Aberdeen oil consortium contract
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: homeless
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
there would appear to a somewhat premature posting announcing that " Alpine "has not got the contract on the Main forum...makes one wonderwhere he gets his advance information from?? <img src="confused.gif" border="0"> <img src="confused.gif" border="0">
Join Date: May 2001
Location: BRS
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You guys are still ignoring the BA CitiExpress proposals. They are a good bet. I'd put my money on them, from what I hear they are odds on favorite. 4 Dash 8-300's I the rumour I have heard.
Chins Up It Could Be Worse.......
<img src="eek.gif" border="0"> <img src="eek.gif" border="0">
Chins Up It Could Be Worse.......
<img src="eek.gif" border="0"> <img src="eek.gif" border="0">
United1,
The oil consortium have not ignored Brymons proposal!! Thy apparently are the front runners, with 3 other bidders.....Westair of Sweden and BAC in a joint venture (ATP ops), Atlantic Airways with a 146 service, and Flightline, also with a 146 service. Dash8 vs. ATP vs. 146. Odds anyone?
The oil consortium have not ignored Brymons proposal!! Thy apparently are the front runners, with 3 other bidders.....Westair of Sweden and BAC in a joint venture (ATP ops), Atlantic Airways with a 146 service, and Flightline, also with a 146 service. Dash8 vs. ATP vs. 146. Odds anyone?
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Planet Earth for a short visit
Posts: 614
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flightline's 146 only able to offer 1600kg payload out of Sumburgh last week and only 4000kg into Scatsta this week. The ATP has much better capacity under the same conditions. I can't see a 146 operator winning this one.
The Dash cannot carry enough bodies to fill 3 choppers.
As I have already said the right tool for this job is the ATP. The number crunching proves this. Performance and operating costs in all the conditions up there with the available runways make the ATP the only viable contender. If I can work this out then surely it's obvious.
As Alpine have already been rejected, such a poor decision, that would leave only BAC Express with an ATP bid.
The Dash cannot carry enough bodies to fill 3 choppers.
As I have already said the right tool for this job is the ATP. The number crunching proves this. Performance and operating costs in all the conditions up there with the available runways make the ATP the only viable contender. If I can work this out then surely it's obvious.
As Alpine have already been rejected, such a poor decision, that would leave only BAC Express with an ATP bid.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Either the back of a sim, or wherever Crewing send me.
Posts: 1,031
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I too doubt that the Dash 8 is upto this job, not only because it doesn't have the seating capacity, but also I doubt that if it were filled with male passengers (as most of the pax are male) that there'd be much to spare for baggage and freight. I would also like to add that it isn't only the ATP that has tech problems, which have been highlighted during this thread, but I am led to believe that the Dash 8 has been particlurly badly affected by problems for some considerable time, though it has kept Titan very happy.
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it is time for a few facts to be pointed out here on the 146 v's Dash 8 v's ATP.
Firstly I don't think anyone can say or guess who is going to the contract because the IAC and the helicopter mob have some strange ideas as to the best aircraft for the job.
To sum up the Dash 8 and why it would not be good for the contract is that it cannot lift 3 Helo loads full stop. No good because you can't split them up otherwise it lengthens the whole day considerably and with the helo crews very tight for hours and no slack in the system no good.
The ATP is the best of the 3 for the contract. It can lift 3 helo loads in and out of SCS and LSI on any runway. It can accept braking actions as low as poor the whole length of the R/W, mind you not that any one would want to. The point is if required it can land with braking action lower than 0.4. What this all means is that if the weather in SCS is below minimas then it can divert to LSI and land with all pax on board.
The bad point about the ATP is its perceived reliability problems and I stress perceived. The ATP like all aircraft need TLC just like your woman. Treat them with respect and care and they will reward you handsomely. The ATP's in ABZ were no worse with BWA than any other operator it is just that they had spare aircraft to back them up or could call on ad hoc operators to fill in e.g. Titan. There was flexibility in the system but as someone else so rightly pointed out there was a couple of occasions when 2 aircraft were tech but that was due to a common problem across the whole fleet world wide. It took a while for the manufacturer to provide a suitable solution which when it came resolved the problem. The ATP is no different to any other aircraft operating in this cold, damp, salty enviornment. All other aircraft had just as many problems as anyone else. The ATP had it's enemies before it even started operating for the IAC. The ATP's did lack a little bit of TLC but these problems were being addressed as both BWA and the maintance provider had more experience with the aircraft. As for the post reporting that a 4th aircraft was in ABZ entirely for backup to the IAC, that is not correct. BWA was shifting the entire fleet to ABZ before the demise. It is true that it was used if one of the others had to have scheduled maintenace or if there was a tech problem that could not be repaired within a reasonable time frame. One more poit to add is that the contract called for 3 aircraft and the days flying could be completed with 2 if required but as time went by the IAC insisted on 3 being available all the time.
The 146. What can you say about this. The sector is less than 200 miles so therefore for a start it is not cost effective to run an aircraft with jets . The 146 is certianly not without its problems and the reliability is poorer than the ATP and I suspect more so operating in the enviorenment of the Northsea. Performace wise it has to have braking action better than good the entire length of the runway at both SCS and LSI and if it has to divert to LSI with the cloud base at about 300' then it can't go to LSI and land on the short runway without exceeding it's limits. Therefore back to ABZ for another go and no one gets left on the island and the backlog starts to grow. The only advantage that is obvious aprt from speed and leather seats is that it can lift considerably more out of SCS if required but if thye decide to lift 4 -5 helo loads from SCS then the oilies who arrived on the 1st or 2nd flights from the rigs will be extremely upset about waiting around in SCS in a terminal, when they could be home with family and friends, that doesn't exactly lend itself to comfort.
In conclusion the IAC will make the choice they think is the best, but they then have to live with it. I hope that the aircraft they do chose will do the job for the sake of those guys who work offshore because ultimaly they are the ones who suffer and they do a hard job living and working in insufferable conditions. The choice is going to come down to comfort versus cost. Are the willing to fork out many millions more for an aircraft with leather seats to carry the same amount of people. Lets not forget that the amount of people going through SCS now is not going to increase significantly as the airport is already at saturation point.
If any of what I have typed possibly not so correct then please correct me.
Best of luck to who ever gets the job.
Boofy. <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
Firstly I don't think anyone can say or guess who is going to the contract because the IAC and the helicopter mob have some strange ideas as to the best aircraft for the job.
To sum up the Dash 8 and why it would not be good for the contract is that it cannot lift 3 Helo loads full stop. No good because you can't split them up otherwise it lengthens the whole day considerably and with the helo crews very tight for hours and no slack in the system no good.
The ATP is the best of the 3 for the contract. It can lift 3 helo loads in and out of SCS and LSI on any runway. It can accept braking actions as low as poor the whole length of the R/W, mind you not that any one would want to. The point is if required it can land with braking action lower than 0.4. What this all means is that if the weather in SCS is below minimas then it can divert to LSI and land with all pax on board.
The bad point about the ATP is its perceived reliability problems and I stress perceived. The ATP like all aircraft need TLC just like your woman. Treat them with respect and care and they will reward you handsomely. The ATP's in ABZ were no worse with BWA than any other operator it is just that they had spare aircraft to back them up or could call on ad hoc operators to fill in e.g. Titan. There was flexibility in the system but as someone else so rightly pointed out there was a couple of occasions when 2 aircraft were tech but that was due to a common problem across the whole fleet world wide. It took a while for the manufacturer to provide a suitable solution which when it came resolved the problem. The ATP is no different to any other aircraft operating in this cold, damp, salty enviornment. All other aircraft had just as many problems as anyone else. The ATP had it's enemies before it even started operating for the IAC. The ATP's did lack a little bit of TLC but these problems were being addressed as both BWA and the maintance provider had more experience with the aircraft. As for the post reporting that a 4th aircraft was in ABZ entirely for backup to the IAC, that is not correct. BWA was shifting the entire fleet to ABZ before the demise. It is true that it was used if one of the others had to have scheduled maintenace or if there was a tech problem that could not be repaired within a reasonable time frame. One more poit to add is that the contract called for 3 aircraft and the days flying could be completed with 2 if required but as time went by the IAC insisted on 3 being available all the time.
The 146. What can you say about this. The sector is less than 200 miles so therefore for a start it is not cost effective to run an aircraft with jets . The 146 is certianly not without its problems and the reliability is poorer than the ATP and I suspect more so operating in the enviorenment of the Northsea. Performace wise it has to have braking action better than good the entire length of the runway at both SCS and LSI and if it has to divert to LSI with the cloud base at about 300' then it can't go to LSI and land on the short runway without exceeding it's limits. Therefore back to ABZ for another go and no one gets left on the island and the backlog starts to grow. The only advantage that is obvious aprt from speed and leather seats is that it can lift considerably more out of SCS if required but if thye decide to lift 4 -5 helo loads from SCS then the oilies who arrived on the 1st or 2nd flights from the rigs will be extremely upset about waiting around in SCS in a terminal, when they could be home with family and friends, that doesn't exactly lend itself to comfort.
In conclusion the IAC will make the choice they think is the best, but they then have to live with it. I hope that the aircraft they do chose will do the job for the sake of those guys who work offshore because ultimaly they are the ones who suffer and they do a hard job living and working in insufferable conditions. The choice is going to come down to comfort versus cost. Are the willing to fork out many millions more for an aircraft with leather seats to carry the same amount of people. Lets not forget that the amount of people going through SCS now is not going to increase significantly as the airport is already at saturation point.
If any of what I have typed possibly not so correct then please correct me.
Best of luck to who ever gets the job.
Boofy. <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: UK NE Scotland
Age: 59
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JGG,
Twas me that mentioned the 4th aircraft being stationed @ ABZ - the basis for this comment was a BWA Statement issued via Bristows following Shell (main user) spitting out the dummy with the services reliability. This was the 2nd time Shell had summoned BWA to explain what they were going to do to resolve the reliability problems. The 4th aircraft arrived a long time before Titan appeared with the ATR42 and the demise of the contract. I live in Shetland and have used ATP's regularly since BA replaced the 748's in the early 90's - BA's and BRA's problems with the planes over the years has been very public - I created a thread when the BWA service started asking why on earth they would want to change from the ATR's to the seemingly unreliable ATP's - consensus then was cost plus poss the move from LSI to SCS . I agree that on paper the ATP is the most suitable aircraft - but you have to trade this off with the knowledge that you're going to have more than your fair share of tech problems - which when affecting the Helicopter Ops (expensive bit of service) isn't something that makes sense (unless your an accountant !)Did a return trip on the 146 last week - impressed till the aircraft went tech and we had to wait for one of the others to arrive.
Twas me that mentioned the 4th aircraft being stationed @ ABZ - the basis for this comment was a BWA Statement issued via Bristows following Shell (main user) spitting out the dummy with the services reliability. This was the 2nd time Shell had summoned BWA to explain what they were going to do to resolve the reliability problems. The 4th aircraft arrived a long time before Titan appeared with the ATR42 and the demise of the contract. I live in Shetland and have used ATP's regularly since BA replaced the 748's in the early 90's - BA's and BRA's problems with the planes over the years has been very public - I created a thread when the BWA service started asking why on earth they would want to change from the ATR's to the seemingly unreliable ATP's - consensus then was cost plus poss the move from LSI to SCS . I agree that on paper the ATP is the most suitable aircraft - but you have to trade this off with the knowledge that you're going to have more than your fair share of tech problems - which when affecting the Helicopter Ops (expensive bit of service) isn't something that makes sense (unless your an accountant !)Did a return trip on the 146 last week - impressed till the aircraft went tech and we had to wait for one of the others to arrive.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: London
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UKpaxman you seem to Contradict yourself in your last post. You say that the ATP would have its fair share of problems when operating, but then on your only experience of the 146 you say you had to sit around and wait due to tech problems. Does this not put your point into question. . .As I stated in a post before the ATPs with BWA did have their problems but I seemed to be because BWA Scotland were not getting the engineering support and spares required from HQ. If you look at the other ATP operators that have applied for the work ie BAC Express and Alpine, it would seem sensible to suggest they would be able to give more of their time and money (in terms of spares and engineering support) to these aircraft being their only interests. As one posted above with a bit of TLC the ATP is a great aircraft, more suitable for the job, even as you suggested as one who travels on it. Any operator who is willing to start up and devote their business ONLY towards this route with no other hidden agenda, must be worth their weight in gold.. .You must remember the slump in the airline market is only a tempory one. Six to twelve months down the line it will pick up again and those airlines who have gone into this with the agenda of a short term fix, in terms of gaining capital to survive through this period should be looked apon with caution. Aircraft will make more money operating on an adhoc charter basis on other routes than they will on what seems to be a very tight profit margin, on this route (ie the 146).. .From talking to friends in the industry I must say Flightline are in no better shape financially than BWA were before they went under. From what I can understand it was either them or BWA for the chop. Do the oil consortium really want to take that sort of risk again, to find out 6 months down the line they have to go through this all again. I suppose only time will tell.
[ 24 January 2002: Message edited by: trackdelta ]
[ 24 January 2002: Message edited by: trackdelta ]</p>
[ 24 January 2002: Message edited by: trackdelta ]
[ 24 January 2002: Message edited by: trackdelta ]</p>
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: UK NE Scotland
Age: 59
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It wasn't really a contradiction as I've no experience of the 146's reliability. Whereas I've spent many an hour at either end awaiting an ATP thats getting repaired or substitute aircraft to arrive - BWA,BRA and BA. Interestingly one of the threads above also questions the 146's reliability - <img src="confused.gif" border="0"> . No doubt whatever the end result the debate will continue.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: europe
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lookes like it is going to be a competition between Fligt Line and Atlantic Airways, both operating Bae146... Atlantic`s advantage can be that they have operated the 146 into FAE for more than a decade, succesfully.. .A few data on FAE. .RWY 13/31 1250 MTR. .APPR: Non prec.. .Weather:unstable. .Closest Alternate: 400 NM away!
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rivet-. .So you are saying the bottom line is that the 146 would be "safer" to use on this contract than the ATP, therefore money shouldn't be an issue. What crap.. .And as far as operating the ATP in a x-wind-its not down to being a gambler. Its all about using the correct technique and adhering to the aircrafts limits my friend.If its out of limits you don't do it. Plain and simple.. .So I don't really know what your'e trying to say.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Either the back of a sim, or wherever Crewing send me.
Posts: 1,031
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Rivet -
Honest Frank and myself are obviously wanting the ATP to get the contract as we may well then get a job after the sad demise of BWA, and whilst I respect your views on the ATP I think that your incinuation that it isn't a safe aeroplane is way off the mark, or indeed that the 146 is safer. You say that an ATP kissed the ground whilst trying to take off, I don't know the full facts of this incident, but the 146 hardly has an unblemished reputation. The ATP is perfectly safe, otherwise it wouldn't be allowed to fly!. .I think your comments re safety are unwise, if you thought the ATP wasn't safe why did you spend 2000+ hours in one????
[ 26 January 2002: Message edited by: Johnny F@rt Pants ]</p>
Honest Frank and myself are obviously wanting the ATP to get the contract as we may well then get a job after the sad demise of BWA, and whilst I respect your views on the ATP I think that your incinuation that it isn't a safe aeroplane is way off the mark, or indeed that the 146 is safer. You say that an ATP kissed the ground whilst trying to take off, I don't know the full facts of this incident, but the 146 hardly has an unblemished reputation. The ATP is perfectly safe, otherwise it wouldn't be allowed to fly!. .I think your comments re safety are unwise, if you thought the ATP wasn't safe why did you spend 2000+ hours in one????
[ 26 January 2002: Message edited by: Johnny F@rt Pants ]</p>
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Either the back of a sim, or wherever Crewing send me.
Posts: 1,031
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I have been informed this evening that the final presentations were made today to the various companies, and that the contract will be awarded to the successful bidder on 15th Feb.
GO BAC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
GO BAC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: London
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe from crews who operated this route in the past with BWA, that the guys in Aberdeen who operated the ATP up their would be used on this route. Most of them are waiting to hear back on this. Makes sense really as they have the experience and local knowledge of the route. I also have heard that some of the ex- southend ATP guys are hoping to get in through an ex ATP Captain that is working for BAC - although not convinced as it seems to be a help your friends situation, leaving out a lot of good crews in Aberdeen. Shame really for the guys in Aberdeen who have worked so hard in the past for this consortium.