... <img src="eek.gif" border="0">
<img src="eek.gif" border="0"> <img src="eek.gif" border="0"> <img src="eek.gif" border="0">