North Sea Jigsaw [Archive]

3rd Sep 2003, 00:49

Bertie - the same suggestions are made every couple of years or so regarding civilianisation of 78 Sqn - the S61s could take the SAR role and a contractor could provide the heavy lift for the times when it is needed.
However, since it is our only deployed SAR asset and the whole military SAR empire is under financial scrutiny from MOD (it doesn't do a whole lot of military stuff despite being a vital part of the nation's obligation to honour the Chicago Convention in providing SAR facilities for shipping and aviation), to hand it over in the current political climate would be less than wise.
Once the future of SAR helicopter provision in UK is clarified, since you currently have 3 service providers - the RAF, RN and HMCG using Bristows, where probably one would suffice, then maybe it will be handed over.

zalt

18th Nov 2003, 00:15

In line with Twisted Rigging's suggestion in July, G-JSAR has started a contract at based onshore at Dan Helder today (see headlines at http://www.bristowhelicopters.com/). Its a five-year contract, with two one-year extension options, awarded by a group of eight Dutch oil and gas companies (including BP Nederland). Apparently a review of the safety cases has shown that the Dutch military SAR capability is adequate.

S76Heavy

18th Nov 2003, 06:18

Zalt,
you probably meant to write "inadequate".
Funny to see how every country operates Sea Kings and the Dutch thought to get away with a Lynx. Cheap trick.
As far as I know these oil companies got a report that stated that an accident with something like a S61 or a Super Puma would mean that after a survivable accident everybody would perish due to the lack of adequate SAR cover. And they probably thought they were going to end up in court if it happened..

Still, commercial SAR opens up the market a bit more, perhaps it should become the standard? leave the combat SAR to the military but normal SAR to a commercial operator?

Heliport

18th Nov 2003, 15:46

A contact tells me that OVN (the Independent Pilots Association NL) has been achieving results. The union put forward a strong case that the existing SAR capacity was inadequate and has persuaded the oil companies in NOGEPA to take action.

NAM/Shell have addressed the lack of radio cover over sea and are now installing new transmitters/receivers all over the North sea to guarantee full radio cover down to the deck.

In addition, the Dutch government has given a commitment that the ageing ssr-only radar at Den Helder will be replaced with a more powerful radar that has primary capability as well.

Discussions are continuing with the government, NOGEPA, ATC and other agencies to improve the working conditions of Dutch offshore pilots.
OVN is expected to produce an advice paper for the Minister of Transport in the next few weeks outlining what it has identified as the improvements necessary in the interest of flight safety.
eg The union argues that the ageing Dutch Navy Lynxes are too small and slow to do the job.

OVN is small union but, from what my contact tells me, it appears to be getting results.

Hummingfrog

20th Feb 2004, 23:12

Still very quiet on the rumour front though BALPA Log did have an article on the concept. Is it going to happen?:confused:

Am I going to have to retire my yellow helmet!!:{

HF

Bomber ARIS

20th Feb 2004, 23:26

There's a Rotorhead on the Newcastle Crash thread by the name of Jigsaw Jockey, conspicuous by his/her absence from this discussion.

Perhaps due to embarassment at their 100k salary.:O

Let's have the story Jockey

roundwego

9th May 2004, 21:32

Anyone got any news on the BP jigsaw SAR contract? Has it died a death yet or is BP still wanting to push on with it?

332mistress

10th May 2004, 19:49

Due to BP selling its assets in the N Sea Bond will have a spare Puma on contract to BP so watch this space for Jigsaw in 2005.

332M;)

JKnife

10th May 2004, 20:40

Rumour mill has it Bond will supply two aircraft, one based offshore and one onshore in the Shetlands somewhere.

Any one any idea where the crews are going to come from? Lots of military SAR crews with loads of experience who would like to get out of the RN/RAF - hint, hint.

Here's hoping :D

JKnife

JKnife

12th May 2004, 15:32

Seems the rumour wasn't far off according to the following:

http://www.shephard.co.uk/Assets/Images/Rotorhub/2004/05-may/bond332l2.jpg

Aberdeen, Scotland: Bond Offshore Helicopters has been awarded a long-term contract by BP Exploration for two new Super Pumas to provide search-and-rescue (SAR) services in support of operations by the oil major in the Central and Northern North Sea and West of the Shetland Islands.

Under the 10-year contract, valued at approximately 100 million, Bond will provide two dedicated, state-of-the-art Super Puma AS332L Mark II helicopters, air and ground crews and full back-up for round-the-clock SAR, 365 days a year.

The aircraft have been ordered from Eurocopter for delivery in the second half of 2005 when they will go into service in December with onsite immediate response crews and engineers. One aircraft will be based on a production platform in the Central North Sea and the other on Shetland. They will operate in conjunction with advanced Regional Support Ships provided by one of BPs marine contractors

The twin-engine Mark II Super Pumas provide improved safety and performance, with a four-axis auto-hover system which significantly enhances the aircrafts ability to operate in severe weather conditions and at night; a dual hoist system, and state-of-the-art avionics and SAR equipment, making the Super Puma one of the most advanced SAR aircraft in the world.

Around 40 personnel - pilots, rescue crew and engineers - are being recruited by Bond for the contract. The company has already secured a number of them and they will be employed meantime on other services.

Bond began operating services to the offshore industry in the North Sea in the early 1970s, becoming a leader in its field in the UK and internationally. The company and its staff have extensive experience of providing SAR services to the offshore industry, military and government bodies in Europe and Australia.

Geoff Williams, Bond Offshore Helicopters Managing Director, said: The contract takes helicopter operations in the offshore industry into a new dimension, with search-and-rescue being significantly enhanced through these dedicated aircraft and crews in their specialist role.

The scope and scale of the contract is also a major step forward in the development of our services to the industry and in the creation of further long-term employment.

The SAR helicopters will bring to seven the Super Pumas in Bonds fleet.

Mountainman

14th May 2004, 13:04

I'm amazed at the lack of comments regarding Bond being awarded the Jigsaw contract.
I am a Coastguard SAR pilot, and I know the guys that did the Jigsaw trial, and to a man, they all said how difficult it was to work up to and maintain the standard that BP required........and they were almost all current Coastguard aircrew.
Where are Bond going to get that kind of experience from ?
Ex military pilots are generally very good, but it takes time to get them up to speed (no critisism intended, civvy flying is just different) And I've heard the L2 is not the easiest machine to get to grips with (I'll stick to my 61 thanks)
I think it's great to see more work coming up, but I personally don't believe that Bond have the experience to start up this kind of SAR operation.
If BP were so keen on safety at any cost, why didn't they give the work to a proven operator?
Does anyone care?

Aussie Mate

14th May 2004, 14:00

South Africa and Australia silly.......

Heliport

14th May 2004, 14:28

Press and Journal Aberdeen UNION ANGER AS BP REVEALS PLANS TO REPLACE STANDBY SAFETY VESSELS

Oil giant BP is poised to reveal plans for a new offshore safety system scrapping standby safety vessels today - a move certain to provoke a furious response from unions representing offshore workers.

Details of plans for four giant motherships, each with two high performance lifeboats, combined with more helicopter cover, personal locator devices and better survival equipment were given to union leaders and MPs last night.

Under what is known as Operation Jigsaw the central and north North Sea will be divided into three areas with BP installations, each of which will be patrolled by one of the new regional support vessels, with the fourth en route to or from shore with supplies.

Their lifeboats - autonomous recovery rescue craft or "arcs" - will each be the equivalent of RNLI sea-going lifeboats and capable of rescuing survivors and completing passage ashore, according to reports.

It was not clear if the motherships will be equipped with helicopter platforms and carry their own aircraft. They will be similar, but 50% larger, than existing multi-role vessels used in the southern North Sea

It is understood BP have commissioned the craft from Chinese shipyards and that their keels have already been laid.

They will replace the existing fleet of largely chartered safety vessels, one of which is on constant patrol round each platform.

The company claim that the new safety regime will be more expensive to operate than current arrangements and provide better security and safety cover.

Senior executives firmly deny their motive is to save money.

Among concerns likely from politicians, some of whom are expected to give the company's plans a very cautious welcome, is the fact that BP have raced ahead without producing a prototype for testing in severe North Sea conditions.

There is also worry about the effect on other offshore operators like Marathon and Kerr McGee.

But the senior National Union of Marine Aviation and Shipping Transport Officers (Numast) national secretary Alan Graveson said: "Jigsaw has two key pieces missing."

He said these include the removal of safety vessels, one of whose tasks is to warn off shipping that come too close, with an increased risk of collision.

The other that in the event of a mass abandonment "helicopters with regional support vessels carrying 'daughter' craft will be woefully inadequate".

He protested the unions had been given just 24 hours warning of the announcement of proposals which appeared to mean "that all that was learned following the Piper Alpha disaster has been thrown in the bin".

He said: "It is a disgrace to the memory of those who lost their lives."

BP has made substantial changes to proposals first put forward in 2002 which were roundly denounced by the unions. They were also widely criticised by MPs and standby vessel owners.

One of the most telling complaints was that there was an over reliance on helicopters which were said not to be able to cope with a mass abandonment and unable to operate in the worst weather, putting lives at risk.

A BP spokeswoman said then their proposals would include a significant marine element and enhance substantially their safety capability. She said: "We are concluding our detailed evaluation of the various components of the project which includes both aviation and marine elements, which have been the subject of intensive consultation with offshore employers and contractors."

BP was approached for comment last night.

An emergency meeting of the Inter-Union Offshore Oil Committee is being called to discus the proposals.

It is understood the Health and Safety Executive have been consulted by BP and may have signalled their approval.

Hambling Chaos

14th May 2004, 19:56

Mountainman I guess that all this committment to safety is fine until it costs.

Bristows are the number one SAR operator but they must cost more as they have the best equipped civil SAR helicopters in the world. I saw the Jigsaw Mk2 at Helitech and it was superb, they had taken a good Mk2 and improved it out of all recognition - what are Bond going to do?

Also the BP press release says that it will create 40 jobs - how are they going to run 2x 24/7 sites and a spare aircraft and crew and trainers with only 40 people?

You must hand it to BP though, they sold the concept to the workforce using Bristows and then implement it with a cheap copy.

Hippolite

14th May 2004, 21:01

Hambling Chaos

If you are who I think you are, your comments are interesting since I would have thought that you would have been involved in the contract award unless the decision was viod of any operational input and made exclusively by bean counters??

These must be interesting times for you.

HH:cool:

Hambling Chaos

14th May 2004, 22:53

Hippolite

I am not sure I know who you think I am! My typing skills are quite poor and shambling chaos didn't come out quite right when I logged on- don't go on the handle listen to the message!

However, you comment about bean counters may be quite apposite. Put helicopters offshore, get a tick in the box, save money.

simfly

14th May 2004, 23:53

Has any announcment of the final locations of these aircraft been given? I've heard that BP are planning (or hoping) to base one of these aircraft in Scasta :oh: though I thought the plan was to base one/them offshore..... :confused: and for those who don't know, there is an offshore based emergency heliochopper in East Shetland Basin, Statoil have a 214 based on Statfjord (a few miles from Brent!) to which Shell have a contract with, and use now and again for casevacs and the odd emergency downman, but BP cannot use it and currently have to wait for the Coastguard S-61 from Sumburgh.

HughMartin

15th May 2004, 20:11

BP and Bond go back a long way with SAR trials. This photo was taken on the Belford Dolphin accommodation rig in the Forties field in 1978.

If my memory serves me right, the BP rep agreed to a trial using a rope ladder. The person climbing up it (he is only about 2 feet above the helideck) was one of the aircraft engineers. This trial was for obvious reasons not a success!

The pilot posts on this forum. Does he remember??

Bond went on to provide a very successful SAR service with a Dauphin for many years.

http://www.hughmartin.btinternet.co.uk/Fly/Jigsaw.jpg

Cyclic Hotline

15th May 2004, 21:43

The method described above by Hugh, is not a new one.

I clearly recall thr "Batcopter" an all-singing, all dancing variant of the Bell 47 being used in a similar fashion. Unfortunately during the trials, with Robin at the helm, Batman was savagely attacked by a Shark!

After some deft work with an aerosol can of shark repellant, the vicious beast let go. Later on they also demonstrated a unique emergency preocedure when they suffered an engine failure but were fortunate enough to perform an emergency landing in a mattress factory! :8 :ok:

Nigel Osborn

16th May 2004, 05:01

Hi Hugh

Where in the hell did you get that photo???? The person on the ladder was a deck attendant who had never climbed a rope ladder in his life which is why BP chose him. The person in the back is an engineer whose job was to watch and make any safety comments but not to do anything unless for safety.
The ladder was rolled up and fitted under the rear seat, the whole idea being that it could be left there and rolled out by the pilot when an emergency rose.
The pilot, and I won't say who he was but he left for Oz the nezt week, rolled out the ladder and the climber was in the back in under 30 seconds. BP were suitably impressed as this was done in response to a 61 ditching with only 3 on board and the other helicopters flying by could only watch, although 1 did toss out a life raft which went a few miles downwind. The Forties Kiwi very kindly made the ladder.
How time flies!!!:O

Night Watchman

16th May 2004, 06:48

Interesting pictures, I can see from that lifting technique why Bond aren't recruiting that many people!

Despite Bond and BP's 'long history' of SAR trials :confused: I should point out that the Jigsaw trials were slightly more complicated than getting some poor sod to climb up a rope ladder!

Nowadays the BP Health and Safety Department would have a f**king fit at the very thought of an untrained man climbing a rope ladder to a helicopter without the aid of safety ropes, trained medics, roped off areas, HSE consultants and a bouncy castle. But it is nice to see that the man in question has one hand on the ladder rail at all times! So no red card there!

In fact it's a very different North Sea to the one Bond left, as I believe they are now discovering. So I have no idea where they are going to get their staff from. There aren't that many qualified guys around and as anyone who's been involved in SAR will tell you - SAR training takes time and experience. It's not just a case of putting crew on a 3 month SAR course to get a tick in the box. If BP and Bond are serious about this then they are going to need to get the right guys to run it and man it. SAR is about experience and that's hard to find.

There were a lot of lessons learnt during the trial on both the flying and engineering side that will have to be learnt all over again.

Anyway, good luck chaps.

But the real burning question is what are they going to call their aircraft? Bristow owns the 'jigsaw' callsign so what will Bond use? Answers on a postcard.....

Hambling Chaos

16th May 2004, 08:59

Night Watchman has hit the nail on the head, things have moved on in recent years and things are hopefully a lot more professional.

If the rumours about Bond pay are true, what self respecting SAR pilot or crewman is going to jump ship to join an outfit with no REAL SAR pedigree, which is clearly being run on a shoe string?

The Jigsaw crew at Helitech explained that they had to modify the SAR autohover control in the cabin as the standard Eurocopter system needed a crewman with 3 hands- there are some ugly crewmen around but very few with 3 hands! Where will BP get all that kit from, will Bristows cut their own throat and sell the design?

I bet the CAA and HSE are watching BP very carefully.

S76Heavy

16th May 2004, 09:37

But the real burning question is what are they going to call their aircraft? Bristow owns the 'jigsaw' callsign so what will Bond use? Answers on a postcard.....
How about "Puzzle"?
:}

Hambling Chaos

16th May 2004, 11:46

How about:

Once piece short of a Jigsaw.

Or,

the Nightsun is on but the 3 armed crewman is not at home.

Or,

The names Bond, Jig Bond.

SASless

16th May 2004, 12:23

Do you reckon some Bristow SAR folks might be enticed to leave for greener pastures? Afterall...if Bond got the contract...there will be some overstaffing at the outfits that lost the bid. Or am I wrong here? Rumbles from Nigeria seem to suggest that OLOG is intent upon replacing Brits with Local pilots.

AllyPally

16th May 2004, 19:44

Whoever won this contract would have had a problem finding the crews to man it. I don't believe that any of the contenders has 12 SAR qualified captains, flying non SAR line flights, available to fill this contract. There are also going to need pilots who are willing to live in Scasta!! or spend half their life on one of bp's rigs being constantly b*******d for not holding onto a stair handrail etc.

It will be interesting to see the terms and conditions that Bond are prepared to offer to entice suitabley qualified pilots to join them. As Night Watchman said you can't take an AS332L2 captain who has never night winched over water and turn him into a safe SAR captain in less than 6 months and with a 90 flying hr training bill (Seaking SAR course times).

Interesting times ahead for those who are SAR qualified and are willing to spend half the year away from their family!!!

AP

BHPS

16th May 2004, 20:04

SASless

I don't think Bristow will lose SAR crews just because Bond have won the Jigsaw contract. The Bristow Jigsaw guys are mostly now working on a contract in Holland with the black and yellow Mk 2 that was at Helitech, and the Coastguard units still need to be crewed. Certainly no overstaffing at any of these units. I suppose it is possible that for some of the guys in Holland, they may make a move if they want to go back to UK and Bristow tell them there isn't a job for them at home. No doubt Bond would be interested in them as they were in at the start of BP's pet project.

As to OLOG wanting US pilots instead of Brits, I too have heard that, but a lot of the oil companies evidently want pilots with North Sea experience. Wonder how much longer that will happen though with those b*****d accountants in the contract departments of the oil companies who want helicopters out in Nigeria?

BHPS

JKnife

16th May 2004, 20:39

As someone still in UK military SAR I would like to ask Mountainman why he says "Ex military pilots are generally very good, but it takes time to get them up to speed". Aren't most of the Captains in Bristow SAR ex-military anyway, or are there some purely civil-trained ones now? What about the aircrewmen? If the pilots have trouble, then surely all ex-military must have some problems adopting to civil procedures?

I cannot see what the difference is between the way military SAR crews work and the way Civil do except possibly when it comes to training. I understand that there aren't many hours to train each month in the civil world (and there aren't as many as there were in the military world these days), plus the CAA apply some restrictions which do not apply to the military. That aside, please explain?

Don't the procedures that Bristow use originally come from the UK military anyway?

As for the new contract with Bond, if Bristow had won it, wouldn't they have needed to get new crews, so they would have been in the same position anyway, despite what Mountainman says about a proven unit?

I wonder what the training will be for those that Bond take on? I guess it wont be anywhere near the amount that AllyPally suggests from the military course that he mentions. I agree with him and Night Watchman that it takes time to gain experience and I would suggest that even 6 months is too quick for a SAR Captain. More like a year at least.

However, even saying all that, I think there may well be some military crews interested if they can get their "get out of jail free" card arranged in time.

JKnife

Hambling Chaos

16th May 2004, 21:26

JKnife,

The trouble is that there is not a standard military way to do SAR. As an ex military pilot myself, I know that the way the navy crewmen con a deck is different to the RAF way. The civilian way tends to take a bit from each service and tweaks it a bit, so ex military pilots have to adapt to a new(ish) way of doing things. More SAR pilots are being trained in-house as fewer military pilots join the N Sea these days.

Also the civilian SAR helicopters tend to be better equipped and the crewman's job involves using the FLIR, also the radar is in the front not the back.

Most oil companies impose minimum hours limitations on commanders, often specifying a minimum no of offshore hours as well. It is unusual for a military pilot to get his command in less than a year, even for fast-tracked experienced military SAR pilots. So, if Jigsaw suddenly need a lot of experienced SAR pilots the the choice is to poach current civilian SAR pilots (pay them big bucks) or get ex mil pilots and pay big bucks to train them.

JKnife

16th May 2004, 21:51

Thanks Hambling Chaos for your input. You appear to suggest that the military do not have a standard way of doing things. I must strongly disagree. The Navy has its way of doing it and the RAF its way, I agree, but that doesn't mean that we don't have our standards. Surely you must realise this from your service days? Each service does standardise within its own and, by what you are saying, so does Bristow. Is it not that the RN, RAF and Bristow (plus now Bond who will probably have their own procedures), are really just different "companies"?

Are there not differences in procedures if you change between companies in the civil world? It surely doesn't take long to get used to the new procedures? I just get the feeling you and Mountainman are trying to make it sound more difficult than it actually is.

As for the equipment, well, it might be better, but you still need the pilots and aircrewmen to do the job at the end, which is winching. Not that difficult to learn new equipment and quicker than trying to get the overall experience of SAR, I would suggest.

I guess we'll have to see what Bond will offer for experience at the end of the day as you say. I suspect (hope?) that if they really need SAR experienced crews they may just ask the oil companies to reassess their minimum hours limitations, or does the CAA have a say as well?

JKnife

Mountainman

17th May 2004, 07:18

Hello JKnife,
(s)Hambling Chaos has really answered your question, but let me elaborate slightly.
Of course the military have standards, but you make the point yourself that they are not the same standards.
If you left the RN (for instance) and joined a unit staffed wholly by ex-RN aircrew, you would have no problem fitting in. However, when you join a civvy outfit like Bristows, you will be working with Ex RN, RAF and civvy aircrew (yes we do have home-grown captains now)
How long does it take to convince an ex RAF pilot that it is not the best idea to change from aircraft to boat axis in the middle of a transfer? I fly with ex RAF pilots who have been out of the forces for 10 years and they still revert to type when under pressure. You cannot afford for this to happen on a dark and stormy night.
It's equally difficult to stop ex RN crewmen from saying "easy, easy, steady" and although it's not a killer, it does emphasise the point that a good SAR crew MUST know what each other are going to say and do when under pressure. Surely your standards teams would agree?
When we do a transfer from a yacht under way, we will get the yacht to go on a port tack,close hauled rather than sails down. This allows us to effect a hi-line transfer whilst the mast is held off to Starboard by the wind, safe in the knowledge that our down draft will not blow the yacht over....why? Because our winching position is just behind the cockpit rather than well aft like the Seaking.So there's your next problem, you also have a differant aircraft to contend with.
Once you have got all this sorted out, and feel ready for command, you will then have to convince all the other aircrew on the unit that you are up to scratch and dependable. Your rank will not give you any respect on a civvy SAR unit, it only dictates how much you get paid.
Training wise, each unit gets 45 hours a month for training, and this will give you about 15- 20 hours training per man.
If this all sounds like civvy "spin", then speak to any of the ex-mil guys on the units and ask them how they found the transition.
Finally, yes, the CAA have an enormous input, as I believe Bond are now discovering.
Launching off with a hearty "Hi Ho Silver" and returning for tea and medals does not go down well with them (sadly, as I miss those days)

simfly

17th May 2004, 13:28

I have a feeeling that SAR experience was most definately NOT the reason for the contract being awarded to Bond, but more the fact that BP are trying to utilise the aircraft that would be spare in the new contract about to start. Remember, when the contract was awarded to Bond it was for x amount of L2's, then BP subsequently sold off Forties, Thistle, Montrose and one or two others, result- too many helicopters.... No doubting the fact that G-JSAR is a state of the art piece of kit, and very experienced crews along with it, but can bond now lure these guys their way????

JKnife

17th May 2004, 18:18

Mountainman

Thanks for your comments. I would question you more on some of them, but this topic is not for that and I think we have taken up enough space.

JKnife

running in

18th May 2004, 15:58

Simfly,

So you are saying that Bond picked up the work because BP had bought them too many L2s? Sounds like the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing!

Experienced civil licensed SAR pilots and experienced crewmen are at a premium - what do you think the going rate will be to sit and get bored stupid offshore? The Norwegians pay their offshore based crews something like £200+ a day on top of their normal salary. I think to jump ship from a land based SAR unit to live on a N Sea Platform I would need at least that much encouragement!

Anyone know what Bond/BP are paying?

Running In

Hambling Chaos

18th May 2004, 18:58

Running In

I think it will take more than just pay (unless it is lots and lots and lots, in which case I might be interested!) to get people to "jump ship".

Conditions of employment, the equipment and training will all come into play. If Jigsaw is to be done on a shoe string then retaining people could be a problem.

running in

18th May 2004, 19:28

H Chaos

I agree that retention could be a problem, look at the civilian SAR operator across the water!

I hope that BP/Bond will appreciate that SAR is more complex than ferrying people to a rig.

Sailor Vee

19th May 2004, 11:19

running in,

Across which piece of water are we talking about? If it's Eire, we're having absolutely no problem with retention, in fact, there is a waiting list of people to join.

running in

19th May 2004, 17:34

Sailor Vee

Which I suppose is why Bristows had a spate of crewmen joining them from Ireland.

running in

20th May 2004, 11:20

I see that Bond have just accepted their first L2. Does anyone know when the first SAR aircraft is arriving?

simfly

20th May 2004, 11:39

Heard SAR part doesn't start till 2005ish.

BHPS

20th May 2004, 20:41

According to an item on Rotorhub at this link http://www.shephard.co.uk/Rotorhub/Default.aspx?Action=745115149&ID=90a8aaf6-e24d-47bd-83d2-4ad0a85df59c it says that the SAR aircraft will not be delivered until August 2005. The other 5 aircraft in passenger configuration will all be delivered by July this year.

Anyone know if Bond Offshore have sorted out their AOC yet? Heard that the CAA weren't happy with some things and haven't issued it yet.

BHPS

Mountainman

21st May 2004, 19:52

JKnife,
I appreciate your restraint.
Please feel free to PM me anytime for a chat.
Mountainman

running in

21st May 2004, 21:18

If jigsaw isn't due to start until late 2005 why has the Mk2 been chosen for the job when more capable aircraft will be in service by then.

Both the S92 and Ec225 are more capable than the Mk2, have better safer systems, for example a run-dry gearbox. The S92 has a bigger cabin, always a plus when picking up lots of survivors. The EC 225 is faster than the Mk2 and has better hover performance.

It does seem strange that a soon to be obsolescent aircraft has been chosen for a system which is meant to improve safety, when the new types on the N Sea will offer much more. Unless it boils down to cost, or am I being cynical again?

Mars

22nd May 2004, 14:37

Running in:

Are you sure of your facts about the run-dry gearboxes?

running in

22nd May 2004, 19:49

Mars

According to the brochures for the S92 and EC 225 they have dry running gearboxes. In fact I believe it is now required for certification.

Also if you look at the Sikorsky website they claim that they have a run dry capability. The EC 225 claims the same thing.

HeliEng

22nd May 2004, 19:51

Running In:

What you must bear in mind is that the L2 has already been through all th Jigsaw trials. To bring either of the types that you mention into this kind of role is not an overnight task, the chances are that neither of them would be ready to even start trialing until late 2005.

running in

22nd May 2004, 21:26

Heli Eng

Unless Bond buy all the Bristow mods which ensured the success of the trial, along with the MCA crews, then they might as well start from scratch with a new type as it will take just as long.

Bristows took several months to modify the L2 up to MCA standards for the trial, using knowledge gleaned from decades of Coastguard Operations.

HeliEng

22nd May 2004, 21:49

I appreciate your point, but none of the fits to G-JSAR are a secret, and besides with people working with Bond who are very familiar with JSAR, I can't see it being that much of a problem.

Who knows, all speculation at this point, only time will tell!!!

:confused: ;) :confused: ;)

Mars

23rd May 2004, 14:17

Running in:

Don't believe all you read!!

running in

23rd May 2004, 20:31

Mars

Try looking at JAR 29 or FAR 29 on the net. If they can't run dry they don't meet the new requirement!

Mars

24th May 2004, 07:57

Running in:

Whilst it is correct that a requirement is present in FAR/JAR 29.927(c)(1), it could be interpreted that is it conditional upon the assessment that some (loss of gearbox lubrication) failure modes are extremely remote; this might trigger request for an Equivalent Level of Safety (ELOS) assessment - which would propose mitigation only of those elements which fall short of the extremely remote categorisation.(1) Category A. Unless such failures are extremely remote, it must be shown by test that any failure which results in loss of lubricant in any normal use lubrication system will not prevent continued safe operation, although not necessarily without damage, at a torque and rotational speed prescribed by the applicant for continued flight, for at least 30 minutes after perception by the flight crew of the lubrication system failure or loss of lubricant.Which led to my questioning of your simplistic assumption. (It could be suggested that it is difficult/impossible to satisfy the requirement for a 30 minute run-dry gearbox for helicopters above a certain size - hence the use of alternative emergency lubrication systems, or failure assessment.)

No regulation can foresee all future uses/interpretations; that's why we see the introduction of hedging statements - to avoid the law of unintended consequences.

running in

24th May 2004, 14:17

Mars

Thank you for your comprehensive reply...you could almost be Nick Lappos. If you are Nick, could you confirm if the S92 has a run dry gearbox because rumours coming out from Norway are that it hasn't.

Seriously, as a line pilot I would be happy with an emergency lube or cooling system if the gear box will not run dry. However, I would not be happy with an equivalent level of safety (if it is what I think it is) as current gearboxes have been know to throw out their oil. Knowing my luck it would be in the ESB in the middle of the night in a gale!

Mars, what equivalent level of safety would you be happy with..equivalent to the S61, or the S Puma or what?

I was hoping (in my simplistic way) that the new aircraft would be safer and comply with the latest FARs and JARs, not use a get out clause because it is "difficult/impossible".

running in

running in

26th May 2004, 10:08

Mars

Do you have a view on the "Equivalent Level of Safety" that you would be happy with?

Or were you expressing company policy?

You clearly know a lot about this subject and I am interested (in my simplistic way) about how you see future certification going. Do you think we should adopt the Boeing solution and claim grandfather rights (like the 737) going back decades or should we try and improve future helicopters in accordance with the latest FARs and JARs? Gearboxes in particular seem a particular weak point in helicopters - do you agree.

Getting back to the thread of this discussion. SAR helicopters need to be reliable, if a crewchange helicopter has a snag it diverts, if a SAR helicopter has to divert due to a snag then the survivors could die. Hence my initial comment that in my view Jigsaw should not use an obsolescent type, ie the Mk2. I know economics come into this, but so might saving lives.

running in

ScotiaQ

26th May 2004, 12:55

BOND started SAR in Ireland and some of the crews involved are now back with BOND. Aircraft Nos 6 & 7 will be the SAR Aircraft and fully equipped by Eurocopter. Times have moved on and certainly BOND have, a pity that some of the otehr operators cannot move on and be part of the present instead of always looking back.

They have the equipment and will have the crew - mark my words.

Hambling Chaos

26th May 2004, 16:21

Is that why the other 2 operators are "looking back" with the S92 and EC 225 rather than moving on with a 15 year old design?

TeeS

26th May 2004, 18:09

Hambling Chaos & Running In:

Do you really think it would be a wise move to kick start your brand new fleet with a brand new aircraft type?

I can't think of a single 'new' type that has ever been introduced without 'teething problems'. That might be a pain in the backside when you are introducing one new type amongst a couple of other fleets, but when it is your only type, that could spell the end!

Cheers

TeeS

Woolf

26th May 2004, 19:17

I must agree with TeeS, starting your operation with a brand new type is risky. That aside there was no way that Bond would have been able to aquire the aircraft and get them delivered by July this year anyway. In the end it is not the operators decision which type of helicopter is purchased but the clients. If you can't find a customer willing to pay higher rates for a more advanced helicopter then there is no point getting them. The other two operators in Aberdeen are only looking at the S92 and the EC225 because the upcoming Shell contract will require a helicopter able to carry good payloads a long way (East Shetland Basin) in any wind conditions. The L2 is not a bad option for the Northern North Sea and probably a good compromise between payload, range and cost for most destinations. Yes it is a 15 year old design but I don't think that this is "old" in helicopter terms - I would say it has just matured and got rid of it's teething problems......

The two SAR helicopters are a different story. I don't know much about SAR so can't really comment on the L2's capability. Payload and range won't be much of a problem looking at the localities involved so it all depends on it's SAR suitability. I thought that was the reason BP paid Bristows to conduct the trial and find out. It would be very interesting to get comments from the pilots involved but it obviously must be suitable for SAR as it is now used for this purpose in the Netherlands. I am just speculating here but what if Bristows had won the Jigsaw contract? Would they not have used the L2?

A quick note on the gearbox issue. Even though the L2 has no dry run cabability in it's civil version I have heard it roumored that the Dutch military version is certified for 30min? Can anyone confirm this?

Woolf

Mountainman

27th May 2004, 05:50

ScotiaQ,
I think you should perhaps check out exactly who started SAR in Ireland, you might find it wasn't Bond.
I saw one of thier Irish SAR 61s a few years ago, and I can honestly say I have never seen a more tired looking SAR aircraft. It appeared to have been equiped to the minimum standard required to meet the terms of the contract, and that was it!
At least (when you look back) Bristows have continued to develop the SAR aircraft they operate.
The Jigsaw trial aircraft was fitted with a lot of Bristow mod's, which directly contributed to the success of the trial
The aircraft that Bond will get from Eurocopter will not be fitted with the BHL Mod's, unless Bristows agree to sell them.
So Bond might have equipment, but will it be the right equipment, and where will they get crews who are up to speed on operating it?

AllyPally

27th May 2004, 18:45

They will get the crews if they pay the money. Not many people want to spend half their life on an oil rig or in the back of beyond, but if the money is good £80,000+ for a Capt then a few people may dust off their yellow helmets and apply!!:O

AP

running in

30th May 2004, 21:50

Ally Pally

On a less serious note, whilst counting their money the crews could look at the following website!

www.uktvstyle.co.uk/WhatsOn/WatchingPaintDry.cfm

running in

AllyPally

1st Jun 2004, 14:55

Its not quite as bad as that!! You've the breakfast/lunch/dinner menu to look at. Then there is the sea, the inside of your eyelids, the inside of your cell (I mean cabin) and Sky TV!!

But if the dosh is right;)

AP

Hueymeister

5th Aug 2004, 18:44

Is it happening????????????

ralphmalph

5th Aug 2004, 21:31

Having spoken to freinds in the RAF Sarworld who are looking for jobs (albeit 6 months ago), things are still looking good but i believe the original timeline is slipping considerably..

Fraid I don't have anything concrete!

Ralph

Maverick Laddie

7th Aug 2004, 11:26

Obviously had some paint left over from the Shawbury 412's

running in

17th Aug 2004, 10:57

Interesting ad in Flight this week from Bond Offshore looking for Jigsaw crews.

I am surprised that it is only "desirable" for Jigsaw SAR commanders to have any previous SAR experience - I would have thought that lots of experience was essential. They will also take untrained crewmen.

The Ad also requires the crews to live near Aberdeen, presumably so that they can fly the line between SAR stints.

Hueymeister

17th Aug 2004, 15:21

What's the package?

running in

17th Aug 2004, 15:37

Hueymeister,

As they clearly don't think they need SAR trained pilots, I guess they will pay just line pilot rates.

running in

332mistress

17th Aug 2004, 20:08

I am surprised that BP are willing to have inexperienced (SAR) captains on this contract. I would think that night hovering over the sea in poor weather is not something that you pick up with only a few hours training. I think that they may struggle to get suitable captains if they only pay "normal" line rates. Who wants to spend 6 months of the year stuck on a N Sea platform with nothing much to do.

Things can go horribly wrong very quickly when doing SAR and one accident would be devastating to the good idea of replacing safety boats with helicopters

332M

running in

18th Aug 2004, 11:07

332mistress,

I don't think its just inexperienced commanders they will take, it implies that they will take you with NO experience (SAR experience desirable)!

A fully coupled SAR helicopter can hold an accurate hover when it works and the doppler doesn't unlock - unlocking typically over a glassy seas when you have fog (just when you need it). There are no known systems which will hold an accurate hover over a deck or a drifting liferaft, so an experienced commander and winch op is essential.

Add to this inexperienced crewmen and it becomes scary. I agree with you, do BP and their workforce know what they are buying?

Hedski

18th Aug 2004, 11:21

The ad may say SAR experience desirable but my ear to the ground tells me SAR experience will be a prerequisite for successful applicants. :cool:

Wizzard

18th Aug 2004, 12:35

I think that the advertisement might have been poorly thought out - the Emperor perhaps?

No way will BP accept low time SAR Commanders - this flagship project will be under very close scrutiny and any incidents will be pounced on. The OILC will not let anything be kept quiet.

As for salaries, don't expect too much - remember they are a low-cost operator.

Wiz

Staticdroop

18th Aug 2004, 13:16

Anybody know where they are getting their FO's from, also if they are low payers why did a lot of crews jump ship from the other 2 operators when they set up their initial operation:confused:

Wizzard

18th Aug 2004, 13:24

Static:

Bond won the BP North Sea support contract. Ergo the company that lost the contract - 3 L2 Pumas - would/could need to downsize. If one were qualified on type and low in seniority one might feel it best to jump before one is pushed!

Salaries at first glance similar to the other operators but there are lots of caveats - North Sea experience, hours, colour of eyes etc. :O

Wiz

JKnife

18th Aug 2004, 15:02

Rumour had it a little while back that the Chief Pilot nominated for the Jigsaw Contract did not have any SAR background!

Hope it was only a rumour!

Staticdroop

18th Aug 2004, 15:38

Wizard,
Thanks for the reply, it makes sense, but do you know who Bond are recruiting/using as FO's for the SAR contract as the new advert is for commanders. Are their own crews moving sideways to fill slots opening space at their aberdeen base requiring further recruitment:confused:

Wizzard

18th Aug 2004, 16:32

Static:

I'm pretty sure that they will need FO's as they're working very hard at the moment on their regular contract.

They seem a happy bunch from what I've seen - from a distance!

Wiz

Jetboxer

18th Aug 2004, 17:16

Wizzard, your statement about Bond 'Dont expect too much they're a low cost operator!' makes me smile.

Correct me if I'm wrong but my understanding is that in your opinion the red/white/blue operators are offering a higher class, maybe a first class (VIP) service to their passengers, in-flight meals/entertainment, luxury survival suits maybe.

Having worked for both of the red/white and blues in recent years, I dont recall this being the case!

:hmm:

Night Watchman

18th Aug 2004, 17:27

What I would like to know is whether the Bond SAR crews are going to have to prove the same standard as the Jigsaw Trial Team?

The Trial crews were all professional and current SAR operators with years of experience from both the military and Coastguard. The Jigsaw concept was sold on what they achieved after nearly a year of day and night winching in all sea states. Now that BP has chosen another operator with different crews are they going to meet the same standard or is this being conveniently passed over? Apparently the winchmen are going to be HEMS paramedic’s so no winching experience there, and the co-pilots taken off the line in Aberdeen.

Anyway, a message for all budding Jigsaw SAR commanders – If you are going to buy a house in Aberdeen then avoid the Bridge of Don and Danestane area. The house prices there are always the first to suffer when the oil price drops followed closely by Kingswells and Westhill.

Mountainman

18th Aug 2004, 18:54

Jetbox,
I think Wizzard is saying that the money will not be very good in Bond because they are a" low cost operator".
Self proclaimed low cost operators tend to cost less because they pay their employees less ( among other things )
Nobody is talking about the quality of the passengers suits.
Still smiling?

roundwego

18th Aug 2004, 19:17

Who is this "Emperor" I have heard about a couple of times when Bond is mentioned? Surely not one of the original Bond team - must be one of the newbies. Can anyone enlighten me?

JKnife

18th Aug 2004, 19:25

If Bond are going to use line co-pilots, that isn't too much of a problem so long as there is a training scheme in place for them to become SAR qualified. After all, you have to start somewhere!

Are the HEMS medics going to get a winchman's course from someone such as Bristow, FBH or the RAF? If not, how are they going to be trained, in house? Will they be able to get recurrent training to keep up their medical skills? Anybody know if Bond have any SAR trainers on their aircrew side, or are they looking for those too?

I suspect that there is a lot going on that we are not privvy to for whatever reason (probably commercial) and only time will tell how it is going to work. Fun to speculate though.

Night Watchman

19th Aug 2004, 09:07

That's fair enough if the guys are going to get properly trained but my question still stands -

Are they going to have to meet the same performance standard as the Jigsaw Trial Team before they start the SAR cover or will it be assumed that because the Trials did it then they can too?

Jetboxer

19th Aug 2004, 09:40

Mountainman, Wizzard

The title low cost operator maybe justified with regard to the price BP are paying. I'm not familiar with the ins and outs of the contract, but if the cost to BP is less than the opposition were charging I dont think this is due to Bond "paying their employees less (among other things!)" - as you've stated.

The flight crew pay scales are almost identical to competitors and in some cases better. The number of crew that migrated across the airfield would not have done so if this were not the case. Also, none of these crew were in threat of being pushed, as Wizzard stated. They would not have been at risk due to their age, experience, seniority.

As for "Among other things":
-All the flight crew have been sent to Eurocopter in the South of France to complete courses of training. This was not just crew that required the full AS332L2 type rating course, but also those who already had the type on their license. The engineers have been through similar courses of training, also in France. This is a cost that the opposition have chosen not to bear.

-5 new AS332L2s with a more advanced Nav kit than the oppo. A quieter cabin and more comfortable seating is not the cheapest option either.

-A totally refurbished hanger/terminal, with brand new equipment, which the engineers seem very happy with.

Maybe Bond are not a 'Low cost operator'. They are just more careful where their resources are being allocated. Where it counts - on Training, equipment, and employees (those that bend'em and those that mend'em), and not on buildings full of beancounters trying to keep Big Brother across the Atlantic happy!

Some may think I'm off on a tangent with regard to this thread, but I think if Bond Offshore Helicopters carry on the way they have started and approach Jigsaw in a similar way, I have no doubt the operation will be a success.

Mountainman, I'm sure you know a lot more about the SAR aspects of the operation than myself, as I have no experience in this role. I do understand the difficulties in getting experienced crews (which I agree, is a must!) and setting up efficient training programs. A year ago many people had doubts, myself included, as to wether Bond would be up and running, competetive, and safe. I've been pleasantly surprised.

As I said, if they continue in the same vein, you might be surprised at how they cope with Jigsaw.

I'm sure experienced crews will be sourced and they will have to be payed well for their services. Just as the offshore line crews were sourced.

Still smiling.
:D

AllyPally

19th Aug 2004, 11:05

Does anybody have the text for the Jigsaw advert. Just tried to get Flight but they had sold out. Tried F.Int website but no advert there. Ta

AP

Wizzard

19th Aug 2004, 11:51

Jetboxer

At no time did I infer that low cost meant that Bond are giving a second class service, in fact if they have any sense they will be bending over backwards to please the customer at the moment. Let's hope that BP wont be asking them to bend over forwards in the near future:O

I think it's common knowledge that most of the pilots that went across the runway were fairly low down on the seniority list as regards the 'big picture' within Scotia so whether they were at risk or not is a moot point. Having said that, Bond have acquired some high quality pilots from Scotia.

My main point has always been that pilots should not expect huge salaries to work offshore on the Jigsaw project. Perhaps they can attract ex-mil guys with a pension behind them although they in turn might not be keen to sit in prison - or as some people call it - offshore for half of their working life.

Keep smiling:ok:

Wiz

ps "More advanced Nav kit" does not methinks in this case mean "better Nav kit" - just a rumour but then again this is a rumour network!

Crashondeck

19th Aug 2004, 12:28

A couple of points on Bond's recruitment.

Firstly, the ad is titled "We're Headhunting". To me that implies they know who they want - they might even have a list of names. I am certain that everyone (commanders and winchoperators) they employ will have substantial SAR experience. The wording in that advent will have been adjusted to satisfy the law.

Secondly BP will almost certainly want to see CVs of those in key positions. In other words it might well be the case that BP have the final say on who's who.

There is no doubt that Bond will have the right amount of experience in at least two of the four seats. What worries me is that the winchmen won't. I hope those going for that job are very aware of what being a winchman means and more importantly how much the Mil and Civvy winchmen are being paid. Don't sell yourselves short!

Rotorbike

19th Aug 2004, 16:35

The following is copied from www.flightinternational.com for AllyPally

Following the award of one of the largest oil and gas industry crew change support contracts in the world, Bond Offshore Helicopters has been awarded a further significant long term contract for the provision of Search and Rescue services. This new 10 year contract requires two additional AS332L2 Super Puma helicopters which will be fully equipped to support 24 hour/7 day week Search and Rescue operations, aircraft being based offshore in the central North Sea. This contract requires highly motivated aviation professionals and therefore applications are invited from those who meet the following requirements:
A JAA/UK ATPL(H) with substantial experience in an offshore commercial, military or coastguard role. Experience at Search and Rescue or public transport hoisting operations is desirable. Training positions may be available for those pilots who have had significant SAR instructing experience. Flying experience must include not less than 1500 hours as pilot in command of helicopters including a minimum of 500 hours on multi-crew twin-turbine types.
A JAA Instrument Rating (Helicopters) is desirable but training may be provided for suitable applicants.
This SAR operation requires personnel to be both offshore and Shetland based for periods of up to 15 days at a time and the ability for all staff to co-operate closely with the client on site is considered an essential element of this operation.
In order to achieve a flexible and integrated workforce it is the Company's preference that employees reside within commuting distance of Aberdeen Airport, as from time to time, there may be a requirement for SAR staff to reassign to Aberdeen-based operations.
All applicants must have the right to work and live in the UK without restriction.
It is anticipated that employment for these positions will commence the 1st quarter of 2005.
In order to assist in personnel assessment and suitability, applications for any of these positions can only be accepted on a Company form that should be requested from the email address given.

AllyPally

19th Aug 2004, 18:41

Rotorbike - thanks very much - not much call for Flt Int up here.
Does anybody know the e-mail address for the form?

Ta

AP

running in

20th Aug 2004, 11:13

Crashondeck,

You said

"Firstly, the ad is titled "We're Headhunting". To me that implies they know who they want - they might even have a list of names. I am certain that everyone (commanders and winchoperators) they employ will have substantial SAR experience. The wording in that advent will have been adjusted to satisfy the law".

They might know who they want, but why have they spent a few thousand £s on an Ad? Perhaps their headhunting has failed.

Is it illegal to say they want competent, experienced SAR commanders?

I agree about the winchmen. They are brave skilled men who deserve to be paid at least as much as the pilots, will exparamedics be any good at night in a force 10? Some might, but do they know what they are letting themselves in for?

With rumours circulating about military SAR being civilianised in the near future, eg Culdrose, will military pilots sell up and move north in the coming months or wait and see?

Hueymeister

20th Aug 2004, 13:23

Latest I heard is that Mil SAR is at the moment safe..so don't count on having a surplus of Mil SAR bouys knocking on the door...unless they make us redundant in September...but the RAF is short of helo guys...perhaps we'll retread the soon to be jobless Jag mates????????????

Night Watchman

30th Aug 2004, 21:55

Now it seems that the Bond Jigsaw aircraft will also be performing air ambulance in Shetland.

I wonder how that will fit in with the offshore safety case. If an aircraft ditches whilst they are on ambulance duties are they going to take the pregnant mother to the scene or drop her off first??

Full Story
http://www.shetland-news.co.uk/pages/news%20stories/loganair_to_lose_air_ambulance_contract.htm

Edited version

Gama have said they will operate two EC 135 Eurocopter helicopters out of Glasgow and Inverness, along with two pressurised fixed wing King Air 200c aircraft out of Glasgow and Aberdeen. These aircraft will be able to handle adverse weather conditions more effectively than the current Islander fixed wing aircraft which are not pressurised.

Further support would be made available from the Super Puma search and rescue helicopter operated by oil company BP out of Scatsta airport, in Shetland. Existing support from the Ministry of Defence and the coastguard will continue.

2STROPS

1st Sep 2004, 10:41

Anybody had any contact with Bond yet? Any news on pay, conditions, roster, leave etc.

2S

Staticdroop

1st Sep 2004, 11:09

This jigsaw job sounds like a rather interesting job with all the right toys to do it properly. Will there be a great demand to work in the environment? are there going to be a lot of takers for the posts offered?
Any thoughts on these questions:cool:

Juan Smore

11th Oct 2004, 13:00

Does anyone know if Bond have completed recruiting for Jigsaw yet and what the plan is for the next few months?

Night Watchman

12th Oct 2004, 06:27

I have heard that they have finished interviewing the potential SAR Commanders and will start on the crewmen shortly. Co-pilots will be interviewed in early 2005.

Apparently, despite several applications from current UK Coastguard SAR Commanders and Jigsaw Trial SAR Commanders (SAR current on the L2) none of them appear to have been interviewed. Is it because they all work for Bristow, the same company providing the SAR Mods for the Bond L2's? :hmm: Conspiracy theories on standby..

winchop

12th Oct 2004, 09:37

Where would pprune be without the conspiracy theorists!:rolleyes:

From a rear crew update, Bond are busy sorting out the large numbers of applicants as we speak and I was told they have got them down to a shortlist already and are hoping to have interviews and decisions made by Christmas.

As for talk I've read elsewhere about hiring firefighters etc., instead of qualified rearcrew, thats rubbish. Bond wouldn't do it just to save a quid and the oil companies will certainly not let it happen. For years oil companies and government agencies putting out tenders for contracts such as these, have had strict conditions on what pilots could work on these contracts, as in flying hours and experience in the role. This has extended to rearcrew now and so it should.

Still, would like to hear from anyone in the know on what kind of money they are paying the rearcrews. I've heard it's very good, but you'll be on a contract, so no super, sick leave etc. Anyone?

Mountainman

12th Oct 2004, 14:55

What's wrong with firefighters?

I'd heard that Bond are going to use paramedics as winchmen, and I can't see the differance.

Why not cut to the chase and go down to the local supermarket and employ all the checkout girls...........they'd be cheap!

PS This is not in any way intended to be insulting towards checkout girls (sorry......"persons" ) I shop at supermarkets frequently, and the staff are always very professional.............I just wouldn't want to be rescued from the water by them....... unless it's from a puddle in the car park.

Night Watchman

13th Oct 2004, 09:09

Winchop

As for talk I've read elsewhere about hiring firefighters etc., instead of qualified rearcrew, thats rubbish. Bond wouldn't do it just to save a quid and the oil companies will certainly not let it happen.

You talk about Bond hiring qualified rearcrew and yet they haven't interviewed any of the current Coastguard or L2 SAR Commanders. Surely if they wanted qualified people they would at least have interviewed some of the above? Especially with their current North Sea and Atlantic operational experience.

And why are they talking about employing Air Ambulance paramedics who have probably never been winched in their life or pulled a man out of the water in a flat calm sea, never mind a high sea state.

All all sounds like Bond/BP spin to me.

For years oil companies and government agencies putting out tenders for contracts such as these, have had strict conditions on what pilots could work on these contracts, as in flying hours and experience in the role. This has extended to rearcrew now and so it should.

You make this sound like like it's a new thing. More spin? It's not, the strict conditions you talk about have been around for years for both pilots and aircrew. All the UK Coastguard contracts have had it since the start of them (15 odd years ago), as did, I believe, the original Jigsaw Trial contract! Apparently BP insisted on aircrew with a great depth of experience to help sell the concept to their workers. Interestingly enough none of them, to date, have had any reply from Bond with regard to their aplications. I'm sure the military have similar conditions on their aircrew personnel too.

Mountainman

Are you mad? Checkout girls? You haven't really thought that argument through.

Think of the discount vouchers you can get off your next weekly shop! :=

Juan Smore

13th Oct 2004, 10:40

Intelligence suggests that those crewman applicants who have won an interview will be contacted by the end of October.

Hopefully commonsense will prevail for the crewmen and only those trained and experienced will get selected instead of non-aviators (the thought of sharing accommodation during those long winter nights with some check-out girls in possession of helmet bag-fulls of Stella discount vouchers does have it’s merits though). With regard to training, it is quicker and cheaper to put a crewman through an ATLS course if he needs it than to put an ambliance-person through a flying course.

Night Watchman: If your info is correct about current SAR commanders not being interviewed then please add me to the presumably long list of the ‘Totally Baffled’.

winchop

13th Oct 2004, 11:27

Mountainman and Night Watchman:

There's nothing wrong with firefighters at all. However if it IS true Bond want to train up new winchmen, then I'd rather it be an air ambulance paramedic with the medical skills already and some aviation knowledge than a firefighter with neither. Airmanship can't be learnt on a quick winchmen course, it takes time in the air and working in a multi crew environment to achieve, which they already have. But I would rather see fully qualified winchmen hired any day. (Better yet.. check out chicks!) :ok:

I can't speak for the pilots on who may or may not have got an interview but I pray that they grab with both hands the commanders with the SAR experience, because when I'm sitting in the back fat dumb and happy, I want a good SAR driver up front.

I know the experience criteria required is not a new thing, that's why I'm saying Bond will not get away with hiring those who haven't done the job before. Cheers all...

Night Watchman

13th Oct 2004, 17:28

Winchop,

“Airmanship can't be learnt on a quick winchmen course, it takes time in the air and working in a multi crew environment to achieve, which they already have.”

Are you suggesting that an air ambulance paramedic has all the airmanship he requires for SAR because he’s flown in a helicopter? What experience has he got of getting people out of the water, of getting himself and a casualty off the back off a boat safely in rough conditions, of providing a FLIR letdown at night to the back of a vessel or to a rig in fog, of plotting a search pattern, of participating in a search and providing comms with the Coastguard, RCC and the like? The list could go on. Yes they can learn the basics on a quick winchman course but they can hardly be regarded as experienced.

What you and others need to understand is that the Jigsaw project is going ahead on the results of a group of very experienced SAR operators. The times and performance which justifies the whole existence of Jigsaw was achieved by long term SAR crews with years of experience. Any endorsement for Jigsaw by HSE and the workforce and others will be based on this. Will the Bond crews meet the same performance figures and prove that they can with their current recruitment policy? The answer is I don’t know but if they aren’t employing some current SAR Commanders and adopt the same policy with crewmen then I seriously doubt it. To many non SAR crew SAR is regarded as something anyone can do quite easily, I wonder whether those calling the shots at Bond believe the same?

“I'm saying Bond will not get away with hiring those who haven't done the job before.”

Really..??? Well we'll watch and see…..

Juan Smore

13th Oct 2004, 19:53

Is it not the case that Bond (the contractor) will have to comply with what BP (the customer) requires with regard to the experience and qualifications of the aircrew? I would hate to think that BP have been remiss in laying down stringent requirements on this matter.

Quite agree with you, Night Watchman. The correct experience and qulifications have to be present from day one or else the whole thing will go Tango Uniform in very short order.

Night Watchman

14th Oct 2004, 06:58

“Is it not the case that Bond (the contractor) will have to comply with what BP (the customer) requires with regard to the experience and qualifications of the aircrew?”

I think it is more of a case of - can they comply? Where are they going to get their experienced SAR crew from? They appear to have been quite picky to date so the pot is getting smaller.

SAR crew are few and far between at the moment and the pay offered by Bond is apparently on par with normal SAR pay in the UK, so not much incentive there. I don’t know how that would compare with the military crew but anyone coming over would loose a government pension and job security.

Remember it’s only a job for as long as BP keep the platforms – 40’s no more, Montrose no more, Arbroath no more…. BP’s outlook on life is big is better and I’m sure it won’t be long until they start to compare the profitability of smaller production platforms on the North Sea with their huge new discoveries in Russia.

If more platforms are sold off will the independent oil companies who will inevitability take them over want to pay for an expensive offshore SAR operation when a converted trawler sitting off a platform will meet the HSE requirements?

The job is going to be pretty boring too. Most crew who have spent a fortnight offshore doing morning and/or evening shuttles will tell you that a platform can be pretty boring and slightly depressing when you are hanging around doing nothing and there will be plenty of that!

So despite the current hype, the job itself isn’t going to be that exciting.

It’s also worth remembering that there are two other agencies that will have a big say in whether this still goes ahead. The CAA and the MCA and their approval will depend on the experience of the SAR crews amongst other considerations.

Mountainman

14th Oct 2004, 07:27

Has anyone out there actually been for an interview and been offered a job?

If so, what did you think of them?

I've heard recently that the co-pilots there are deeply pissed off because they have been told that some of them will have to go onto Jigsaw whether they like it or not.

So the crews are shaping up to be pretty punchy aren't they?

You'll have "pissed off, don't want to be here, haven't got a clue what's going on" in the left hand seat, and Nurse Gladys Emmanuel on the wire eagerly anticipating treating 21 hypothermic "patients" but not looking forward to "collecting" every one of them single handedly from the "cruel sea" before she can even start dispensing tea and toast.

Nice one!

winchop

14th Oct 2004, 09:15

Nightwatchman..

Why do you hate Bond so much? When did you work there, we might have worked together. You can't be so against them and not have worked for them surely??

And NO I'm not suggesting air paramedics have all the airmanship compared to experienced winchmen, stop twisting my words. I said I would rather winch down an air paramedic with SOME airmanship than a firefighter with absolutely none. When I worked for Bond the air paramedics did all our medical courses and were nothing but highly skilled and professional along with the paramedics I work with here currently in Oz who ARE the winchmen on our SAR helos. To carry on about them as 'Nurse Gladys making tea' is uninformed and insulting. What decade do you think we are in anyway?

I hope we can wait and see what happens with recruiting first before we all damn the company and knock them for people they've hired or didn't hire before they've actually done it!!

running in

14th Oct 2004, 09:53

So, the chickens are coming home to roost!

The Jigsaw Trial used fully trained SAR crews and worked. Why do Air BP, sorry Bond, think that they can get away with inexperienced crews?

The real problem is that Bond probably don't have a clue about SAR, otherwise they would snap up all the experience they could get hold of.

Runnin In

Nigerian Expat Outlaw

14th Oct 2004, 10:09

Never been SAR crew, military, civilian or any other way. But I've seen them work and as an outsider I reckon they may qualify as SAR after training but it takes more than training to be good at it. The essential missing element is experience, and Bond or any other operator can't buy that wherever they recruit. Fact is, like it or not, Bristow have the monopoly on that in the civilian world.

running in

16th Oct 2004, 11:14

So no reply to Mountainman's question!

But there again should be expect fireman and checkout girls to reply on pprune?

winchop,

You need winchmen who are advanced first aid trained, but they must be winchmen first and foremost.

running in

[email protected]

16th Oct 2004, 11:23

Running In - you are absolutely correct, I don't think many of the wanabee winchmen realise what a physical and dangerous job it is - the only way to minimise the danger is to be fit and well trained. If you have ever tried to place a strop on a person in the water whilst wearing a rubber suit and being battered by waves and downwash you will know what I mean.
It's the whole point of the 'Rescue' in Search and Rescue because you have to extract the casualty from peril before you can weave your paramedic magic on them.

Nightwatchman - the MCA will have zero input - the UK SAR cover is already in place and the Jigsaw stuff is just an add-on for the rig areas. As for the CAA, I suspect their knowledge of SARops is less than encylopaedic and other than checking that the helos are being operated within the rules, won't give a t*ss who is dangling on the wire.

Bond wouldn't give a job to a very experienced SAR QHI, partly because he asked awkward questions about de-icing the helo during the winter and keeping it pointed into wind on the heli-deck. Other questions regarding rear-crew equipment were equally ignored so if the Operators haven't actually thought through the detail of the job then who will?

winchop

16th Oct 2004, 12:32

Running in..

100% percent agree with you, no argument from me on that...

As for the question about interviews. I just got a reply from Bond saying interviews for rearcrew were starting by the end of October and they were hoping to have all they required and signed up by Christmas. Just telling you all what I was told...

Can anyone tell me what level of medical training a civilian winchman can get in the UK? When I worked for Bond previously, we did a medical course with the Scottish Ambulance Service, but it was really only advanced first aid with defibs etc. What level are the Bristows SAR boys at for example?

regards to all..winchop

Night Watchman

16th Oct 2004, 14:45

Crab,

How wrong you are. The MCA – Maritime Coastguard Agency now have an enormous input towards the approval of a safety regime offshore. Aberdeen MRCC regularly hold meetings with the oil companies to agree and discuss safety and SAR procedures. They run courses on it for oil company staff. The image of the MCA being a grey haired bearded man, smoking a pipe staring out to sea through a telescope is long gone. The MCA has changed, it encompasses several government agencies now and are now responsible for things like pollution, safety offshore, seaworthiness of ships etc.. as well as maritime SAR. You are also forgetting that for this to work an appropriate Command and Control structure needs to be put in place to co-ordinate such SAR assets. In the Netherlands the Dutch Coastguard provide that structure for the L2 out there on behalf of the oil companies. Do you really think that if the UK Coastguard turned round and said ‘we think jigsaw is a bad idea’ that nobody would listen? Of course they’ll have an input!

With regard to the CAA. It is they who grant the dispensations which allow a civilian aircraft to perform SAR Ops. These dispensations have been approved after many years of working with one operator. They are not granted to just anyone and you can’t get them by applying through your local post office. The CAA regularly audit the SAR units to ensure that a proper safety and training regime is in place and that the aircrew are performing the task correctly and within the agreed operational procedures. At least one of their inspectors is an ex military SAR driver so their knowledge on SAR is probably more than you're giving them credit for. The CAA are ultimately answerable to the government if things go badly wrong with any operator that they have given dispensations too. Oh, I think they will give a t*ss! Especially in this blame culture we all live in now.

Winchop,

I don’t hate Bond. I am just slightly alarmed about what I hear about their recruiting. I find it strange that they appear to be ignoring applications from seasoned SAR Commanders from the Coastguard and, from what Crab is saying, the military. In fact, I have heard that the only Coastguard pilot to be interviewed by them was a co-pilot! Why didn’t they interview any of the Commanders that applied (and there were a few)? None of that seems to concur with your previous argument that they would only hire the most experienced crew available and it was you that said that “when I'm sitting in the back fat dumb and happy, I want a good SAR driver up front.” Does this not worry you? If anything I’m fighting your corner on this one!

Oh, and the Nurse Gladys remark wasn’t made by me so you’ll need to redirect your anger elsewhere on that one! No offense taken though… in case you were wondering! ;)

Night Watchman :ok:

winchop

17th Oct 2004, 09:31

Nightwatchman

If they aren't hiring the experienced drivers from the Coastguard and elsewhere that HAVE applied, then you're right, it is very alarming! I'm discovering more and more that maybe I'm being a bit too optimistic and naive to think they will hire the SAR commanders you talk of.

If I do get an interview as rearcrew, then at the top of my list of questions will be, 'who are the pilots you've hired to fly me around and what are their backgrounds?' (Along with, how much are you paying?) :ok:

To achieve my desire to be 'fat, dumb and happy' in the back of the cab, I need to know the guys (or girls) up the front are the right people thats for sure!:}

winchop:cool:

[email protected]

17th Oct 2004, 09:36

Nightwatchman - I still don't think either agency has any say on who is hired to be a winchman, that is up to Bond and BP, providing they make the right noises about training then who will prevent ex-firemen and ex-paramedics from acting as Jigsaw SAR winchmen.

running in

17th Oct 2004, 09:44

Does anyone know if BALPA have been consulted over the new proposals for Jigsaw? After all it is their memebers who will be rescued when a ditching occurs, if the SAR crews are not experienced will they be successful?

Also are Bond recruiting inexperienced crews (both front and back) to save money and undercut the present pay rates, especially for crewmen?

running in

NLTTGITWOAGS

17th Oct 2004, 12:15

Just a slightly different angle on this thread regarding SAR commanders experience, as Bond proved in the Emerald isles, they did not know what SAR stood for, or what was involved, only some very experianced crews ( already running the show before Bond took over)managed to keep the show going.
Why should you hire experianced people who will keep reminding you,that you are not doing the job properly?, after all, if the commander returns from failing to do a rescue , quoting " the job was too difficult " who will question his decision? life will carry on, and they will keep the contract.
Its a pity to see they will do it all again, i just hope no one gets hurt.

Mountainman

17th Oct 2004, 18:20

NLTTGITWOAGS, that's an interesting point you've made.
If you look through the earlier postings on this thread, you'll see what I think of Bond's legacy in Ireland.

If an outsider were to read this thread, they would probably think that some of us are a bit anti Bond but personally I wish them well.

My real problem is with BP.

I have seen what the major Oil Companies have done to the oil and gas side of the North Sea helicopter industry and it scares me to think that the same thing might happen in SAR.
There comes a point when the cost cannot be driven down any lower. All that happens is corners are cut and things go wrong.
Do the offshore workers really want to be flown to work in an aircraft that was chosen because it was operated by the cheapest company?.........I don't think so.

I don't think that either the CAA or the MCA will ultimately stand in Bond's way, because Bond will (given time) be able to demonstrate that they have approved equipment and "qualified" crews. I think Bond's ultimate hurdle will be to prove to the offshore workforce and more importantly the HSE that they can meet the performance standard ie recover 21 survivors from the water in less than 30 minutes, and that is where the paramedics or any inexperienced crewmen will suffer.

The HSE will be watching things very closely and the BP Safety Rep's are a pretty pro-active bunch, and they do read Pprune, so if I was running the show it's them I'd be worried about.
Sadly for the Bond lads they don't even know what they don't know.

As for my "Gladys Emmanuel" comment earlier, I apologise if it offended anybody. I'm afraid the paramedics have become political footballs, and if that doesn't sum up this fiasco, what does?

Tokunbo

17th Oct 2004, 18:39

Well, look at the aircraft that will be used for the Jigsaw contract. See who is the Chief Training Captain for Bond on that type. Ask what experience he has of training and SAR. Does it have any relevance? Is this 'new Bond's' overall level of experience and expertise? I don't live or work in UK so I have no idea, but maybe there are others out there who do.

running in

18th Oct 2004, 08:48

The last time a lot of questions were asked on this forum about Jigsaw, Scotia Q strongly defended Bond and sounded as if he was involved in the project with Bond.

Scotia Q, do you have anything to say about the points raised this time around? Could you enlighten us, as we are in the dark and could be barking up the wrong tree.

running in

Wizzard

18th Oct 2004, 10:23

It might be that Scotia Q is now Bond Q!

Wiz :rolleyes:

running in

18th Oct 2004, 11:17

Wizzard,

I expect you are correct.

The lack of comment from an informed Bond source leads me to think that our concerns are real......unless anyone knows differently?

ri

Mountainman

19th Oct 2004, 14:37

Crab,
I'm curious.
Could you elaborate on the questions that your QHI friend asked and what the response was?

Sailor Vee

20th Oct 2004, 16:03

Have they thought about a return to the mainland with a serious casualty when the weather is cr@p?

The other operators have Lo-Viz approaches for the airfields they operate from; this is regularly practiced.

Where will Air BP be able to do this, or are long transits to an airfield out of the 'Haar' going to be acceptable, bearing in mind ‘the longer the transit, the greater the risk to the casualty’?

2STROPS

20th Oct 2004, 16:32

I think what a lot of people are assuming is that Jigsaw will be the same SAR as provided by the RAF/RN/HMCG.

It won't. It will be a much reduced version from what I hear. The commanders will be line pilots given a few hrs winching practise, the co-pilots will be even less experienced.

The crews will only be qualified to winch over the water and onto simple decks, no cliff/mountain exp required.

They will be there to remove casualties from danger and land them on a suitable rig for treatment.

Low viz approaches to airfields will not be required.

The main danger will be boredom but to relieve that I hear pilots will be required to fly the line every 3rd offshore rotation to satisfy the accountants as their hours will be low.

I for one will not be applying. I don't want to be on the end of the wire in poor conditions at night with an inexperienced SAR pilot at the controls:*

Wizzard

20th Oct 2004, 17:52

Let's remind ourselves what Jigsaw is all about - as I see it that is!

As I write, each and every offshore installation - apart from FPSO's - have a Standby Vessel in the vicininty to rescue the crew if there should be a major accident (Piper Alpha) or a man overboard etc.

These are on station 24/7 and are a very expensive piece of kit. What BP want to do is to replace many of these vessels with 2-4 offshore/onshore based helicopters, thereby saving lots and lots of oily money.

The main task of these aircraft will be to pick up survivors in the water and take them to the nearest oil rig/platform where they can get medical treatment if required before being transfered to the beach in slow time. If an urgent medivac to the beach is required it might be that the powers that be decide not to release the Jigsaw aircraft and use the current SAR resource - Bristow/RAF.

Therefore there might not be a requirement for Jigsaw crews to be all singing, all dancing SAR qualified - especially in the early stages.

Scoop 'em up and drop 'em off might be the order of the day ;)

running in

20th Oct 2004, 18:39

Wizzard,

"Scoop 'em up and drop 'em off might be the order of the day"

Have you ever tried to do manual wet winching at night, or even a basic deck?

Thought not!

running in

serf

20th Oct 2004, 20:36

seems to me like some people thought they would be able to walk into these jobs and are now miffed that they are being rejected.

miitary training, good as it is, is not the only way.

running in

20th Oct 2004, 20:58

serf

I think many of the concerns are real and not based on being "miffed".

Either the Jigsaw crews are competent SAR crews or they are not. It is like being pregnant, either you are, or you are not. You can't be half pregnant!

For a winchman dangling on a wire over a pitching deck, either the commander is competent or he/she is not. Half competent will result in an accident or an unsuccessful rescue.

ri

Wizzard

21st Oct 2004, 17:05

Running in, you ask a question.
Have you ever tried to do manual wet winching at night, or even a basic deck?

Then you answer it yourself!

Thought not!

What a presumptuous fellow you are ;)

Wiz

ralphmalph

21st Oct 2004, 19:57

I had the luck to be on board a SAR helicopter called to rescue a fifty year old man from a rig in the north sea roughly an hours transit from base.

The casualty had suffered suspected multiple heart attacks and was at the end of a .5km long platform.

we arrived at the overhead to be told that we were not to winch the casualty from the walkway connecting the rig complez.

we were told that the casualty was to be evacuated via a Dauphin that was on the far side of the complex.

the cas had to endure a transit up and down stairs............over a long distance...........and then pulled up the vertical steps to the helideck.

whilst this was going on i watched as the Dauphin crew re-rolled the seats of the aircraft to take the cas to shore.

said cas then boarded the a/c without a defib or paramedic and was flown to shore......

Assistance was offered to the rig but was refused over and over again......all this after we had made a 45 min transit to pick the guy up?????

our only thoughts were that the company was trying to either reduce costs or incident signals?????

Ralph

Nigerian Expat Outlaw

23rd Oct 2004, 08:49

Could that have been a cost related decision that backfired ? After all, the aircraft had already mobilised. Surely an incident report would have had to be raised, even if it was internal whether or not the guy was recovered by a SAR crew or the Dauphin ?

[email protected]

23rd Oct 2004, 11:20

Mountainman - he asked how they planned to keep the aircraft deiced during the winter so that they could achieve their 10 minute readiness state - the reply was that it was an engineering issue but gave no indication as to how it would be addressed.
He also asked how the aircraft would be kept pointing into wind in an area that could go from 40 kts in one direction to 50 kts in another in a very short period - the answer was the same but hinted that an engineer would be sent out with an electric handler/dolly in the 50 kt wind to move it. I don't know how many engineers will be on the rig to support the helicopter but I will be surprised if it is more than 2.
As for the HSE requirements, 21 wet survivors from a dark and stormy sea in 30 minutes? Not without a very well trained, practised and fit winchman and even then he'd be f**ked at the end of it and certainly in no shape to give medical assistance. Even doing them as double lifts from the comparative safety of a large dinghy would take 30 minutes.

Red Kaye

23rd Oct 2004, 19:58

I have heard similar rumours to 2STROPS about the standard of pilots. Evidently some of the Bolkow Captains from the Lighthouse and Scatsta operations are going to be SAR Commanders as they have "underslung load winching experience and also able to winch pilots (the sea types) on vessels".

Hmmm, from what I can remember commercial winching is very regulated and restricted compared to what is allowable for SAR. If my memory serves me correctly, commercial winching has to take place at a height no higher than 10ft and there must be no obstructions laterally for 15-20ft. It's been a while so I could be wrong.

Hope some chap from the CAA with SAR experience is going to keep a close eye on this project. The more rumours I hear, the more I think it is a big fudge by BP to their workforce, and nothing like was envisaged from BP blurb I saw. There are now too many rumours for some of them not to be true.

RK

Night Watchman

24th Oct 2004, 16:58

You have to feel sorry for the guys offshore, it's kinda like being sold the latest and best double glazing and then a guy turns up and fits a piece of perspex!

Mountainman

25th Oct 2004, 06:16

Thanks for the reply Crab.

I know the trial team came up with solutions to a lot of the "issues" that arise when you base an aircraft offshore without protection, but I don't suppose they will be too forthcoming with any of them now.

I have to agree with Night Watchman, the offshore workforce must be wondering what they have agreed to.

The Jigsaw trial guys were used to literally "sell" the concept to the people offshore. A lot of the trial flights were done next to BP platforms, often with that platform's safety rep on board to observe how things were done, and I understand that the crews were then expected to shut down on the deck and give a presentation on what they had just achieved.

As for the 30 minute standard, I do know that all the backseat crew on the trial were qualified and experienced winch operators. I beleave the idea was that they could swap roles halfway through the evolution if the acting winchman became tired, but I'll stop now in case I am accused of nurse bashing again.

:ouch:

running in

26th Oct 2004, 19:15

With the last quarter profits BP announced today you would think that they could afford a credible rescue and recovery system!

ri

Mountainman

27th Oct 2004, 20:38

I heard a very interesting rumour a few days ago regarding the the chief pilot of the Jigsaw trial.

Apparently he's been approached by Bond and asked if he would "jump ship" and set up their SAR operation for them.

As I know him personally ( He's currently the CP of the SAR operation that Bristows set up in the Netherlands with the original Jigsaw trial aircraft) I phoned him and asked him if this was true.
He didn't confirm or deny this, but his reply was brief and typically diplomatic, and I'll quote him (with his permission I might add)
"I have no plans to leave Holland or Bristows"

What does that say about BP's plans, and Bond's need to get the right people?
Surely Bond would have pulled out all the stops to get him, if for no other reason than to give credibility to the implementation phase?
To my knowledge, NOBODY from the original trial team is leaving Bristows to join Bond

Perhaps he has developed a taste for windmills, cheese and ham, chocolate sprinkles and a complete lack of scenery, but I definately got the impression that he was not the least bit keen on Bond's slant on SAR.

Interesting........
:hmm:

Nigerian Expat Outlaw

27th Oct 2004, 21:26

Why would the CP go for less money ??:D

Juan Smore

28th Oct 2004, 08:51

Mountainman

Do you know if any of the Jigsaw trials team (now Den Helder) crewmen have been approached by Bond? From what you say, it would seem that if they have been approached then they aren't planning to leave Bristow either!

I ask because Bond stated that those who were selected for interview would be notified by the end of October and as yet I don't know of anyone who has.

Any info................??

Mountainman

28th Oct 2004, 09:59

Hi Juan Smore,

I've just checked with my crewmen sources, and as far as they are aware, one of the ex trial crewmen now in Den Helder was approached and wasn't interested, one has applied and hasn't heard anything and one has just left the unit to go to Portland (still Bristows).

Since my last post I've also heard that the CP was offered big bucks to swap cap badges which is contrary to what Nig' Ex'pt Outlaw says.......who knows?

Would anyone like to confirm that Bond are now talking about slashing the offshore allowances?
If they are, then I wouldn't be surprised as they have a track record of doing this.

When they took over the Irish SAR units from Irish Helicopters ( Bristows in all but name) they promised the staff the world if they joined them and promptly denied everything (Baldric) when they did !

Maybe not so "new" Bond after all.

Nigerian Expat Outlaw

28th Oct 2004, 10:29

Montainman, I stand (or sit) corrected, wasn't aware he'd been offered big dosh to jump ship, thought he'd be getting the standard rate with a small CP allowance which is fairly standard practice in the oilpatch (the amount is never enough to compensate for the resulting brain damage !!).

Until the full policy/conditions of service etc are known and in writing it doesn't seem like a particularly prudent move yet....................:ok:

Juan Smore

28th Oct 2004, 12:39

Mountainman

Many thanks for posting the info so quickly; you must be at work! If the Den Helder CP & crewman weren't interested (apart from personal reasons) then maybe it speaks volumes about what is or isn't going on up there.

And the offshore rates should be a large part of the attraction of the job, not a deterrent!

We wait and see with interest.

Nigerian Expat Outlaw

29th Oct 2004, 10:49

Hmm....... Maybe cheap, but perhaps not so cheerful:sad:

running in

30th Oct 2004, 13:59

Reading between the lines, Bond is not going out of its way to attract experienced SAR people. Also from what crab said they don't like being asked difficult questions!

Do they know what they are doing?

Will the CAA & HSE roll over and let Bond do their version of "SAR"?

NLTTGITWOAGS

31st Oct 2004, 00:47

Prehaps there lords and masters at bond and BP should read the citation for the recent SAR award bestowed on an RN crew in cornwall.
A real SAR outfit who knows what they are doing!!!

running in

31st Oct 2004, 12:40

NLTTGITWOAGS,

I agree, and they should also read the citation for the Bristow/MCA crew who won the Bill Deacon Award the year before for a difficult rescue in foul conditions at maximum range.

ri

Nigerian Expat Outlaw

2nd Nov 2004, 10:28

And many other citations/awards gained by civvie SAR crews through the years. True professionals.

freeride

2nd Nov 2004, 14:52

....and very nearly ran out of fuel.....

NLTTGITWOAGS

2nd Nov 2004, 22:52

Ahh , you misunderstand SAR, the skill comes in not running out of fuel, and getting an award. Run out of fuel and you in the S...!!!!

DeltaFree

2nd Nov 2004, 23:32

Considering a job move, I have heard about this offshore mallarchy but not taken much notice until recently. So just what does it offer a Puma qualified ex RAF SAR pilot? Is it worth a job move? It seems the latest comments suggest it may be more trouble than its worth.

serf

3rd Nov 2004, 18:17

delta,

i suspect that your RAF Puma may be somewhat different to the bond version - you might need a conversion course

Night Watchman

4th Nov 2004, 18:33

Well it seems that Bond have ignored the applications from experienced SAR crewmen from the Coastguard because none of them seem to have been asked to an interview. Does make you wonder where they are getting there staff from.

Also heard that in Shetland they are bidding for the air ambulance work with the jigsaw aircraft up there. So where's the cover if their L2 is airlifting a patient to Aberdeen?? :confused:

Glad they're taking this SAR thing seriously. :sad:

running in

5th Nov 2004, 10:17

Night Watchman

Don't blame Bond, they are only doing what the contract demands. I think it is BP who need to be questioned, but hopefully their workforce and the HSE will do that.

ri

NLTTGITWOAGS

5th Nov 2004, 14:18

No chance , if like all the other major oil companies , anybody who dares action, ie speak up , about there HSE policy will be " moved on"
As usual in these circumstances , things will carry on, trusting to chance that " hopefully nothing will happen whilst i am in charge " attitude.
As long as 'YES 'men are employed by these companies as chief pilots etc, we will always have these incredible hypocrisies in the aviation world.
Professionalism is a word like common sense that no longer exsists in the offshore aviation industry, it costs too much!!

running in

5th Nov 2004, 16:50

NLLTGITWOAGS,

Steady on....the company I work for has many professionals and it does still exist - its just that the oil companies don't want to pay for it.

Bertie Thruster

6th Nov 2004, 08:31

"It is unwise to pay too much, but it is worse to pay too little. When you pay too much, you lose a little money. When you pay too little, you sometimes lose everything, because the thing you brought was incapable of doing the thing you brought it to do. The common law of business balance prohibits paying too little and getting a lot - it cannot be done! So if you deal with the lowest bidder, it is wise to add something for the risk you run. And if you do that, you will have enough to pay for something better." John Ruskin. 1819 -1900,

Nigerian Expat Outlaw

6th Nov 2004, 08:36

runningin,

Me too. I work with people who manage to teach me something while learning themselves almost every day. But we are all hamstrung by cost cutting measures as a result of contractual constraints.
All the oil companies want is a bus service (or in this case a SAR service) that runs cheaply and requires little or no commercial maintenance/tweaking. IMHO most of the contracts are stitched up in such a way that they get exactly that, but with a cop out clause that almost always apportions blame on the operator (and the crew in particular) if things go wrong.
With the new QA/SMS policies in place nowadays I wonder how many past accidents/incidents, where they to be objectively reinvestigated, would have commercial pressure as an initial contributory factor ?
Sounds suspiciously like BP want to fund this project in the same way as the bus service, i.e. have their cake and eat it ??
But in this case they can't compromise, or can they ? If they do, who will get the blame if anything bad happens ?
Just a thought:ok:

NEO.

Wizzard

12th Nov 2004, 15:57

So, anyone got a job yet?;)

Wiz

Red Kaye

12th Nov 2004, 19:55

Evidently the crewman and engineer interviews have been put back a month or so for some reason. I have also heard that some more pilots may also be interviewed.

RK

2STROPS

16th Nov 2004, 19:00

Interesting I have yet to meet anyone - SAR experienced pilot or rearcrew who has admitted being offered a job.

:confused:

Tuckunder

16th Nov 2004, 19:43

Personally I will steer clear of a chief pilot who thinks coupled SAR OPS isn't Rocket Science. He is probably right it isn't but relevant, current experience is what keeps you out of the water on a black stormy night. 2 Weeks offshore, 2weeks Scatsta, 2 weeks line flying in ABZ. No thank you.

Droopystop

17th Nov 2004, 08:34

Any truth in the rumour that there are a number of CHC Ireland pilots who will be crossing the water.....?

angelonawire

18th Nov 2004, 23:36

I don’t know what all you guys are winging about, I think bond and bp are going to pull out all the stops on this bad boy, bp holds a big furry bag full of big green beer tokens and I’m sure if the guys don’t start flocking their way or the s**t hits the fan, I’m sure with a few extra quid any outfit could pull it off. As for experience well lets take a look at the roger nigel, there is probably more experience in stumpy hennel’s starboard flipflop than some of the guys serving there at present, loads of the original dedicated sar guys have retired. Or due to the fact that all of the shiny arsed admirals still think the ruskies are going to be carrying out beach landings at loe bar, therefore invested billions in the all singing and dancing merlin, which has either forced most of the guys into chasing imaginary subs or told the pusser to stick it where the sun don’t shine, overall leaving the coveted sar seaking squadrons with not a lot of experience. Also with the prospect of ‘sabre sar’ on the horizon it is quite easy to foresee the navy relinquishing sar altogether to save a few quid, as for the boys in light blue, they had their first taste of tony liar’s(woops missed the’b’) budget cuts and they probably will not be the last, how long will your sar squadrons last??? Personally I don’t think that 2 on and 2 off sounds that bad, I’ve done longer than that on the crest of a wave, as for the crews they hire, as long as they hire maybe 50% experienced crews, they can train up the others no big deal, if I can do it, any one can........ More jobs for the boys at the end of the day

joedirt

19th Nov 2004, 01:13

Lord Melchet, please stop flogging it !!

Lu Zuckerman

19th Nov 2004, 01:31

An excellent and very funny movie.

:E :E

332mistress

21st Nov 2004, 21:24

Gazzoks man I won't have anything said against Lord Melchet.

His Lordship knows all he thinks he needs to know about SAR.

332M :cool:

chopperman

21st Nov 2004, 22:03

Lord Melchet, please stop flogging it !!

Does he (Lord Melchet) still flog the L2 around at cruise tq + 5-10% while reading the paper?

Chopperman.

Juan Smore

30th Nov 2004, 20:08

I've heard of a couple of crewmen that have had interviews with Bond. I've also heard an unconfirmed rumour that they are not taking crewmen over the age of 35. Anyone care to confirm/deny/enlighten on this?

EFATO

6th Dec 2004, 08:58

Seems to have gone very quiet on Jigsaw.

Scuttlebutt in SAR world doesn't seem to know of any experienced SAR pilot being offered a job. In fact several experienced pilot's turned down.:confused:

Anybody know what is going on?

ScotiaQ

16th Dec 2004, 10:49

:O Looks like the Senior Pilot from Bond Air Services is joining BOH to run Jigsaw. Expect movement on this subject shortly

Red Kaye

16th Dec 2004, 15:09

I believe that an ex-RAF SAR pilot has been given a contract, but no other details, plus I have also heard of one from CHC-Ireland.

Is the Bond Senior Pilot an ex-SAR man from years back?

quichemech

16th Dec 2004, 21:08

Bond Air services senior pilot means SENIOR pilot, chief pilot, whatever you want to call him, if you know who he is, then you know his history, hadn't heard that he was heading it up, just making a move for his last few years.

bigdipper

16th Jan 2005, 01:07

Anybody heard anything as things seem to have ground to a halt since before Christmas!! Anybody been offered a job yet?

Wizzard

20th Jan 2005, 15:55

Anyone heard when the first SAR aircraft is due to arrive in ABZ?

Wiz:O

sargod

27th Jan 2005, 19:16

Calli

You haven't just missed the boat, it's way over the horizon. The advert was in Oct 04 Flight Int mag, nothing like being on the ball eh!! ;)

JKnife

27th Jan 2005, 20:41

They still haven't done the interviews as far as I know though, and they were supposed to have been completed by end of November. It's now the end of January!!

Nigerian Expat Outlaw

27th Jan 2005, 21:25

Rather you than me............... What happened to Mountainman ?

BHPS

28th Jan 2005, 07:50

Mountainman hasn't moved, still in the same position (just like a mountain really :D)

genesis848

28th Jan 2005, 16:56

Jigsaw is very much alive and kicking.They have recruited all thier captains and they are in country converting to type. On the subject of rearcrew they have just completed interviews for the training team and have selected a guy called ashley"rob" roy an ex RN SAR crewman from Prestwick who last job was a line winchman at Slygo for CHC as the Chief Aircrewman. If you have not heard from BondOS having submitted your CV you are not one of the "selected few" on the training team but with a "on line" date of Dec 05 they have got to get thier finger out and train the 4 operational crews required.
All the rumours of watch systems are right on the button.Its 2 weeks on the rigs two weeks off, 2 weeks at SCATSA two weeks off and two weeks based at Aberdeen and repeat the cycle. Heres the interesting bit PAY:The top whack for the winch ops is £41K this includes all your bonus's for rig time ect....do the maths and you will see that this contract falls well within what Bristows and CHC are paying for in country SAR crews if you take the given that you do 18 shifts on the rigs a year.
Watch this space for breaking news as Jigsaw goes on line.

PS: They are starting this venture form scratch from the L2 to the toaster..I think that they mean business!!!

Droopystop

29th Jan 2005, 11:51

Its 2 weeks on the rigs two weeks off, 2 weeks at SCATSA two weeks off and two weeks based at Aberdeen and repeat the cycle.

If you are on duty for 2 weeks in Aberdeen, can you then go on to do 2 weeks of (I assume) 12 hour shifts offshore without busting Flight Duty limits? Or is there another 2 weeks off between Aberdeen and offshore?

18 shifts per year offshore? I make it you do 5 two weeks stints offshore on the above quoted scheme plus the same in Scatsta.

running in

29th Jan 2005, 17:33

genesis848

I am not very good at sums, but only "4 operational crews" does not seem enough to cover the shifts you stated at 3 locations.

ri

sargod

29th Jan 2005, 19:18

genesis848

A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing!!! or is just sour grapes on your part coz you didn't get in??

You can't have been to Bond otherwise you would know the pay is more than 41,000

Perhaps you are just trying to put decent backseaters off so you can get a look in!! Touching any raw nerves yet!!!;)

Nigerian Expat Outlaw

29th Jan 2005, 23:02

Looks like the knives are starting to come out......... Maybe because Bristow seem to be on the up at last ? CHC don't appear to have proved much after the inital shock, shame people lost their jobs in the meantime.

Return to sender

30th Jan 2005, 10:38

Looking at the shift pattern there does seem to be some holes in it.

To cover 24 hours at Scatsta and offshore you need at least 4 crews, assuming the other 4 are on time off then it becomes 8 crews and then 10 if you have 1 two week period in Aberdeen.

In my calculations you will exceed the 2000 duty hour limit under the new european working time directive which comes in to force on the 13th April. Apparently that comes with either a £1000 fine or a prison sentence for anyone who does!!!!! Nice, you go to prison for working too hard, what utter sh....

Bristow are working on this problem at the moment, CHC Ireland units appear to know nothing about it (from my sources) and neither does Bond if the above is what they are proposing.

Meanwhile, it seems the new Bond co-pilots starting in September have already been told they WILL be going on jigsaw after their first year.

RTS.

joedirt

30th Jan 2005, 12:49

Could you expand on the European working time directive ( links, info etc)........!?

I'm particular interested in the HEMS/SAR scene regarding this directive

roundwego

30th Jan 2005, 13:01

My source tells me that Bond Offshore pilots are being individually interviewed by management and are being told they will be required to sign a waiver to the european working time directive. Is this true?

Return to sender

30th Jan 2005, 13:32

Joedirt,

Have a look at the links below. It's heavy reading but should give you some answers.

http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_aviation/documents/page/dft_aviation_028337.hcsp

http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_aviation/documents/page/dft_aviation_032810.hcsp

Basically, you can not exceed 2000 duty hours a year so it has big implications for any one running on a 24 hour or 12 hour roster.

Doing the maths anyone working a 12 hour roster can only work 13.9 shifts a month.

A 24 hour roster based on the current UK CG FTL works out at 8.5 shifts a month.

In addition to that you have to consider duty travel, HUET training and the other courses/refresher training etc.. you can't do while on shift. All of which must be logged as duty time. So naturally the number of shifts you can do falls.

From the DFT: -
Periods spent working overtime and on standby duty are captured under the definition of "working time" and should therefore be taken into account when calculating an individual's total annual working time.

To add to the employers problems it seems that every employee must take at least 20 days leave a year. That's LEAVE, not time off as a result of a rotating roster.

Roundwego,

I'm not sure that an employee can waiver the working time directive. Otherwise everyone would do it because from my understanding it's the worker NOT the company who pays the penalty for breaking it.

Anyway the fun continues,

RTS.

Tuckunder

30th Jan 2005, 15:51

Roundwego,

As I read the rules, we are classed as mobile airworkers both SAR and commercial type flying. As such we cannot opt out. Therefore, I doubt your friend Mr Payne will be able to do as you suggest.

Happiness is an IFR hover!

angelonawire

30th Jan 2005, 16:18

genesis848, you seem to know quite a bit, slightly wrong on pay with all bonuses etc, actual figure closer to£45k for winch op. two weeks on rig, two weeks off, two weeks scatsta, two weeks off. with two weeks leave per year to be taken one week at a time added onto time off, thus giving two 3 week periods per annum. the shifts on the rig will be 12 weeks per year and 12-13 weeks per year at scatsta.....25 weeks per year on shift x 12hr shifts x 7days= 2100 hours duty time per year....if this is a problem(over EU wtd 2000hrs) it is easily solved by classing some of 12 hr shift as standby time where only half is counted towards total duty time ie 10 hrs duty 2 hrs stby(counted as 1 hour) = 1925....bargain!

chopperman

30th Jan 2005, 19:09

by classing some of 12 hr shift as standby time where only half is counted towards total duty time ie 10 hrs duty 2 hrs stby(counted as 1 hour) = 1925....bargain!
Angelonawire,
Not quite as cut and dried as that I'm afraid. I believe that the definition of 'Duty Time' has still not been clearly defined and is being discussed/argued about by the legal boys at this moment.
As I understand it the argument is very basically as follows;
By being on standby at the request of the employer the employee is deemed to be working for the employer, which, for the purposes of the Working Time Directive requires the duty time to be counted in full.
I don't know if any ruling has been declared yet, but, as the Danish have just adopted the Working Time Directive perhaps one of our colleagues in Denmark could comment?
Personally, I hope that the argument goes in our favour, i.e. standby duty hours to count in full. My reasons? Simple, the requirement for more pilots and engineers will result in more of them being employed.

Chopperman

Return to sender

30th Jan 2005, 19:13

angelonawire,

Nice try, but I'm sorry to say you haven't a clue what you're talking about.

Standby period is spent is classed as time spent away from the base or in SAR from a state of immediate readiness in suitable accommodation etc. As Jigsaw is a 15 minute response time throughout the 12 hour period you can't be on standby during that period. What you have just suggested is basically cooking the books which not only lands you in trouble but also the company you work for. The CAA would take a very dim view of that. Fiddling duty hours is a well known scam and is checked for on unit audits.

You also haven't taken into account courses and checks away from the unit such as HUET, medical courses and duty travel or were you going to class that as leave?? :confused:

332mistress

30th Jan 2005, 19:43

The EU directive is complicated but at the moment any pilot/crewman who works offshore has to claim 14hrs duty per day offshore. This is a CAA FTL mandatory requirement. You can do 9hrs flying duty within this 14hr period.

The EU also states that you have to have a minimum of 28 days leave a year. There are big discussions at the moment between offshore unions and the oil companies as to how leave is defined. The oil companies saying that the 13 days you have off between 15 day cycles can be "accountable leave". This is nonsense so a fight is developing.

If Bond are only offering 2 weeks leave you are being short changed. The industry standard is 42 days which includes public holidays and weekends within the period of leave taken.

332M

TeeS

30th Jan 2005, 20:21

332mistress - Complicated is the right word! My understanding of the working time directive view on leave, is that a weeks leave should entitle the worker to one week away from work. Thus a weeks leave for a 5 day/week worker would equate to 5 days while a 3 day/week worker would equate to 3 days leave. The minimum requirement of the directive is 4 weeks leave per year so your 'standard 5 day a week office worker' requires a minimum of 20 days leave per year.

If you work on the basis that someone on an equal time on/off roster works a 3 1/2 day week, this would equate to only 14 days leave per year. However, and it is a big however, an offshore equal time on/off roster is not in reality equal time on/off, due to the change over flights, positioning etc. Additionally, I do not believe any major operator offers the minimum leave required by the directive.

Balancing this, is the fact that a two weeks on/two weeks off roster with two weeks leave is in fact a damned good deal when you look at it and compare with other rosters.

I realise I have sat happily on the fence and argued both sides of the discussion but then as you said, it is complicated!!

Cheers

TeeS

Hummingfrog

30th Jan 2005, 22:07

TeeS

Your quote below perhaps shows you have never done this type of roster, or are management!!

"Balancing this, is the fact that a two weeks on/two weeks off roster with two weeks leave is in fact a damned good deal when you look at it and compare with other rosters."

It is in fact a very poor deal compared with the onshore rosters I have worked in the N Sea. On average you are away from home 75% more than an on shore based N Sea Pilot. Your social life is very restricted as your life is totally controlled by the cyclical nature of the roster. No asking for specific days off for family reasons - if you are offshore then tough. Either Xmas or New Year offshore. You have to keep your family relationship going over the phone.

Any regular weekly activity is impossible due to you being away for 15 days at a time. You can not plan holidays starting within 2 days of your due date on shore because often you can not return onshore on time due to the weather being out of limits.

The accommodation is usually poor with the sharing of toilets etc common. Rig life is controlled by legions of rules which include no sunbathing on the helideck!! Although it has been tried but you don’t get much of a tan when wearing overalls, hard hat, safety specs and gloves.

If this roster is so good why are there very few volunteers to do it within my company? Most who do it have very personnel reasons for doing it which out way the very large downside, though even that is not a strong enough reason for some who have left recently for the benefits of an on shore roster.

I think those who have signed up for Jigsaw may be in for a shock. Working regularly on the same rig allows you some stability but constantly changing locations between rig/Scatsta/Aberdeen will not.

The way some companies interpret the CAA Flight Duty scheme may also mean that after you stint at Aberdeen you may only have 3 days off before going away for 15 days.

My wife has suffered me being based both on and offshore and she certainly prefers me being based onshore but is willing to sacrifice a large part of family life for our own specific reasons. I will be interested to see how many original Jigsaw crews are still in post after a couple of years.

Good luck to those on Jigsaw

HF
(who wasn’t headhunted
:ok: )

winchop

30th Jan 2005, 22:49

The standard touring roster with CHC Australia is 2 weeks on, two off, but you still get your entitled 6 weeks annual leave. (Standard annual leave in Oz is 4 weeks, if you do shift work, as our roster is classed as, you get 6 weeks) You earn your two weeks off as you've just spent two weeks away in some crappy location, (usually) so it has nothing to do with your annual leave entitlement.

Question for you North Sea chaps..what or were is "SCATSA" I'm assuming it's the Shetlands?

Also, if you do two weeks on in Aberdeen, what are you actually doing there? There's no Jigsaw SAR aircraft based there is there? If not what are the winchops doing, working in head office photocopying???:confused:

Nigerian Expat Outlaw

30th Jan 2005, 23:24

Hummingfrog,

No offence, but you appear to have forgotten the main factor, which is CHOICE.

Yes, Xmas and New Year etc away is a bad routine, (doesn't happen every year) but some people actually exist very well on rosters like that.

As Mountainman would testify (he decided he'd had enough of it years ago), there are some who have lives and relationships (and are ex North Sea with it's "structured" life), who relish the amount of time off a roster like that can give you.

So please, let's not generalise:ok:

Have you been anywhere apart from the North Sea ? As I saId, no offence.

Cheers,

NEO.

Return to sender

31st Jan 2005, 00:38

Also, if you do two weeks on in Aberdeen, what are you actually doing there? There's no Jigsaw SAR aircraft based there is there? If not what are the winchops doing, working in head office photocopying???

Probably yes they will. They will be washing aircraft, acting as ground staff and god knows what else. It's the new, caring sharing Bond - no job is too small for a winchop! ;-)

By the way if you finish washing the aircraft early can you do my car? :E

winchop

31st Jan 2005, 02:28

RTS

I'll wash your car if you tell me what SCATSA stands for!:}

angelonawire

31st Jan 2005, 06:25

hey i'll wash your nicks and socks for £45k a year and 26 weeks off, i'm not shy!!!

212man

31st Jan 2005, 06:34

Winchop; your guess was right, Scatsta is in the Shetland Islands. It's the closest land base for the more northen fields.

TeeS

31st Jan 2005, 08:20

Hi Hummingfrog -

I worked the offshore rosters on both the Piper/Claymore and Forties for a fair period. At the time it was Week on/week off which really meant 8 on/6 off by the time you had done your travelling. Two weeks on/off would have been far better for me but was not an option. While based onshore I was bounced between Strubby, Humberside, Beccles, Blackpool and Bournmouth so there was never anything more stable about homelife!

Without doubt the best roster I ever worked was Sumburgh (in the Peter Boor days - Top bloke! Where is he now?) 5 on, 2 off, 5 on, 9 off. Still cracked 900 hrs flying less than half the year!

The option to have 2 blocks of three weeks off would cost me 42 days leave under my current scheme (we only get 36 days/year) and you get two weeks off every month, it sound good to me!!

And no, I am just a line pilot so no hidden agenda.

Cheers

TeeS

ec135driver

31st Jan 2005, 09:25

Tees said

"And no, I am just a line pilot .......

Come come, such modesty! JUST ??? Get back to work

TeeS

31st Jan 2005, 09:31

Ooops! Caught again!

Hummingfrog

31st Jan 2005, 11:13

Nigerian Expat.

I agree it is all about choice. I chose to be offshore for my own specific reasons. I was trying to describe that the Bond deal with only 2 weeks leave is a very poor deal compared to the industry standard of 42 days leave

The time off is not the main reason most of us work offshore. We have had 2 pilots leave recently because the demands of family life outweighed the benefits of working offshore.

I admit I have only worked N Sea (Puma/Dauphin) in my civil life but have worked many odd rosters in my RAF days in N Ireland and the Falklands. If I lived near Aberdeen I would not work offshore - it seems idyllic having 13 days off a month but you do pay for them and they soon get used up as you complete all those tasks which you would have done after a normal flying day onshore. Remember an onshore based Puma pilot will get 9-10 days off a month!

TeeS

Unless you are very very old ;) I must know you as we have worked the same platforms and the same rosters with Bond. You must have been unlucky to have been bounced around the Southern bases as most of us had a reasonable stable roster based on Frigg/Tharos/Iolair 40s - ah the joys of single pilot must have a nostalgia break.:ok:

OK back to earth now.

I agree It is all about choice. All I can say is that if the Bond roster of Rig/Scatsta/Abn with 2 weeks leave a year is true then it may suit some people and they have to make their own choices.

HF

Tuckunder

31st Jan 2005, 11:44

Having spoken to 2 Oracles Tim Wilson CAA and David Shepherd DFT in our part of aviation industry (mobile airworkers) we are not allowed to opt out.

Happy hovering!!

joedirt

31st Jan 2005, 18:39

Did they define duty time ? Having read through the papers I presume the need for more pilots will increase drasticaly after April 13 !?

bondu

31st Jan 2005, 21:52

Quick note on the European WTD.

Leave: the minimum leave to be taken is 28 days, not 20.

The fines of £1000 for each offence are applicable to both the individual and the company.

The WTD came into effect on 13th April 2004, not this year.

There are to be no opt outs, as far as I know.

There is some discussion at the moment between the lawyers in the DfT, CAA and various employers as to some of the definitions laid out in the Statutory Instrument (SI). This may lead to a revised version being issued in due course. It is possible that some current CAA variations may be permitted, ie: counting standby time between 2200 and 0800 at half rate (a 24 hr duty, without night callout, being logged as 19 hrs).

The draft SI was actually published in 2003, so all the European companies, including those in Eire, have had more than ample notice of the changes. Few, if any, seem to have addressed the situation until now, thus creating a panic, as usual.

bondu :rolleyes:

TeeS

1st Feb 2005, 11:39

Hi Bondu

I have spent a fair bit of time trying to find a definition of the ' 4 working weeks.' The only one I have found so far is on the DTI website Here (http://www.dti.gov.uk/er/work_time_regs/wtr7.htm#section7)
In it it explains the version I gave above, however if you have any better source I would be grateful for the info.

Regards

TeeS

Hummingfrog -

The bouncing around was to a large extent my choice as I enjoyed the variety. I was really just trying to make the point that I had experience of loads of rosters that could never compare with equal time on/off. I was out there around 1991 to 1993 if memory serves.

Cheers

Tees

boomerangben

1st Feb 2005, 16:56

4 working weeks = 20 days plus the 8 statutory holidays (bank holidays) = 28?

Don't care what anyone says, flying is better than driving a desk and you get more time off too.

genesis848

3rd Feb 2005, 16:21

SARGOD
Yep you were right I was not one of the "few" but i am certainley not bitter and twisted about it. The good thing about jigsaw is that with the amount of new positions its creating it is leaving a vacuum of jobs to be filled by the people who are not "the few"!!
The comment of a little bit of knowledge being dangerous well the whole jigsaw discussion seemed to be getting quite a bit stale and as you can see by the subsequent discussion on the subject ..................well aim achieved i think !!

PS: G8 handle mate!

Jigsaw is not the "bloody holy grail" of this business but Bond OS are a breath of fresh air and thats got to be good. The subject of duty hours and the EWD i feel will run and run, as will the amount of new employees when they experience life on a rig...even if it is only 2 weeks!!

TimS

4th Feb 2005, 00:37

Hummingfrog

I can confirm that TeeS is "very, very old"

Just keeping an eye on you little bro'.

That's it - back off to Jetblast !!!

TimS

TeeS

4th Feb 2005, 10:33

TimS

Does your Mum know you are surfing the Internet!!

TeeS;-)

boomerangben

Sadly, if you look a little deeper, you will find that the supposed 8 bank holiday days can be included in the 20 Statutory days.

Tees

winchop

26th Feb 2005, 05:35

Just heard a crewman from CHC Ireland got offered a Jigsaw position, salary of 31K + 8K offshore allowance = 39K. (UK Pounds) Is that good, bad or average money for SAR crewies in the UK?

Question for the offshore drivers...Also how expensive is housing in Aberdeen? Obviously there's good and bad areas in Aberdeen, I was just wondering average prices...many thanks:ok:

Return to sender

27th Feb 2005, 22:25

Apparently Bond are recruiting pilots for Jigsaw again.

After having got their happy few together it seems that some are less than happy and have gone elsewhere. It seems that the reserve team are now being offered places in the first squad with P2’s being offered their first command on Jigsaw. Is that really a good idea? :-(

The original 9 Bond co-pilots recruited (with compulsory posting to Jigsaw after one year) at the end of last year are down to 6 and new candidates being interviewed.

It probably doesn’t help that Bristow are recruiting and that Scotia despite losing the Talisman contract are showing no signs of staff reductions.

There’s a rumour that some of their engineers are none to happy either.

Should be an interesting year – new project, potentially high staff turnover and new operating procedures. Makes you wonder when and how they’re going to train all these guys in time for the great opening. BP must be slightly nervous about all this after all the hype. Still, time will tell.