Aberdeen oil consortium contract
 

Does anyone have any news on this contract, I know that all tenders had to be submitted by today, and that there were apparently 10 or 11 bids. Any idea who's put in bids, who's shortlisted or who's the front-runner??

IVE HEARD THAT THE EX BWA ATP'S ARE BEING MAINTAINED AS NORMAL TO START FLYING AT A MOMENTS NOTICE AND ALSO HEARD FROM SOMEWHERE ABOUT ALPINE AVIATION STARTING UP ASWELL. I CANT SEE JETS OPERATING THE ROUTE LIKE FLITELINE'S 146'S FOREVER AS THEY MUST BE COSTING A FORTUNE.

Heard a long time ago that the consortium were very unhappy with the BWA operation and were open to offers mid way thru the contract. Wrong airplane, bad operation, anyone throw any light?

Nothing is ideal to Scatsta I know, but maybe ScotAirways could run the arses off their 328's and make it work, higher operating costs but at least a decent operator / airplane could demand a little higher premium and save SoctAirways into the bargain!!!

Well, I don't remember the Oil Companies having such a big problem when Brymon Offshore were running the Dash7's on that route. From memory they wanted it done cheaper, and look what they got. Unfortunate for BWA, and everyone involved, but it has brought a smile to faces off some, as rumours were rife of double dealings involved when Brymon lost the contract a couple of years ago.

............. Chins up it coould be worse... <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0"> <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0"> <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0">

IM NOT 100% SURE BUT I THINK THE OIL COMPANY WAS QUITE HAPPY WITH IT AS THEY COULD BE BACKING A COMPLETLY NEW AIRLINE.

Flightline were advertising in this weeks Press & Journal in Aberdeen for cabin crew for 3 months contract-Whats all that about then.

LGW Vulture - well sport, for a supposed Senior Aviation Analyst, with regards to some of the stuff you contribute, you seem remarkably ill-informed (neigh, naive).

Accordingly I'd suggest you do a little more research as to the historic 'facts' in respect to the why's and wherefores of history of the Aberdeen Oil Contract work, e.g. it was the 'Oil Consortium' who wanted BWA to use (highly unreliable) ATP's (whereas BWA had wanted to use ATR's, i.e. they even had two of them on their AOC just for that purpose - and indeed a lot of the demise of BWA was due to a failure in refinancing / selling-on of the full-rate leases on the those two aircraft) plus the fact that to provide the required (contracted) 'service level' they needed to have a ridiculous number of (unreliable) ATP aircraft available, when two ATR's would have sufficed.

The bottom line is old son, there's a lot of history that surrounds all this, most of which you were not privy to !

Ps. It's for a good reason that the ATP is also known as, 'Another Technical Problem' - and in ALL of the above BAe have an awful lot to answer for (imho) !

Well, here's hoping Flightline get the contract. Being a regular user of the service I've spent many an hour in Aberdeen waiting for BWA to fix the ATP or fire up the fourth aircraft. Having a fleet of 4 aircraft with three out of service due to technical problems is downright ridiculous but it happened on a few occassions. The contract only demanded 3 aircraft, the fourth aircraft was only brought in due to the poor reliability of the other three. Living under the flightpath of Scatsta, and talking to some folk who have used the service, the punctuality of the service has never been better. With regard to the cost, apparently the 146's are using about a third more fuel than the ATP's, that said the 146 is much better at clearing backlog from Scatsta as they can depart with up to 95 PAX but they're limited to a similar number as the ATP was for arrival at Scatsta. Have to say watching them take of and climb is pretty damned impressive, I'm due out of Scatsta first thing Monday and I'm looking forward to the flight. Here's hoping the consortium look a bit further than costs this time - either that or bring back the Dash 7's.

The 146 is proving its suitability and impressing the punters and clients alike. Nothing but positive vibs so far!!!

Used to do this route out of Aberdeen with the old Shorts 330. Marvelous machine for this route.
Not too fast agreed but made it in and out many times when others failed. Can't see the D328 on this route due to the poor crosswind component on the machine, 21 Kts.
And this is absolute Max, no messing around!!
Dornier is just not built for Scottish Island weather in fact neither is the BAE 146!
Bring back the old Shed and all will be forgiven!!!!!

Shawny,

I did lots of trips on the 330, my memories are earache and the hardest landing short of a completley uncontrolled descent. Problem nowadays is the fixed wing into Scatsta is there primarily to serve the Helicopters - because of this the aircraft needs to be able to carry 54 pax - 3 helicopter loads. This rules out a lot of the smaller regional aircraft. The low point of the 330's service was when it was unceremoniously blown over onto it's wing one night during the stopover. Dash 7 was the most fun, crosswinds seemed like more of a challenge to these guys - and as for short take off and landing, it had to be seen to be believed sometimes.

Lets get back to the main discussion - not, what aircraft we think can do what and where.Right.

Hadrian should have built that wall higher.

Gentlemen,

I believe that - as I hope you will all find out the hard way - the ATR42/72 does this job just perfectly.

Having dealt with the various companies that fly or flew out of Sumburgh over the past years, In my eyes apart from the performance of the 146, the best aircraft for the job is the ATR72. It was a bad day when the ATR's were replaced by the ATP's. Very rarely did they leave Sumburgh without a max payload available.
They would be ideal for Scatsta.
<img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0"> <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0"> <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0">

Except the oil consortium decided against the ATR after insisting it be used. Only to discover it was much more expensive to operate when compared to the ATP, and then reverted back to the ATP.
As for reliability on the ATP, the dispatch figures tell the truth. The ATP is no more unreliable than any other aircraft, it just has a bad press.
Many of the delays associated with this contract were down to tech choppers or wx, but the ATP was often made to be the scapegoat.

Here here silverhawk.
Many a time I can remember tech heli's, poor wx off-shore( below the heli's minima )or poor wx at SCS, late arrival of heli's etc...But the ATP would get the stick.
Yes, the ATP did go tech sometimes.What aircraft doesn't.

Strap-in I have some email to send to you regarding some of the allegations you have made in this thread. The email in your profile is not working therefore I must inform you that unless you provide a valid email address to me privately and amend the one in your profile I will be deleting all posts ever made by you.

You do not have to leave the new address publically visible but you MUST provide an address where you are contactable at. This goes to anyone else who uses PPRuNe.

Silverhawk,

Bad Press ???, you mean BWA brought a fourth aircraft to Aberdeen just because they read somewhere it was unreliable - I don't think so. Honest Frank is right about the offshore weather causing delays, this led to backlog and this tended to be when the ATP used to play its Joker and go tech usually at least two together. When the ATR's were at Sumburgh, you'd be surprised at the number of BA pax who ended up on the ATR due to ATP's going tech. In fact my last trip through Sumburgh in December saw a 146 there, diverted from Scatsta due to crosswinds. When it left it also had all the BA pax from another cancelled ATP flight that was left sulking on the apron. The last excuse I heard was that the ATP's didn't like the damp conditions.

As one who has flown both the ATP and 146 ( currently flying B777) I must say that both aircraft are good at what they do. From what I can gather BWA did have problems with the ATPs in Aberdeen but it must be said that it sems they were not getting the engineering support from HQ. Look at BRAL, they seem to be having good overall dispatch rates with theirs because they are well maintained. When it comes to the crunch I believe the ATP has the advantage over the 146 it its bad weather performance. I have flown both and know which I would rather be flying on a cold, windy winters evening in the Shetlands. That being said you can understand why the pax love the jet. But you have to look at the bigger picture and with good engineering support I believe the ATP is the aircraft for the job up their.
Anyway good luck to whoever gets it.

Honest Frank - what you've said is quite right, there were many occasions when I have arrived in Scatsta to be told the helicopters are running late, and when you're scheduled out in 25 mins with a 1/2 hour turnround in Aberdeen there's no catch-up. The guys and occasionally girls in Aberdeen are only told they're delayed and assume it's the aircraft's fault when it's quite often not. Anyway how's the house coming along during this enforced period of poorly paid leave???

Re the debate about ATP/ATR/146, well it all depends on how much the oil consortium are prepared to pay. The ATP is the cheapest option, which is the reason it was brought in to do the job a couple of years ago, it is also better at dealing with strong x-winds than either of the others. It may well be the most inferior of the three in most other aspects but that is a major factor in the Shetlands, and I'll bet there are many occasions when the ATP'll get in when none of the others would.

Anyway none of this actually answers the original post, so come on somebody give us a clue as to who's up for the job, and most importantly do they need any pilots.

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 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?

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.

I did hear rumours that the contract is being awarded today - can anyone confirm or deny this???

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 !

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 hear its down to 2 ATP and 2 146 operators, anyone know anything different?

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.....

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.

I understand that it can get very windy up in Scatsta. Does anyone know the crosswind component landing limits for the ATR/ATP/BAe146?

But will they pay for it?

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.

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!

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!

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"> :)

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

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).

Silwerhawk
What do you mean ?
I was answering Slizer`s question....
ATR`s got the 99,5 %++ dispatch advantage too...

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">