Merged: Pel Air vs RFDS for the Air Ambulance contract in Australia

[Dances With Dingoes]

I have heard Pelair have undercut RFDS for the QLD section contract, although have not heard any official words about it so I thought I would come straight to the place of all wisdom in things aviation. PPRUNE

Can anyone tell me is there any truth to it?

[j3pipercub]

Sorry, you've lost me. What contract? The crewing, the aircraft? You ex-pel air or current?

j3

[bushy]

It is very difficult for a company to undercut a "not for profit" or subsidised organisation that can quote low and make up the shortfall by asking for donations from the public.
It's not really a level playing field and is a clever means of getting cheap airmedical services for the government by getting Mr general public to subsidise it with donations.

[lordofthewings]

If this is true, Pel Air wont survive. RFDS supply a critical service to all of Australia, and do it with flying colours. Other operators are moving in to the air ambulance business, but you will find they are not there to compete with the RFDS. The likes of Pel Air, Careflight QLD, and now even CQ Rescue in Mackay will support RFDS and hopefully not take its work away.:ok:

[Howard Hughes]

It is very difficult for a company to undercut a "not for profit" or subsidised organisation that can quote low and make up the shortfall by asking for donations from the public.
Bushy, while I generally agree with your 'not for profit organisations should not have AOC's' mantra, I think it is important to remember that not one cent of donations from the general public goes to running 'Government Contracts'!

In fact quite the reverse, profits from any contracts the RFDS have, go to providing funds for their more 'traditional' rural services. Of course there are tax benefits to being a 'not for profit' organisation which may help reduce their overheads, however the RFDS are currently paying their pilots considerably more than any of their GA competitors!

Personally I don't see too many other GA companies with the facilities, or resources able to cover the State of Queensland, Pelair included!

[apache]

"Not for profit", doesn't actually mean that they don't, or can't, make a profit. and true, they RFDS do pay more than their GA counterparts, and spend more on training, and uniforms etc.

IF the RFDS had to compete against GA companies run by "for profit" accountants, and using the cost factor they now have.... they wouldn't survive a month...!!!!!!!!!! they are a beauracracy hiding behind a legend. HOWEVER, they do do sterling work, and have my respect. I wish that I had been able to have a stint with them.

[lordofthewings]

You will find that Careflight QLD(RACQ) and Careflight NSW(NRMA) are two very separate companies that happen to have the same name.
CF NSW utilise Pel Air for jet coverage while CF QLD have there own jets and crew.
The companies looked at coming together many many years ago, thus the same name, but with different board members and business models, they went there own ways.

[Howard Hughes]

but with different board members and business models, they went there own ways.
Sounds just like the RFDS!;)

[tail wheel]

A "not for profit" entity is required to operate “profitably” in order to preserve it's solvency, in the same manner a commercial “for profit” entity generates profits.

A "not for profit" entity generates financial surpluses, whereas a “for profit” entity generates profits.

The difference is that a "not for profit" entity is not permitted to distribute it's surpluses to Members by way of dividends or other benefits, but must re-invest it's surpluses in the services it provides. A “not for profit” entity is not subject to company profits tax but is generally subject to all other taxes and duties, including GST, payroll tax etc. Certain ATO approved charities, generally in health or religious services, operating as "not for profit" entities (but not all) may enjoy FBT benefits which are generally passed to staff by way of a higher PAYG tax threshold.

Both “not for profit” and “for profit” entities generally managed their operations on similar business principals.

[Cravenmorehead]

RFDS QLD section do a lot of clinical work particularly in the Cape region.
They use operators outside the RFDS frame work ie contactors. GAM and Hinterland etc. They all have to pass quite strict RFDS audits.
The QLD goverment through Queensland health pay for this. it is a community service, provded for the communities.
Perhaps Pel Air have won this work????

[Horatio Leafblower]

Was chatting with an ex-Pelair driver the other day who told me PelAir have tendered for the NSW Air Ambulance contract against the RFDS, using B350s.

"Interesting". :eek:

[Harry Cooper]

What happened to the RFDS WA aka Maroomba jet operation that was on the drawing board? Does this service replace that option?

[Dances With Dingoes]

Did not want to start the same old 'profit, not for profit, non profit' debate. Although I do agree with most of what has been said here I was just wondering if Pel Air had actually won the contract, given that no one has any facts about it I guess it just has not happened.

Now Back to the OFF TOPIC THREAD. :}

Like I said I agree with what has been said so far but there is the example of Pearl (I will just duck and take cover now) but they won the contract for the Top End even though they were competing with RFDS, so I think that makes it possible elsewhere. Do not take it as gospel, but now that contract is up again, I believe Pearl, Pel Air and others are competing for the contract against the RFDS.

It takes time and money to put together a bid for a contract and no business would be investing both if they didn't think there was a dollar to be made.

Speaking of profit, I am going to run a book on who gets the the top end contract. ANY TAKERS $$$$$$$
ANYONE WANT TO SET THE ODDS?????????

DD:E

[B58]

The tender that went out in QLD was for 2000 extra hours on top of what is already distributed between RFDS, Careflight etc by QLD Health.

To date the tender has not been awarded to anyone (that I'm aware of) but there were quite strict conditions placed on aircraft type, loading capabilities and crew experience in aeromedical operation.

RFDS was only one of the companies that tendered for the extra hours and there is certainly no guanrantee they will get it, but 81 years of aeromedical infrasrtucture and experience in QLD, more than 15 aircraft, 50 pilots and 7 fixed bases throughout the state doesnt fall over overnight because of an extra 2000 hrs on top of the 20 odd thousand hours a year they already do.

[CharlieLimaX-Ray]

Does the NSW government still own the B200's, or they owned by the contractor?

[Jabawocky]

Now here is a shocker!:eek:

As of July 1st 2011 Pelair will be the new guys on the job.

Not good for all the RFDS folk. :uhoh:

One wonders how a really 1st class professional "not for profit" outfit can be undercut by a commercial group with way less experience and equipment for the job.

Any of you folk who know the ropes care to comment?

J:sad:

[Horatio Leafblower]

I was told by an ex-Pelair bloke that they were tendering for the NSW contract too.

I imagine the Pel Air Metro drivers made redundant were on much less money than the RFDS drivers - Rex management know how to screw 'em down :suspect:

I am sure the Vic government know what they're doing - no, I can't see any issue with replacing very experienced specialised pilots with guys with much less experience. No issue there at all. :ugh:

[OZBUSDRIVER]

Sooooo, this then leads the question...who actualy owns the facility at EN? and, Who owns the aircraft?

[PPRuNeUser0161]

Changing of the guard hey, I guess it was only a matter of time it is a contract after all. Dissapointing for the rfds pilots with the conditions they have built up over time, this is how they get erroded all legal like!

In any case there is two years left and the pressure will be on the next operator to get their act together in time to start. Look forward to seeing who gets SY now, it should be announced very soon I think.

I would say there would be a clause dictating the minimum experience levels for the pilots to fly the line, hopefully everyone who wishes to keep their job does so.

[tobzalp]

no, I can't see any issue with replacing very experienced specialised pilots with guys with much less experience.


Unfortunately there is no column in a Ledger for 'Experience':mad::ugh:

[Jabawocky]

Sounds ike a CHARLIE FOXTROT in the making to me.....will someone remember in about 3 years to bring this thread and this post to the surface............I may be wrong, but I think it will be a case of ........:ugh:

[Horatio Leafblower]

Isn't the trend in the USA for regular crashes of EMT aircraft?

Reduction in the experience base must be world's best practice then... :uhoh:

[Wally Mk2]

Okay I knew this would come out sooner or latter.

I'll add a bit here seeing as I am directly effected:{

Yes it's true the RFDS has been unsuccessful in the next contract in Melb.
Sydney unknown as yet but doesn't look good.

We have a great team down here, top management with the best C&T guys you will get in the business, pilots who can do the job with their eyes closed all well above the mins many in the 5000-10000 hr bracket. Engineers who are worth their weight in gold. The admin staff who really run the place we just do as we are told are terrific people:-)
The fact is that it's a Govt commercial contract & when Govts are involved anything is possible, anyone recall the Amann Aviation fiasco many years ago?
Pelair/Rex obviously have a lot of clout & I wish them well because it's not an easy contract to stay on top of. Anyone can fly a KingAir they are idiot proof that's not the issue it means making several quick decisions on the run under some very adverse conditions that counts, pilots need to be extraordinary at times, will be interesting to see if Pelair use this contract and others (if they win others) as a proving/training ground so to speak for their up & coming 'gringos'! Just an opinon that's all.

I have my doubts as to whether the currect drivers will take on the new employers if they do indeed get offered jobs as there is certaintly almost no chance of us getting our current hard fought T&C's, this will be the deciding factor for us older pilots, early retirment looks good:-)

So I hope that puts to rest some that might be thinking otherwise here. It's been a great ride for allmof us & there is still some fun times & great mateship to be had before we go under but all good things come to an end. The only saving grace might be the fact that 2 years in aviation ('till the end of the current contract) is a very long time, anything could happen & probably will.
ANSETT who? I always thought they where as safe as eggs, most did, but now?..............I rest my case!

cheers


Wmk2

[Jabawocky]

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/_9zVAlB2yTk&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/_9zVAlB2yTk&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

and there is some level of experience money can't buy.............


Courtesy of Jamair vission inc:ok:

[Stationair8]

Sad day for the RFDS guys and girls at YMEN.

Brave move for the Victorian Government and in particular the Health Minister. With the RFDS being in the aeromedical business since 1928 and owning a large fleet of B200's, you thought they would have put in a very competive tender and had the expertise as well.

Hope its not another Amman Aviation in the making!

Little birdie told me that Pelair are planning to operate B350's on the Victorian and NSW contracts.

GAM will also feel the pinch as they do some of RFDS maintenance in YMEN.

[FGD135]

Dissapointing for the rfds pilots with the conditions they have built up over time

That is probably half the reason why they are losing the contract. The trick is to be cheap, not expensive.

Will there be PC-12s?

[PPRuNeUser0161]

FGD135
Unfortunately you are absolutely correct although it just means the same amount of jobs except the pilots now have to live on the breadline. My guess for aircraft is B200's or 350's.

Edit
Wally Mk2
You know, two years is a long time in aviation these days, you never can tell. Another pilot shortage?, a wages breakout?. REX/Pelair is an industry savvy ORG, there is just no way this could be used as a training ground, if anything they would need to use REX mainline as the training ground and I think they know that.

[rmcdonal]

Jaba, where they flares, small lights, or reflectors? Hard to tell from the vid.

[Jabawocky]

rmcdonal

how would you know......and what differece does it make!






Flares I think.

[the wizard of auz]

Yup...... them was flares......... and car headlights at the end of the strip.

[Wally Mk2]

Yr right guys (FGD) they are going to do it cheaper, no doubt about it. It simply cost the RFDS X amount of bucks to run the contract & they would have been too dear at the end of the day to match the winners. For our price you get quality, less doesn't always mean better:-(

You have a fairly level playing field when it comes to purchasing & the running costs regardless of airframes. The fuel will always be the same allowed for in anyones tender BUT the thing that can be kept cheap & controllable (at a human cost) is the people who work there, they are the ones you can screw down & make it work for peanuts (well try to anyway), the rest isn't negotiable. Remember this is a Govt contract with penalties attached for non conforming performances. It won't be a walk in the park for Pelair but I still wish their employees all the best when they do take over, afterall it's the guys on the ground (so 2 speak) that will make it work not the Mr 'El-cheapo' in SQ!.

"SN" It's only my opinion that the contract could be a training ground for their other operations. Very difference beast SP ops againts 2 crew RPT Ops mostly done during normal working hrs. The few guys that came to us from RPT 2 crew found it very hard at first to adjust, the other way round would be far easier.Top guys now though.

"OS" a tear ot two will flow the day we park them for the last time, we have had ( & still are) some great treatment from you guys, keep it up Med 1 works everytime even 1POB:} (kidding)

"FGD" contract only allows for twins, that's the once saving grace that kept most of us there, the safety side of things. An option is for B350's but that brings a whole set of new problems for the current based ops requirements, we shall see.

Wmk2

[BULLDOG 248]

When are the other Divisions due for renewal. I'm sure Pel will be looking for these aswell. Had no idea of them of them getting Vic/Tas though.

[le Pingouin]

Wally, as another controller who deals with you guys every day I thoroughly agree with OS. We bugger you around when you aren't MED1 so we're square! :}

A Rolls-Royce service comes with a commensurate price tag I guess. Pelair has some very big shoes to fill.

[puff]

Wonder what the Pel-Air T&Cs for aeromed ops will be? - Pay for endorsement + a bond and I reakon all casuals hourly rate! Imagine the money that will save - paying those aeromed guys for that 'standby' time costs a fortune !

Very sad - where will cost cutting end in aviation ?

[Daimler]

The RFDS team at EN, were the best bunch I have ever worked with!
Sorry to hear that my friends are being displaced and Air Ambulance Victoria are loosing such a great team. I hope that all who fly with the ambulance Victoria may never know the difference.

[ferris]

Lester; maybe the RFDS were overpriced, who knows...but you have to wonder about the state of play in general when ambulance services are in a commercial world?? Or is it just me?

[j3pipercub]

If 350's are being used, wouldn't it stand to reason that there will be quite a few strips now that will be inaccessible to them, due to being too short for a Balanced Field Length etc?

j3

[neville_nobody]

I sure hope they won't be planting REX cadets in the RHS.

For that sort of op you would want two guys who know what they are doing.

[FourBalls]

RFDS relies heavily on donations for the aquisition of new aircraft.

The people of the bush (and the city)are aware of this and have got behind the RFDS since its inception. The RFDS has, over a long time, earnt the respect of these people - many of whom have seen loved ones helped if not saved. People who sleep well at night knowing that the "mantle of safety" is there if needed.

I doubt the same level of respect and support will be shown to a newcommer.

They are some big boots to fill.

Good luck!

[PPRuNeUser0161]

j3pipercub
The short answer is no. The 350 may may operate into any strip so long as it has been surveyed and the aircraft is at a weight that can comply with the balanced field requirements. Most strips in VIC have been surveyed by the RFDS over the years and i'm sure Pelair will do the same if indeed they are to operate the 350.

Illusion
Your name says it all!

[Under Dog]

illusion
It might help if you get your facts right first before printing that nonsense on this forum.


The Dog:=

[Trojan1981]

Lester; maybe the RFDS were overpriced, who knows...but you have to wonder about the state of play in general when ambulance services are
Quote:
in a commercial world

?? Or is it just me?

I don't understand this. The Fire Brigade is not run by commercial contract; the provision of a Police Force is not put out to tender. Pel-Air, CHC (or any other company) was not asked to submit a tender to provide the Army with a new fleet of battlefield helicopters or provide the RAAF with transport services in lieu of Caribou.

How is the Air Ambulance function any less vital? Why sould the level of expertise be determined ultimately by commercial considerations?

Don't get me wrong, I understand Aviation is a business, but emergency services should not be.

Our Governments, collectivley, have their priorities in their :mad:.

[Scion]

Mark Twain said, "Nobody's life, liberty or property is safe whilst the Govt is in session"
It is still the same!!!i

[Towering Q]

Wally....when and if the time comes, there will always be a shiny new PC12 for you to play with at another section.:ok:

[KABOY]

History will show that this contract has only ever been with one operator for a maximum of three tenders. The loss of this contract should not be really surprising if you look at it's history.

I think people are being swept up in the belief that the RFDS are the only provider of aeromedical expertise Australia wide. Unfortunately this contract operates under the Victorian Air Ambulance requirements not the RFDS. Experience levels, aircraft, maintenance etc are clearly laid out by the Ambulance service, this will NOT compromise the level of service to the residents of Victoria. Maybe the RFDS felt that they should stipulate the requirements of this contract?

What about the previous providers to this contract? The last provider maintained a very good reputation in standards and maintenance. All of their pilots were recruited with various levels of experience and backgrounds.

[ozblackbox]

Well, this is indeed a very disappointing time for the RFDS – an end of an era!

I too am one of the affected crew at the Essendon base and was very disappointed to hear of the loss of the contract.

I take my hat off to each and everyone involved with our current contract. We work with a wonderful team of people, not just the pilots, who support each other to no end. The check & training is superb, more so after the introduction of the simulator – probably the best I have encountered in my 18 years in the industry – job well done!. The office/admin staff who work tirelessly behind the scenes and make things happen – well done and thank you. The engineers who really are worth their weight in gold! The list goes on…. a big thank you to all directly involved with the Essendon contract.

To the flight paramedics, you ladies and gents are fantastic at what you do. It has been an absolute pleasure to be able to fly with you. Many people don’t realise what an awesome and challenging job these paramedics do and that they are indeed an integral part of the onboard crew. They are the best in the business!

We can’t forget the people outside of the contract either. To the ATC ladies and gents – thanks for guiding us to wherever we go and back. EN ATC, what can I say, awesome and accommodating team of people – thank you. To the refuellers, thank you for filling us during all hours of the day and night. There are obviously other people to thank but the list would just be too long – you know who you are. Thank you.

The work we do is exceptional and in many ways quite unique in the aviation industry. You know, we aren’t just pilots! We, more often than not, see people on the worst day of their lives. We have to deal with the grief of family members, console loved ones, console patients…. The list goes on. On the other end of the spectrum we have had patients die on board. This is by no means an easy job and at times can get very emotional and you just have to stay focussed. It’s definitely not for everyone. To see a patient smile, pass on a “thank you Capt” or even get a hug from a family member or relative is worth its weight in gold and makes this job just so rewarding.

The Royal Flying Doctor Service of Australia - Our Video (http://www.flyingdoctor.net/Our-Video.html)

On the flying side of things, the King Air is an absolute pleasure to fly and perfect for the job. Apart from the medical aspects and requirements, flying presents its own set of other challenges. The biggest factor is weather but often patient requirements change enroute and this will dictate where we go or end up. Flight plan changes whilst taxiing are not uncommon.

The new contractor will certainly have some big shoes to fill. No new contract is easy and will certainly present some challenging moments and times ahead. I wish the new contractors all the best with this important and vital service for the Victorian public. I certainly hope that they respect the fact that this is an aeromedical contract and that Air Ambulance Victoria prides itself immensely in the work that it delivers and above all respects its safety record.

If it is true that 2 crew King Air 350s are on the cards then this will certainly present new territory for the Air Ambulance. I’m not sure if two crew is the way to go but I am happy to be proven wrong. I am all for giving low time pilots (cadets or otherwise) a go but an aeromedical environment is not a place for “training” someone up in the right hand seat. I wonder if CASA will or would approve the 350 for single pilot operations in an aeromedical environment? I guess only time will tell when full details emerge.

Another influential factor, on the new contract, will be salary. Finding the right people with a suitable skill set and applicable experience for the job won’t be easy if the salary is not competitive with the current aeromedical industry. Again, only time will tell when full details emerge.

I am certain though, that the new contractor will treat this contract, as all previous contractors have done, with the utmost respect. The level of service to the people of Victoria and those interstate will definitely not change.

Two years is still a long way off.... This is aviation!

[Echo Beech]

Hey all,
gee you know I don't come here often, last time I think was when we had a little incident at YCFS to put my 2c's worth in but I figured the rumours would start to fly again so I've popped in for a look.

I'd just like to say this.... Currently PelAir are the "preferred" tenderer, they have been invited into discussions with the Vic Govt re the tender. The tender at this stage has not to my knowledge been awarded as yet. Having said that let me say this. It will most likely not be changed, but if PelAir cannot deliver on what they have promised or if there are other issues that need to be resolved that cannot then we are back to square one.

For those currently employed by the RFDS in Vic, keep up the good work, B200 pilots don't grow on trees and especially with the contract requirements that the tender will require. I'm sure most if not all of you will go to work with a different coloured shirt one day, IF, the current negotiations with the "preferred" tenderer go well.

[fritzandsauce]

Echo Beech must be right because I am sure if Pel-Air was awarded the contract there would be a media release of some sort from the Rex group

[FFG 02]

Disclaimer: Have never had anything to do with REX/PELAIR but think the Mike Whiskey drivers are the best in the business.

This just throws up so many questions. In two years time when the GFC has passed, and major carriers recruitment starts to move again one can only gather that REX/PELAIR will again be facing pilot shortages on two fronts.
I gather there will be big penalities if they are not ready to rock and roll from day one and maintain services for the life of the contract.

(Whilst the RFDS is a lifestyle-salary rates can only plunge with REX/PELAIR involved). From all the tenders I would have thought they would have come in last. Cobham surely would have even submitted a suitable tender. Guess they know something I don't....


As others have said aeromedical services are not the place for training cadets.

If something aint broken....why the need to fix it.

All the best to the YMEN guys and gals.

[Stationair8]

Having seen a copy of the tender requirements , one hopes the Pelair people have read the fine print, lots of big dollars in penalties if you can't supply an airframe or pilot to meet the contractual obligations.

Two crew is nice but its not a place to be running a cadet pilot programme for your regional airline operation.

Will the B350 be able to go into all the strips that the B200 goes into?

Is the B350 able to be fitted with the big door for loading patients?

Think of the dollars Pelair wil have to outlay to ensure production slots if they go for new aircraft, the cost of the aeromedical fitouts, strecher loading devices etc?

No B350 simulator in Australia, so off to the states for endorsements, or lots of money spent in the real aeroplane!

Vic air ambulance learnt a very hard lesson in the mid 1980's when a C402 was lost on departure out of Essendon. It rapidly changed there thinking in relation to who supplied the aircraft, pilot skill level and employment status. One of the reasons they went with Sunstate(Mildura) later Southern Australia was they were owned by Australian Airlines and had the financial rescources to put into the contract and also had access to Australian Airlines for technical assistance, quality control etc.

Lots of question to be answered over the next two years!

Just remember over the years we have seen the Amman debacle and the Victorian division of the NSCA implode, we watch this one with interest.

[tasdevil.f27]

What would happen to the RFDS base at essendon? Would that be shut down & aircraft sent to other sections? And what would this mean for RFDS Tas, no spare aircraft close by?

Will PelAir go for the tas contract when that falls due??

[Wally Mk2]

I'd like to second my colleges(ozbb) comments & some:-)

I think some might not realize that the contract is for the supply of suitable airframes, pilots, engineers & support staff full stop, the RFDS in this case has nothing to do with the medical side of it, we are just the transport side of things unlike other traditional RFDS bases where the whole shooting match is operated by the RFDS (inc med staff). So anyone could actually do what we do re the flying aspect of it, just remains to be seen if the new operators (Pelair all gong well) do the task as satisfactory.
I hope that Pelair have the clout to handle this.

The RFDS had just as much right to tender for this new contract as it had for the previous ones, in this instance the contract to the RFDS was purely a commercial venture, we lost I suspect due cost, well I hope it was 'cause as fas as the AAV (Air Ambulance Vic ) are concerned we where & still are doing a damn fine job. The use of B350's will move the goal posts a little & make some of the small dirt strips we flew into inaccessible I believe here in Vic such airframes are a waste. With our average sector being around 35 mins a 350 over a 200 would make bugger all difference, (granted they would carry more) still that's for the boffins to decide, we just fly 'em.
"TQ" a shinny new PC12 sounds delightful, where do I sign up?:E

"S8" The cost of a B350 ready to go would be incredible, for a fully equipped B200 in AeroMed config is around $8Mill each, & takes 6 months to have ready once the airframe hits our shores green from the Factory.

To all those that think the RFDS is/was arrogant etc with this contract or whatever well I say this. The RFDS is made up of one thing that counts at the end of the day, PEOPLE, the people on the ground that actually do the hard miles day after day, just like you & me!

Myself & my colleges will still go on doing the same job right up 'till we park 'em for the last time, it's then I shall sit back some day on my mythical veranda, in my mythical rocking chair & say very proudly, I once flew for the RFDS & was part of a great institution, that none of you can ever take away from us:-):ok:


Wmk2:)

[Stationair8]

Rumour is that the Tasmanian government are looking at going all rotary with a Bell 412 based out of the north west and another one in Hobart.

The Dr Sharley report is pro helicopter a lot more efficient, medical staff prefer rotary and it has the ability to operate in all weathers to the west coast etc. Interesting reading for those who like to see how government departments look at problem solving etc.

Looks like the B200 is so last century!

[frothy]

Wally
Your post #40, please don't use past tense when you say the strips we FLEW into, at lot of water under the bridge yet:ok:
I don't know how many watched "Four Corners" on Monday night. A good example of a commercialised approach to Health Services.
Good luck people

Frothy

[GAFA]

I know it's a shame to see the RFDS lose the contract, but remember they were not the original contractor holder. They won the tender when Southern Airlines gave up the contract. Regarding the NSW contract once again the RFDS were not the original contractor holder, do you remember East West with the Queenair's and it was when Skywest got the contract the Kingairs arrived. So what has occured in VIC is nothing new.

[Wally Mk2]

Hey "S8" I'd say that an all Helo op down in '2 headed land' would be a mistake.
Lots of lovely ice at low levels, no Alt's available that the Helo could plan too due distance (off island) & a higher specialized maint, all adds up too BIG dollars:-)
Still dumber things have happened in aviation b4:-)

'OS' sometimes we get caught out with Med 1. I can recall in the middle of the night there a few years ago I had the Med team on board to go save some dumb ass and about to depart rwy 26 @ EN when I got told there would be a delay of around 5 mins due international traffic sliding on down the 16 ML ILS & they needed to protect the overshoot area (of which I would have crossed on departure). I didn't go as Med 1 at first thinking that nah who would be out here at this time of night to hold us up? So from now on even if the Dr needs a P1ss then it's Med one all the way:E Kidding:-)


Wmk2

[Stationair8]

Not quite correct GAFA, the RFDS NSW bought Sothern's Air Ambulance contract in the late 1990's, because Qantas wanted to end any association with piston twins asap, and because Southern wanted to expand its airline operations and didn't want spend $20 million plus buying four B200's for the new contract.

The Victorian government were very keen to get Ansett to tender for the contract in 2000, so that the business could stay with a Victorian company.

The RFDS job in Essendon would have to be one of the best jobs around, mostly 8 hour shifts, overtime paid if your shift gets extended, good equipment and Vic Air Ambulance staff used to be mighty fine people to work with!

[KRUSTY 34]

Only this time there isn't a vibrant G/A on which to daw the caibre of people to fly the missions.

You pay peanuts and you will get monkeys, or at the very least applicants of inferior quality. Amazingly, (considering the recent past) something REX/Pelair have yet to come to grips with! :=

[Stationair8]

Ever meant a happy REX employee?

If they are that f%&*ing stingy they ration out the mints on an RPT flight, WTF are they going to be like on aeromedical flights? Sorry sick one you have used up your oxygen, please stop inhaling Pelair/Rex's oxygen, this will come out of our profit!!

Hey Jim, how is your margin call?

How will the ego in the training department cope training up pilots for this contract? You need six solo lunar landings now to get a gig on the Saab, make sure you know your Aip's backwards!!!

[tail wheel]

Can someone post a link to an announcement that the Contract has actually been awarded to Pelair? :confused:

[Jabawocky]

No :}

PPRuNe......... the Ru = Rumour

I think one poster early on confirmed it all, it may not be 100% inked.... but the sounds of it suggest it will be.

Could go pear shaped and the RFDS stay......... thats life!:ok:

[CharlieLimaX-Ray]

When is the NSW Air Ambulance tender due to be announced?

Didn't Vic Air Ambulance and NSW Air Ambulance ask for a joint tenderer's earlier this year?

Talk on the streets is that REX have told the NSW government, that if they don't get that contract, they will reduce there RPT services in regional NSW.

[mattyj]

Stationair Ask the Med Crew if they would prefer a chopper over fixed wing when its a 300Nm+ Hospital to Hospital transfer flight...nah..the next innovation will be a stand up cabin :ok:

[the wizard of auz]

Wally....when and if the time comes, there will always be a shiny new PC12 for you to play with at another section.
Bwahahahahahaha........ :} Thats a funny post right there. Wally, your reaction was nothing like I was expecting either. :E

[BULLDOG 248]

I think Wally is big enough and ugly enough to say in this instance in aviation you never say never!!!!!

[tasdevil.f27]

Rumour is that the Tasmanian government are looking at going all rotary with a Bell 412 based out of the north west and another one in Hobart.

The Dr Sharley report is pro helicopter a lot more efficient, medical staff prefer rotary and it has the ability to operate in all weathers to the west coast etc. Interesting reading for those who like to see how government departments look at problem solving etc.

Looks like the B200 is so last century! Really a combination of rotary & fixed wing would be a better option for tassie, be pretty ordinary trip on the golden triangle in rotary! Sort of a combined rotorlift / rfds thing under the one roof. Use the most suitable machine for the job at hand.

[Brian Abraham]

medical staff prefer rotary and it has the ability to operate in all weathers to the west coast
As mentioned, icing would kill it, not to mention low level turbulence. Have the T shirt.

[Pindan warrior]

Q1 - who changed the title of this thread and why? it started off as something like "RFDS get boot from VIC air ambulance" - was it politically correct to change the title or was someone's ego hurt too much??
Q2 - what is the prediction for the rest of the air ambulance contacts coming due? - my guess is - NSW = Pelair, QLD = Pelair, NT = Pelair and CareFlight. If this is proved correct it will herald a resurgence of commercial providers of contract aviation services and also put RFDS back where they do their best work, fed govt funded remote services - Clyde sent RFDS in the wrong commercial direction and they have been learning that lesson for the past 7 years, losing money hand over fist just so his ego could be stroked by wan*er politicians.
All those of you who don't have a clue - and from the quality of the posts here on this subject it is the majority, save your comments and smilies and wait for someone who knows what is going on to make a valid contribution.

PDW

[CharlieLimaX-Ray]

Rumour around YMEN today is that Capt Wally is moving on, apparently he got the gig to replace Micheal Jackson in the Jackson5 comeback tour.

[PPRuNeUser0161]

Pindan
I can tell you the contracts have done nothing but good things for SE Section and they have been well resourced all the way. I say well done to the people of SE Section who have contributed to the contract bases. The thing is the contract was not lost, it was always going to end on July 1 2011, it has just not been re-won and I would bet in this case it is not based on past performance.

Wait and see on SY, you are only guessing.

[The Butcher's Dog]

Quote:
"All those of you who don't have a clue - and from the quality of the posts here on this subject it is the majority, save your comments and smilies and wait for someone who knows what is going on to make a valid contribution."
What?.......as in a valid contribution to a RUMOR network........... long bows and wide guessing is what it's all about...:) (this smiley is on me).

[Towering Q]

save your comments and smilies and wait for someone who knows what is going on to make a valid contribution.


All hail the Messiah!

[Arthur Boy]

Evening All,

Long time reader and admirer (well....most of the time!), first time poster!

And what effect will all this, if it be true and correct, do you lot think this will have on the Tassie Ops??

Is the thinking that they will also fall?? If so, when is that contract up?

Cheers All!!

AB

[Black Maria]

Is the B350 type decided or just rumour.

If decided, it has the shortfall of not being able to operate IFR at night to a destination not served by an approved Instrument Approach.
(AIP ENR - Flight Planning)

Maybe that is not so much a problem in the south of the country?

[Track Direct]

BM,
With regards to the NSWAA contract as others have said, we are all guessing at this stage.
Current rumour and far from being decided is a combination of 200/350 at this stage, (possibly 2x2) this will ultimately be determined by the ambulance service.
I don't have the AIP's handy, would the requirement to carry an alternate not be sufficient ? (given the 350 is over 5700)
It would affect ops into about 7 airports in western NSW. (not including the area served by the BHI aircraft)
The boys and girls at EN will be hoping like hell that Rex management have a dramatic change of attitude towards their staff before 1/7/2011 (assuming current staff are offered ongoing employment:confused:)
It will no doubt be a very different "conditions sandwich" being offered by Pelair/Rex/SQ.:yuk:
Good luck to all when the time comes.:ok:

[PPRuNeUser0161]

Black Maria
You are of course correct. There are compliance issues regarding the use of 350's. Two crew or SP, the IFR aerodrome thing and balanced field etc. CASA can issue exemtions of course but I don't see this happening on a permanant basis.They also have to crew these aircraft and that would require ATPL allowance and there still is no excess of available qualified pilots. The next operator should be very carefull not to under quote.

The 350 bit is just rumer and no more, I would not be suprised if 200's are re-instated.

[neville_nobody]

You could use the 350 for the inter city stuff as they are a bit quicker and use the 200's for the remote work.

[Dances With Dingoes]

Now then, here we go again. It seems they may have been going for the Vic Air ambulance contract. I hear now that they have it.

Horatio
Was chatting with an ex-Pelair driver the other day who told me PelAir have tendered for the NSW Air Ambulance contract against the RFDS, using B350s.
350's cant do a no aid aerodrome at night. Not sure how effective that would be? Or do they only do the non-critical work on a pre planned route? Would the extra capacity of a 350 cover the extra cost of the FO?


DD

[downwind]

CASA might issue pel air with a dispensation for the B350 non aid Night approaches due to >5'700 kgs's weight req's. I'm sure there is a work around the problem.

[pcx]

There seems to be a misconception by some pilots that the B350 requires a Copilot. Not so as I understand it. Check the flight manual.

[megle2]

B350 is a single pilot aircraft unless your company selects to operate as multi crew.

[Black Maria]

Agree with the other posters, the B350 is a single pilot aircraft.

However the current AUS regulations have input in the crewing situation; single pilot is ok in the PVT category, but in either CHT or RPT two crew is required as the type is over 5700 kg.

So in the context of this issue it will depend (if the B350 is the typeto be used) on whether the operation is considered to be PVT or CHT.

CASA might issue pel air with a dispensation for the B350 non aid Night approaches due to >5'700 kgs's weight req's. I'm sure there is a work around the problem

Tend to think that if dispensations are given to this operator it may open a few flood gates that CASA may not want to open.

Perhaps it would be simplier to amend the regulations to modernise the weight categories so as to allow the single pilot use of the aircraft such as the B350 in single pilot CHT use. However I really don't see the wheels of progress meshing with the timeframe of the contract change.

BTW, the 350 is a great machine and (depending on operational requirments of course) does have many advantages over the 200, however these advantages need to weighed up against the disadvantages found within the current > 5700kg regulatory requirements.

[pcx]

I do not know of any requirement for 2 pilots for the B350 just because it is being operated in Charter category. I am happy to be corrected though.

There may be a requirement for a cabin attendant if the aircraft is carrying more than 15 passengers IAW CAO 20.16 Para 6

6 Cabin attendants
6.1 Subject to subsection 6A, aircraft engaged in charter or regular public
transport operations shall carry cabin attendants appropriate to their passenger
complement as follows:
(a) aircraft carrying more than 15 but not more than 36 passengers shall carry
a cabin attendant, except that aircraft:
(i) carrying not more than 22 passengers, at least 3 of whom are infants
or children; and
(ii) crewed by 2 pilots;
need not carry a cabin attendant if the duties and responsibilities of the
flight crew concerning the briefing and control of passengers in normal
and emergency operations are specified in the operations manual;

Most operators of aircraft capable of this number of passengers chose to use 2 pilots as CAO 20.18 mandated 2 crew if the aircraft was not fitted with an autopilot. Very few of these aircraft ( Metro 3/23, B1900, EMB 110 etc) have autopilots.

Jetcraft operated some of their Metro’s single pilot and also Jerry McGowan operated his B1900D’s single pilot on the night freight operation.

I doubt that the B350 would be capable of being configured for more than 15 passengers especially in a medical configuration.

I am specifically not commenting on any use of the B350 in RPT operations.

[Counter-rotation]

Black Maria,
I'm not first-hand familiar with all the aerial medical work being flown in Australia. But at least some of it is niether PVT, or CHTR (and it's obviously not RPT). It falls under AWK - so is commercial in nature but not subject to some of the requirements written for CHTR/RTP.
And I too suspect you're correct in your statement about "wheels of progress" and real world, acceptable time to put something in place. Perhaps CASA could include this change in their document re-write... :rolleyes: :}

PCX,
Perhaps the nurse is considered to be a crew member and cabin attendant, giving briefings to pax etc. :ok:
But yeah they would be going well to get 15+ onboard anyway...
And it's got an autopilot...

CR.

[CharlieLimaX-Ray]

Looking up the B350 in Business and Commercial Aviation, they show it as a single-pilot aircraft.

CASA issued a dispensation for Impulse to operate the B1900C/D single pilot on night freight.

[pcx]

If CASA issued Impulse a dispensation to operate the B1900 single pilot on night freight what rule or requirement did they issue the dispensation against.
Some pilots seem to think that, just because an aircraft is over 5700kg MTOW it must be crewed by 2 pilots and the Captain must have an ATPL.
For aircraft certified as single pilot, and for IFR ops, fitted with an autopilot as per CAO 20.18 this is not the case as far as I know.
If I have missed something I am happy to be corrected with the relevant reference.
Again I am not commenting on the requirements for RPT only charter and airwork.

[GAFA]

Impulse operated the 1900's single pilot for years on night fright and Jetcraft/Toll continue to operate their Metro 3/23'single pilot. Only requirement is to have a serviceable autopilot.

[Dances With Dingoes]

CASA issued a dispensation for Impulse to operate the B1900C/D single pilot on night freight.

Impulse operated the 1900's single pilot for years on night fright and Jetcraft/Toll continue to operate their Metro 3/23'single pilot. Only requirement is to have a serviceable autopilot.

But did they operate them to 'NO AID AERODROMES' at NIGHT?

It is not just about one or two pilots, it is about no aid aerodromes. Perhaps I am wrong, I was once before, just ask my old CP. :{

DD

[zlin77]

When I flew in The N.S.W. Air Ambulance our category was AWK...but that was 25 years ago and things have possibly changed.

[PPRuNeUser0161]

As far as I know two crew is not required in AWK CAT, Navaid at night is required and I cant see any dispo for this, Captain required to hold ATPL and all airports must meet balanced field length requirements.

[Track Direct]

SN is correct.
Single pilot aero-med is deemed AWK category.
When tasked to places like YBAD, YGDA,YCBR and YLCG etc the 200 could be used so no doubt the bean counters are looking at ways to get around the no aid night issue.
My sources tell me the tender includes a combination of 200/350.

[ER_ZZZ]

They could also use the B300 LW.

What is the benifit of the 350?

[Wally Mk2]

Obviously this thread/subject has some firing Q's left right & center.
I don't wish to add too much here in detail as there is a lot of personal involvement here for me & my work colleges.

Some facts though seeing as this is all fast becoming pulblic knowledge:

There was options for various airframes to be used for the new contract.
(actually the old Beech wasn't named, there's no req for a KingAir as such but is obvious as no other airframe can do the current task) All B200, All B350 or a combo for both, the latter presents all sorts of issues re availability to perform the contract with a particular type not being available due maint issues as an Eg.(that's just my opinion too) A combo would almost require more airframes than a dedicated type to cover all contingencies.

AWK is the Cat for Aero Med BUT the contractor would also require to have CHRT on their AOC as well (obviously Pelair has I would imagine) as some tasks are not within the current contract AeroMed associated & therefore would fall outside the AWK Cat if the B350 was being considered for that non AWK particular task, (if that makes sense!).

Some airfields currently being serviced by the B200 would have to be dropped off the ALA's reg (due tire press for Eg.) if an all B350 fleet was utilized,this the Air Ambo's are aware of.

"ZZZ" Good question. In my opinion the B350 is a waste for 90% of the Vic Ops. Too small a state Vic is.

As for non aid AD's at Ngt? Well it's a wank anyway in my opinion. What difference is there from a B350 to a B200 that removes that ability? Bugga all! Still SP ops, still Cat B, and a Vref of around 5 kts or so over the B200, yep I can see the sense in not allowing the B350 to do what ist's bro does now.......NOT! 12500lbs have the rule makers thinking oh it's far more complex to operate now it's over that 'brick-wall' figure.............there's your biggest problem, the goons behind the rule book!

So for now we wait & see. As I said in my previous we at EN have a great crew from the guy who sweeps the shop floor right up to the CP, shame to see all that flushed away due possibly to $$$$$:(
Personally I'm okay with Pelair being awarded the new contract (when it's signed) I agree to fair play & a level playing field as anyone is entitled to bid as long as they can at the end of the day provide the same safe & efficient services we have been offering for many years(at a cost), there in lies the $50Mill question! It all comes at a cost, so what cost safety?

Good luck to all my work mates & those directly effected by this decision.

Wmk2

[Stationair8]

Why is it classed as aerial work for RFDS, when in years gone by commercial operators that did air ambulance etc required a charter AOC?

[mattyj]

when you compare leasing used aircraft, the costs of a B200, a B350 (and a B1900D for that matter) are all fairly similar (around $35000 to $45000 US per month I believe and hugely overpriced) and we all know how much (or how little) it costs to get an FO on the payroll so I reckon the price difference must lie elsewhere!! (not saying where though..I'm not sure)

[ER_ZZZ]

The only benefit I can see with the 350 over the 200 is a newer airframe.

Maybe the pressurization system is a tad better.

The next step could be towards PC12 etc.

However I don't agree with that one.

What other twin turboprop could do the job?

Or maybe back to the Be200 with the blackhawk engine conversion

[morno]

I think you'll find there isn't a lot of difference between a B200 and a B350. Slightly different engines (still a PT6), and the B350 is a tad bigger.

They both come with Proline 21 these days, and the new B200's rolling off the production line now are now equipped with the same environmental systems as those on the B350.

So I'm struggling to see where there's any significant difference, :confused:.

morno

[Howard Hughes]

The only difference is the extra 30cms in the fuselage! Oh and the additional running costs, particularly over the short sectors Victoria...:eek:

[Dances With Dingoes]

ER-ZZZ

The next step could be towards PC12 etc.


This is a family web site. Please do not use obscene swear words like that again :=

For gods sake man, my kids read this stuff.

DD:E

[Wally Mk2]

"DD" I had a chuckle with yr comments, gee I hope yr not female there with being known as "DD":E The PC12 (or any SE for that matter) won't be considered whilst those that dream up the contract req's in Vic have common sense:-):}

"LB" although I have to agree with you to some extent 20.7 means zip at the end of the day with these 2 airframes. The Govt don't know sh1t from clay here & obviously use advisers for such contractual decisions, that's where that ends. (the only good thing these people did was to exclude SE Airframes.........phewwwwwwwwww!!!:}
The 200 & 350 both perform exceptionally well, like the 12500lbs cutoff thingy there has to be a line in the sand no more no less.The segmented climb req's for 20.7 A/C are good & well for large heavy A/C but we are talking about a tonne or so here in difference.The only advantage I can see with the 350 is it can carry more further, the latter not being a real issue in Victoria.Other than that no other advantage at all as far as I can see.

Look get a good fleet of 200GT's all decked out with say access to a small jet (regardless of whom is operating them) & lets get on with it! Going down the 350 path will just create unnecessary headaches & ultimately cost more at the end of the day.


Wnk2

[pc12togo]

DD

So a PC12 is an obscene swear word. So what do you call all of us who fly them day and night. So what are we. And how many of these obscene swear words are flying in Aus.

[Stationair8]

PC-12 rich man's Cessna C182 or a poor man's Beechcraft B200.

[pc12togo]

So that means if you got offered a job in one you would say no. A 208 is a rich mans 182.

[compressor stall]

I reckon Lester is on the money. I am surprised no-one else can see the difference. :ugh:

A B200 can easily find itself in a position like the C90 in Tawoomba. A B350 will not.

[pc12togo]

Thanks TKSF. Im with you.

[Wally Mk2]

The PC V B200 is purely personal choice, that argument ends there:-):)

"LS" in regards to the Toowoomba accident well there where Co. & pilot errors there (read the report)leading to that sad end result. You can't really use that as a yard stick as to what the B200 is or isn't capable of when talking about comparing the 200&350 airframes. Besides any airframe can end up a pile of smoking rubble when not handled correctly inc the B350.
The B200 @ MTOW & rotating at 94 kts (even better @104 kts balanced field length) with auto feather U/S & rudder boost inop (both you wouldn't intentionally go without operating) is still capable of flying at or above Vtoss (providing the pilot is well trained) until the pilot can clean the craft up then it will fly away at Vyse easily. ( I know it does we pratice this in the Sim). Oh & just for the record the PC12 can't do anything like that regardless of how flash the SE girl is:ok:

I still stand by my comments, the B200 & the B350 (with it's 20.7 so called protection) have little difference between them for what they are intended to do with regards to the Aeromed work here in Vic.

Wmk2:)

[compressor stall]

Well summarised LS.

Wally, the gulf in certification and guaranteed performance between B200 and B350 is huge. The company and pilot errors at TWB aside, a FAR23 certificated aircraft operated to the flight manual figures can easily end up in a position on takeoff whereby it does not have enough room left to stop, but does not have the performance to keep going if one fails, autofx, rudder boost or not.

If operated according to the flight manual, a FAR 25 certificated aircraft cannot.

This Wally, is a large increase in safety. You are now being poked by the same stick that you use with so much glee and enthusiasm at PC12 drivers. :8

Regards

CS ex PC12, B200 and now FAR25 driver

[Towering Q]

You are now being poked by the same stick that you use with so much glee and enthusiasm at PC12 drivers.

Yeah, you tell him Stallie! :E

[CharlieLimaX-Ray]

So what is the climb performance in PC-12 like with an engine failure after take-off?

If the PC-12 is so good, why then do the NSW, Victorian and Tasmanian governments all require a multi-engine turboprop for their air ambulance contracts? Their consultants must be aware of the advantages of the PC-12 but for some reason don't put it up a viable option to the various state governments, I wonder why?

Nice for the RFDS boys that choose to fly the PC-12 to tow the company line.

Plenty of Pprune experts seem to bag the old technology B200 and its poor single engine climb performance. Get a B200 maunual and you will see that it still has a reasonable climb figure after t/o of around 500 fpm at MTOW provided you fly it right like any twin engine aircraft. Fortnutely for me I did my B200 endorsement many years ago with Flight Safety in the USA, so plenty of EFATO etc. Not like a lot of you guys who get the good old Ozzie GA B200 endorsement with some expert who knows 3/10 ths of sweet FA about the aeroplane etc.

A few years back talking to a guy who was consulting to a state health department his personal belief was that a two crew Cessna Citation certified to FAR23, pilots sent to Flight Safety every twelve months, was the only thing that he would actually recommend as it ticked all the boxes and didn't leave him or the agency exposed to legal action in case of an accident.

[FourBalls]

So what is the climb performance in PC-12 like with an engine failure after take-off?

(gee never heard that one before)

No-one knows. It's never happened. Marginally better than an upside-down kingair?

If the PC-12 is so good, why then do the ........governments all require a multi-engine turboprop for their air ambulance contracts?

Who knows? Flat earth?Too efficient maybe?:E

[compressor stall]

CLX,

PC12 engine out performance has nothing to do with trying to explain the difference between B200 and B350 certification. :ugh::ugh:

If your comment "Pprune experts seem to bag the old technology B200 and its poor single engine climb performance" was directed at me then:

1. thanks for calling me an expert :}
2. I am not bagging the B200. I used to happily fly them. (As I used to happily fly a PC12). However no matter what training you got, no matter how much of a top gun you are, you cannot go past the fact that a B200 can operate out of strips that leave it with nowhere to go or stop in case of an engine failure. This is legal and happens.

I have never said that the B200 is unsafe. However the B350 is more safe due to its certification criteria. What is the safest thing? Well not flying of course. :rolleyes:

Is the B200 safe for the operation? My opinion is yes. Does the government have the right to demand a FAR23 certificated aircraft? Yes it does.

[Under Dog]

As Iv'e said it before I'm scared of sharks and I can't swim that well so I'm quite comfortable cruising across to lord howe in the old B200.
B200 climbs quite nicely on 1 donk despite the certification crap.

The Dog:ok:

[Stationair8]

Wally MK2, I bet you a Mars Bar that the RFDS will continue operating the Victorian Air Ambulance contract way past 2011.

Like the idea of a Cessna Citation for air ambulance work.

Compressor Stall what basically is the difference in the B200 and B350, apart from the CAO20.7.1b compliance? Basically the same airframe apart from bigger engines, longer fuselage and the dual-feed inverter system. The actual airframe is still built the same and shares a large number of common parts with the B1900, B200, C90, Queenair series, Twin Bonanza and B18 aircraft.

CLX, made a valid point in relation to why the government departments request a twin turbo-prop for aero medical work. Must really irk the Pilatus agents in Australia.

Just keep in mind the original Beagle 206 that the RFDS operated in NSW, were certified below 5700kgs but came with charts and also certification to show a positive rate of climb with an engine failure after take-off, all happily accepted by DCA back in the late 1960's.

[Wally Mk2]

"UD" come & stand next to old Capt Wally, together we shall fight against evil & for common sense we shall be victorious:}

You guys can wave the 20.7 stick around all ya like I still believe that the diff between the 200&350 is little to be even bothering about 'cause the 350 is too limiting for our ops.due nonsense.
Look the only way the 350 airframe is "safer" is due the 20.7 umbrella. You can operate the 200 airframe the same way with regards to BFL etc & get the same 'safety' but we don't because it's a bit like the SE debate with regards the 200, we take a risk, a calculated risk (but not that big!!!):)
If we are talking about safety here and we obviously are re what an airframe can or can't do with a failure at the critical stage lets not even enter the PC12 into it:E
As for the PC12 debate? yeah lets get it re-lit here, been dull & boring in here for ages:E
Anyway at the end of the day we all fly what we are comfy with:-)


EDIT for "Desert Duck".......'self labeled experts who have lost touch with aviation a long time ago"........to that I say...........PHEWWWW!!! Thank God for them:ok:
Economics wise yr probably correct 'DD', safety wise, no contest:ok:


Wmk2

[Desert Duck]

The main reason that Health Departments insist on twin engine aircraft ?

Most of the consultants that they employ,and who produce the tender documents, are self labelled experts who have lost touch, a long time ago, with the real world of aviation.

[Under Dog]

Up an at'em Wally you've got our support down there. By the way your spot on about the 350.

The Dog:ok:

[Howard Hughes]

Mr Duck, I think you will find it has more to do with the political clout of the the people who ride in the back!

[redleader78]

I think the reason asnsw fly the b200 over the pc12 even though of the economic benefiets is the requirement to sometimes go to lord howe and norfolk. I vaguely remember talking to somebody from MRU about that issue.

[Jamair]

Re the C90 at TWB I am given to understand there was some anecdotal evidence to suggest pilot incapacitation, which could not be proved or disproved due to the outcome. :sad:

[Capt Wally]

That's ok "LB" no need to slip into the flack jacket no personal attacks from me:-)
Not everyone understands that the the diff between the 200 & 350 is little regardless of that 20.7 mythical umbrella:-):)Each to their own beliefs:-)

If yr in need of our services worrying about who or how the plane is operated will be the least of yr worries, you wanna get saved & go Med 1 don't ya?:ok:
The Vic Govt tender has been or will need to be modified to accept the 350 airframe & all it's limitations, that's the cokc up with it all!. I still maintain that the 350 is a total waste for our Ops.

Capt Wally (Wmk2 is having a rest:})

p.s...............Just for the record "LB" yeah been there done that with 2 crew 20.7 Ops even OS...........too easy, little challenge:-)

[Dances With Dingoes]

pc12togo, TKFS

Sorry to offend. Just trying to add a bit of humour to a sad time for Wally and associates. It is never easy to hear you are going to lose your job as most of us Gen X and older, pilots have probably done at least two of three times on the way to the 'GLORY' of a life in aviation.

I have nothing against PC 12's. I have never flown one but ALMOST everyone I know that has speaks highly of them. The only thing I don't like about them is the fact they seem to remove the PIC's sense of humour as part of the endorsement.

If deep down a PC12 makes you feel inadequate, or angry, just think of this and you may well crack a smile. I am homosexual, I have got red hair. I got beat up at school and I have got an islander endorsement. :{

Like Capt Wally said

The PC V B200 is purely personal choice, that argument ends there:-)http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/smile.gifLets just hope that Stationair8 is correct;
Wally MK2, I bet you a Mars Bar that the RFDS will continue operating the Victorian Air Ambulance contract way past 2011. Wally and mates down there in Vic. Good luck with the change over, lets hope Pel Air have the brains to bring on the experience that sort of job needs and take you guys on with similar conditions.

DD (not bra size) :ok:

[davidgrant]

Any of you guys had a look at the Piaggio avanti 11.
Made as a dedicated ambulance aircraft...under the magic 5700KG
400Knots..41,000 ft...sea level cabin to FL280, stand up cabin, six feet wide.
a third cheaper to run than the 350 also a lot cheaper to run...maybe someone's not thinking outside the box?

[Dances With Dingoes]

400Knots..41,000 ft...sea level cabin to FL280, stand up cabin, six feet wide.True Dat? How they go on dirt/rock runways?

May just be the salvation for the Air Ambo/ medivac service contracts Australia wide for the RFDS IF that is all true.

Might even blow the rocks off our northern friends. Lets show this little bit of joy to Fury Lep and see what he can extract from this little PEARL.

Especially the cost part.

YouTube - X PLANE 9 Piaggio Avanti P180 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JT1Eunzrfyk)

SHHHHHHHHH. Do not tell Pel Air :E

DD

[illusion]

http://www.asx.com.au/asx/statistics/displayAnnouncement.do?display=pdf&idsId=00970017

[TWT]

Pel-Air is preferred choice for air ambo (http://news.theage.com.au/breaking-news-business/pelair-is-preferred-choice-for-air-ambo-20090721-dr9r.html)

[Wally Mk2]

The "Pig" (Piaggio) I'm sure was briefly looked at by the boffins but at the end of the day was highly impracticable for the Vic Ops. There is simply no need for it's capabilities here in Vic. Got nothing against the A/C, would love to fly one seeing as it has TWO engines:}
The type isn't operated here in Oz at all. There would be little if any support around the country for the type other than say a half doz in specialist ops. Even if the Vic Govt thought okay lets get the new contractor to operate these 'Pigs' then the cost to set up a new type & train everyone remotely involved in the Ambo ops would be enormous, far outweighing the cost advantages over the old Becch. The type isn't even suitable for our ops due not having a cargo door for strecther loading, OH&S issues would kill off that issue dead! The canard wing for Eg would be a huge concern not to mention it's abilities to operate into rough dirt strips & those rear facing props, spells dnager in our ops. I'd like a dollar for everytime I've started the old Beech up being able to see both 'head chopping' devices clearly upon start-up only to swing around & see a person or two in close prox to my plane just watching this happens a lot at country airstrips where country people just like to watch (voyeurism:}).

Scene set at a small country airstrip at night. Brand new type (Pig) recently introduced so EVERYBODY is getting used to this new plane & it's odd shape. Low light, raining an ambulance turns up at the airfeild with a very sick patient. It's 3am & everybody is tired & stressed, rush rush rush, it happens, we are human. The ambo driver backs the truck (as we call 'em) up towards the A/C as he has done so for years with the B200 & CRUNCH!!!!!!!!!! hits the canard sqauare on & damages it big time as you would expect................what do we have now? An A/C that is U/S & most likely will be that way for quite a while, make it into a good cubby house for the local aero club perhaps 'cause it's not as if you could stick some 100 MPH tape on it !..........not to mention what about the sick person at the time?
Hypothetical? yeah in some ways but if it has anything to do with aviation it WILL happen!

Beech know all this & have a captive market, it would be a foolish man/Co. to produce a new airframe type these days to go head to head with Beech.

For now the old Beech will live on just means somebody else will be at the 'wheel'.


Wmk2

p.s...........I'll take that Mars bar now thnxs mate:ok:

[PPRuNeUser0161]

The PC 12 Vs B200/350 thing is a dead issue, the FACT is the B200 & 350 are safer, period. As for the safety of the B200 Vs 350 well the B200 is more flexible as it can operate in the NORMAL category as well as the transport FAR 23 BFL category. Both are as safe as each other when operated in the tranport category.

The 350 is 36 inches (1 metre) longer than the B200 and much better lifter.

Edit: The RFDS is not done done yet with EN, it ain't over till its over!

[rcoight]

OK, I really didn't want to wade into this again as it has been done to death, but when I read statements like the one above by Soup Nazi where THEIR OPINION is presented as unarguable FACT, it's difficult to stay silent...

The following is taken directly from the Piper website, from a discussion on the safety records of various types of aircraft:

"We reviewed the NTSB’s Aviation Accident Database, specifically in the 10 year period between 1998 and 2007. We also reviewed other reports that attempted to summarize accident trends.
What we found confirmed many widely held beliefs, but also included a few surprises.
It was interesting to compare the safety of single and multi-engine turboprop aircraft. Their overall, engine related, and fatal accident rates were very similar. Their fatal engine related accident rates were very low. However, the single engine turboprop aircraft had one-third of the engine related fatal accident rate compared with multi-engine turboprops.Whether that difference can be attributed to the lower stall speeds and thus lower impact speeds of single engine aircraft or attributed to the reduced pilot workload following an engine shutdown is unknown, but the effect on fatal accidents was clear."

I have edited for brevity but there is more there for those interested enough to look, including a chart and so on.

If someone can provide a link to other studies which have come to different conclusions (thus backing up their opinion) please do so.

In the meantime I'll keep flying the PC-12, and will feel quite safe doing so.

And for the guys at YMEN I sincerely hope you do keep the contract. For mine I think it would be disgraceful for it to go elsewhere, but if it does good luck to you all in finding other work.

[Wally Mk2]

"rcoight" I haven't weighed into the old debate too much here with this thread as we all agree it's been done to death. But despite all the evidence that SE Turbo props are safer & they probably are "stats wise" (Stats won't keep me safe but a spare engine out ther either to the left or rigt of me will:}) it comes down to personal choice at the end of the day. I know I wouldn't want to fly one 'cause "I" believe they are not as safe, again my choice. I've said it a few times here over the years that ergonomically the PC sh1ts all over the old Beech technology (the Beech reminds me of an old FC Holden) but that's where it ends for me:ok:
The Vic contract for many many years has never allowed for SE airframes & for good reasons. I know why but am not going to devulge too much into that here, been there done that:-)

Yr right "SN' the RFDS ain't done yet but will be by June30th 2011 bar for some unforseen reason.
Okies more to come am sure but we are still down there at "Twin World" doing out job day & night with the best team I have ever worked with, that will be the shame of it all, the break-up of a well oiled SAFE team:)


Wmk2

[PPRuNeUser0161]

rcoigt
Fair enough.

Wally
I reckon the Beech are leaving themselves wide open if they don't come up with a King Air replacement. It's an old design that is built very well and is sooo good to fly however, its slow, not enough room inside, its heavy and has limited range with medical gear on board. If the PC12 had two donks they would have stopped building King Air's years ago.

[Wally Mk2]

"SN" yr right of course as far as design goes but in today's economic climate it would be a very brave Co. whom could or would embark on building a new type these days to go head to head with Beech to produce a better 'mouse trap' Just won't happen in the foreseeable future I reckon.
It's a bit like the "Pig" as I mentioned in a previous post they (Piaggio) wouldn't have a snow flakes chance in hell here in Oz for many years to come if ever in our time purely because nobody again in today's current crappy climate will take on a new airframe type here in Oz never lone use it for a dedicated service such as an flying ambulance.
So for now we have one choice for those who believe in safety & 2 choices for those that believe in garden gnomes & saving money:} Not on my watch Mr:):E



Wmk2


EDIT for Freight Dog:-):)

I did read something about that some time ago but I still stand by my words that we won't see a Beech competitor especially for Aero Med work for a very long time:-)
Socata as mentioned are not sure what will power their NT (New Twin) at this stage but if it is to be turbo fans then that's not in the same league as the old Beech anyway:-)

[FGD135]

rcoight,

Unless I'm missing something, that statistic you quoted tells only a small part of the story. This was the statement:


However, the single engine turboprop aircraft had one-third of the engine related fatal accident rate compared with multi-engine turboprops.


I don't believe that statistic considers engine failures in the twin which did not go on to result in an accident. I believe it only considers those cases where there was an actual "accident" - and the respective fatality rate.

So, all those cases where the twin lost an engine but continued on to land safely are not considered - which makes that particular statistic almost meaningless.

Or am I missing something?

[rcoight]

Yes, you are missing something.

As you say, those stats refer only to ACCIDENTS, whether in a single or twin is not the point.

It also doesn't count all the times a single-engine turboprop loses the engine and lands safely, thus not counting as an "accident".

Many studies of the accident statistics have come to the same conclusion:

That is: If you lose an engine, you are less likely to die if it was the only engine, rather than one of two.

To put it simply; the FATAL ACCIDENT RATE (ie. fatal accidents per x hours flown across the whole fleet) after an engine failure is, for single-engine turboprops, 1/3 of that for multi-turboprops.

Everyone has a very entrenched opinion on "safety" and those figures may seem completely the opposite of what one would expect, but they are the FACTS...

Perhaps those who put together the requirements for various contracts are less interested in the truth than the perceived truth...

If someone has an analysis of the accident statistics that suggests the opposite of what I have shown, please go ahead and show us all.

I won't hold my breath...

Note: I am only commenting on the "bag the safety of the PC12" debate, not on the B200 v B350 debate, which is another thing altogether. I do find it extremely amusing that those who are happy to bag the PC12 about "safety" get all up in arms about any suggestion that the B350 is safer than the B200!!

LOL!! :}

[Wally Mk2]

Oh I love it when the debate goes beyond the original thread:} I try to sit on my hands but it's hard:E
Govt contracts such as the one under discussion here am sure get ALL the facts before a decision is made because when it comes to money the Govt are the biggest thieves & want it for the cheapest price (afterall they are spending yours & my money here). The PC would be the obvious choice as far as money is concerned, none better probably. But when we add in 'safety' to a contract then that's a whole other story as we have witnessed in the Vic Govt contract now for many years. I can recall a few years ago now when working for another crowd whom flew Pollies around the countryside. Twins where always used & 2 pilots for that matter most of the time so you see anything to do with the Govt means in their eyes safety is No 1, am okay with that train of thought too:ok:
One can Analise stats 'till ya blue in the face but if yr out at night in IMC just having taken off from a non aid AD with high terrain in the vicinity, gone into less than VMC at say around 700ft & you loose an engine hands up those that would say (swearing on their manhood or womanhood) they would rather be in a PC than the old Beech?..........................hmmmm funny about that!:} So it has little to do with the stats that say it's safer in a SE than a twin in any situation. Am sure it is safer in a PC for Eg given the right circumstances after an engine failure but we don't always fly/live in the 'right' circumstances world now do we?:)
Ah sh1t who cares anyway, the countries going down the gurglier might as well gone down in a twin!:}
Step right up please............NEXT:E


Wmk2

[rcoight]

Of course, you are quite right Wally

Governments are only interested in the FACTS, they would not be at all interested in the "spin".
Only what's best for everyone...

LOL!


:}

[Echo Beech]

Have been following the thread to see if anything useful is said, so far if I had a filter you could kill about 95% of it :ugh:

I think there are two possible reasons that the NSWAA don't go for the PC12 IMHO.

First off, when the RFDS contract was announced way back in 2001 single engine aircraft were in the tender. Before the tender was officially released it was leaked to the media that PC12's or more correctly SE aircraft was to be an option. The papers reported this and the "safety" issue raised its ugly head. With in one but certainly less than two weeks, any reference to SE aircraft was removed from the tender.

For me personally, and this is just MHO, I with my training feel I can handle an EFATO which is probably the most significant and therefore like the fact that I have two noise makers. But, having said that, we fly to LHI, we sometimes fly either to make first light or leave just prior to last light. I can tell you right now, there is no way I want to be floating in the middle of the pacific ocean at night in the middle of winter because I suffered an engine failure on my only donk. The stats all tell us that a ditching at sea is not a good outcome for the people up the pointy end any how.

Lastly, having done Stats at Uni for three years all I can say is this, "there are lies damned lies and then there are statistics" quoted by many
Lies, damned lies, and statistics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lies,_damned_lies,_and_statistics) :rolleyes:

[scarediecat]

Its a real shame to see Ambulance Victoria negotiating with Pel Air at this stage of proceedings. The current experience level at the EN base is outstanding. Something money can't buy. We all know its just business when selecting a new tender, but occasionally it should'nt.

The Ambulance Victoria spokesman today said "For the patient it won't be any different, it will just be different planes and different pilots. It was a tender process and an alternative company was identified".

If it is true regarding the desire for B350's, I dare say the experience will be different for many patient's considering there will be less available aerodromes! Less available aerodromes means less Air Ambulance coverage for our country friends.

But Im sure Ambulance Victoria know what they are doing :bored:. Let's hope so!

[PPRuNeUser0161]

I have a great idea. Seen as the RFDS is going to lose significant revenue to help fund the traditional operations perhaps they should look at picking up a couple of RPT routes. Lets see, they could promote on time flights that always go, your baggage will arrive with you, newer aircraft and for a tax deductable donation they could take you where you want. Then lets see who wants to protect their patch.

Aeromedical is the business of the RFDS, REX profits go O/S. The Australian taxpayer will pick up the difference on this one. Real good!

[Dances With Dingoes]

Just wondering, since the thread keeps coming back to one engine or two, safety, and especially the media, lets just buy new twins and shut one engine down, day or night and even on revenue flights, screw the regs. We can do it because it is training that 'has to be done sometime'. We will save on fuel and component time. "It's not dodgy it is just economics". Then we can put in a bid that will be lower than the RFDS and get the contract. "And by the way, even though we have CAR 217 we are not a training comapny".

Excuse my ramblings, but if there were such a company, I think there is, legal or not they may just be a formidable force in future Air Ambo/ Airmedical contracts.

Safety is not the only potential victim of cost cutting, ethics can be precariously positioned as well.

Bugga :(

Soup Nazi, Fight FIRE WITH FIRE, haha. LOVE YA WORK

DD:E

[Dances With Dingoes]

Anyone know if the extra hours have been awarded on the QLD contract yet? If so who got them?

Also when are the NSW and NT contracts to be renewed? I am thinking that may be an interesting rumble now that RFDS are aware there is a very serious competitor out there looking like it is after more and more of the aero med work.

DD

[The PM]

Word from a very well placed source (a NSW lower house MP) is that there is less than a million $$ between the two tenders for the NSW contract.As she put it "chicken feed", but she wouldn't be drawn on exactly who was the more expensive.

[Under Dog]

I imagine it will all come down to what type of sevice they can provide the Ambulance service with for their dollar spent not just the over all tender price.Just My 2 bob.

The Dog

[mattyj]

31st Aug..

they've put it back 3 times so the preferred tenderer can get all their ducks lined up..by preferred I mean the one with the most expensive lobbyists..no bull!!

Sh!t process:yuk:

[The Truckie]

Heard third hand that 1900D's are the aircraft choice for Pel Air. Goodbye to half the strips the RFDS could go into to.

[LeadSled]

Folks,
Given the concerns of NSW Inc., isn't it more likely that who greases the axles will be the deciding factor??
Tootle pip!!

[pa60ops]

Any truth in the rumour that a certain consortium bidding for the NSW contract has still not paid the entitlements to the last batch of pilots it "let go"...??? If true, its a worry that they cant even find the money / decency to fork out....:ouch:

[White and Fluffy]

Does anyone know if or how the loss of this contract will effect the Launceston base? Is their main work under the Vic Ambulance contract or RFDS clinic and medical flights?

Cheers, W&F?

[Dances With Dingoes]

A little birdy told me that the QLD contract (extension of) will be announced tomorrow. Just wanted to say good luck to the RFDS. Let us hope that common sense prevails and no other influence affects the decision, such as promising more regional services in the RPT field. But then our pollies would not be swayed by such a thing,,,,,, surely :confused:

On a COMPLETELY UNRELATED MATTER, was that a West Wind I saw in Guam the other day? Grounded by the local authorities? Rumour has it the governing authority there told the pilot to leave and never come back, this is a rumour network after all.

Let us be thankfull that CASA would never allow such an operator to work out of Oz and these types of business could never get a foot in let alone go after contracts held by Australian owned/operated organisations. Would they :confused:

May the best retrieval provider win.

DD

[Howard Hughes]

Does anyone know if or how the loss of this contract will effect the Launceston base?
Launceston is separate contract with the Tasmanian Ambulance service. The loss of Victorian contract will not affect Tasmanian ops.

[B58]

The RFDS QLD Section was announced as the successful tenderer for the extra hours contract today.

[Capt Wally]

.......this is indeed good news, now for the NSW contract to be awarded back to the RFDS, one can only hope common sense prevails

[j3pipercub]

Best news I've heard all week.

[Stationair8]

Any news on developments?

Jim Davis has a shot at the RFDS in this month's Australian Aviation.

[PPRuNeUser0161]

I heard that things are perhaps not so rosy between Pelair and the VIC AIR AM?
SN

[tio540]

Never mind.

[gulf_dweller]

I heard that things are perhaps not so rosy between Pelair and the VIC AIR AM?



Like to elaborate on that SN?

[PPRuNeUser0161]

Nah thats about it really, its just a rumour and is probably a load of RUBBISH. I did hear it though.........
SN

[scarediecat]

Heard that Pelair have finally signed the contract with Air Ambulance Victoria. What took so long? :\

[hurlingham]

If the ambos still back up to the aircraft someone needs have a serious talk to them.

Very dangerous habit

[Wally Mk2]

'eocvictim' To answer some of yr Q's here

Ambo's park close to the A/C for a variety of reasons. The weather for one, it's pouring rain, night time with no cover to transfer a patient onto the A/C stretcher, remember these stretchers are not comparable with rd trucks (a huge bone of contention that one!!!) so req man handling. Doing that a fair distance away from the plane is unacceptable due patient req's & common sense. Also the area's that are used for transfer at small country strips are often very small. With rain soaked grounds often the only place to do a transfer is right beside the plane & I mean within a couple of feet! Hence the dangers of the canard, it's academic as to what it's function is it's too risky to have such an A/C under the above described conditions (personal opinion there) & it would only be a matter of time before a 'Pig' airframe would become the local kids cubby house at the local airstrip!:}
The high tire pressure would kill the 'Pig' for some of our ops, plain & simple, no contest there with the old ugly truck Beech:-)
The life-port system won't work for our ops, OH&S issues knock that one out. Powerful unions involved, good or bad.
So the 'Pig' will never be a feature in & around the Vic Ops for many years if ever, same as the SE A/C, another no contest with the Vic ops, Ambo's unions won't allow it as far as I know & for good reason, too dangerous but as you said, let's leave sleeping dogs lie there:)
As for the contract? Well too many spies in here, not for me to say, lets just say that nothing is 4ever & somebody is going to regret a certain decision am sure (again personal opinion)!:)

Wmk2

[Towering Q]

The type isn't operated here in Oz at all.

I heard somewhere that Qld Section have purchased a couple.

[CharlieLimaX-Ray]

The Piaggio may look good on paper and the salesman may talk it up, but the last thing you want is an airframe that has no real local support.

Look how many B200 airframes are in Australia and also in the Asia as well as good spares support from Hawkers.

Wally I was talking to one of your comrades and he reckons you are going to work in Tassie as you spend a lot of time looking at maps of Tasmania!!!

[Stationair8]

I believe the contract was due to be signed last Friday.

Order for new to B200's to be signed asap.

Any truth that a certain gentleman that has been mentioned and bagged on Pprune over the years and has a well known past is going to be the contract manager?

[Horatio Leafblower]

...Large framed, recently of Jetcraft, previously of Cirrus? :eek:

[Stationair8]

No not that gentleman.

Some days are .......!

[Wally Mk2]

'eocvictim' Happy to explain where I can. I don't make the decisions but I can see why (mostly) it's the only way we do things, good or bad:-)

Now now CL x-ray lets not get 'two' headed over that statement:} I love "maps" of tassie, what pilot doesn't?:}
Support is everything when it comes to A/C in our role. I don't see Hawkers or anyone else for that matter pushing the 'Pig' barrow too far, would be nice to drive one though, then I can say 'Pigs do fly':)

"S8" few if any around our base know of such things but we pilots are like mushrooms mostly:) It's a good job we have a dedicated bunch of wally's down here (well one wally anyway:}) as the joint would fall apart if it wasn't for the men on the ground, especially those tireless engineers:ok:

The working group now await PelAir to step up to the plate & make this work, after all we are dealing with peoples lively hoods here not just some contract on paper!

Still it's the best GA job around because it has purpose beyond 'cattle' transporting, if the money was similar to the big fat shinny jet jobs I doubt there would be anyone left to fly them!:ok:


Wmk2

[Under Dog]

[QUOTE]

Order for new to B200's to be signed asap.


That's If they can get them!


The Dog

[CharlieLimaX-Ray]

Knowing Pelair that would be a Coles paper plate!!!

[xma007]

Large framed gentleman?
You are kidding me.:eek:

[ozblackbox]

Announced today by the NSW Minister for Health that the RFDS (SE Section) has been awarded the tender for Air Ambulance services in NSW.

Wonder what Pelair are thinking now?

[Falling Leaf]

The life-port system won't work for our ops, OH&S issues knock that one out.

Wally Mk2, can you please elaborate on this issue? Are you referring to the manual lifting required between the Life-port and the stretcher? PM me if you want.:ok:

[Wally Mk2]

"FL" it's quite simple really as to why the Lifeport system isn't suitable for our Ops (Vic Ops) it's not compatible with the road ambulances or the current Med equip used by us. I'm not saying that the LifePort isn't any good I have used it elsewhere & found that syetm to be cumbersome & labor intensive although very well self contained, not conducive to good OH&S practices in my own opinion, well wasn't when I was involved with them they could be different these days & if they are then I stand corrected here. You see the service (as in the RFDS) are heading towards utilizing a "roll on roll off set" up where a patient can be brought out to the A/C conveyed on a Rd Ambulance stretcher & be simply wheeled into the A/C on that same unit, (this is a huge problem at times) not the case at this point in time although it is now with one of the new MedVac Bell 412's, this new arrangement is great, the choppers boys have it easy...said with tongue in cheek of course:) I/we have no idea what PelAir & the Vic Air Ambo's have arranged for the future Vic contract re this very subject of patient transport compatibility..

As for the NSW contract being awarded to the RFDS? Well great news for the boys in Sydney, I wish them all well & it well help to ensure the longevity of the Sth Eastern section of the RFDS for some time to come, an organization that couldn't be topped & I'm very proud to be a part of the dedicated team, well for now as it will be broken up in the not too distant future sadly due to commercial pressures & politics, the latter a dirty word.:{

Wmk2:)

[PPRuNeUser0161]

It ain't over yet wal! The fat lady is still in the limo on the way to the show but its an open air show that may get cancelled due to the bad weather!!!!

As for the life port system, it is not even close to the new TAS fit now in use by SE Section in 4 new B200's. The only lift is to transfer the patient onto the stretcher litter, the rest is a piece of cake even with a 200kg patient. It also is very easy work with only pilot and nurse which takes out any OH & S problems that come with using people who don't work for the company.

Life port is what you use when you don't want to provide a dedicated aeromedical aircraft custom designed for that purpose. It takes about four people just to load the patient. OK for jets that do part time EM. Thats about it.
SN

[Under Dog]

Life ports for King Air's were designed by a clown, There are far better systems in production than to have to resort to that back breaking method.

The Dog:ok:

P.s Well done RFDS (south east)

[Jamair]

Lifeport was invented by Satan to make life on earth a misery for aeromed crews..........:yuk::yuk::mad:

[CharlieLimaX-Ray]

Is the Lifeport certified for saltwater operations?

[compressor stall]

Life port is what you use when you don't want to provide a dedicated aeromedical aircraft custom designed for that purpose. It takes about four people just to load the patient. OK for jets that do part time EM. Thats about it.


EXACTLY. :ok:

[CharlieLimaX-Ray]

An article in Friday's Australian, said the NSW contract is for 3 B200's and 2 B350 Kingairs and runs for ten years.

Beechraft have also picked up a large number of orders for the B350 from the US Government for homeland security, si it will be a busy time on the factory floor.

[Dances With Dingoes]

I hear a bit of a tail today that Care Flight ( and I guess Pel Air) will be picking up the slack when Pearl finish the contract in the Top End at the end of June. Seems to be looking good for them to just carry right on from January 1st as well.

I also hear Rex have begun the process to import 4 new King Airs within the last ten days, but cant say that is gospel, just a prune'ism. As well as CF headhunting experienced flight nurses.

Anyone got any info?

If that is the case I guess there will be one hell of a p!ss up out past that old Berrimah Line at some stage, and a bunch of experienced pilots set free on the market at the same time.

Good luck to all affected, hope you all find employment ASAP.

DD

[CharlieLimaX-Ray]

Sunday Herald-Sun has been running a number of articles on problems with response time for road ambulances, shortage of quailified paramedics, delays in getting patients to major hospitals etc.

Minister must be under a bit of pressure, hopefully the fixed wing air ambulance contract is progressing smoothly and everything will be ready to start on July 1 next year?

[Under Dog]

Wonder how their recruitment is proceding!!!


Regards The Dog

[scarediecat]

They have advertised for expressions of interest but that's about it on the recruitment front. I suppose they are thinking about it at least. There is a little over twelve months to go. Last pilot count I heard Pelair had for the new Vic contract was one! (ie the CP)

[Stationair8]

Christine Nixon will be the contract manager on call 24/7.

[tasdevil.f27]

I know there are endless rumours floating, but one that seems to keep coming up is that Pel Air may be looking at trying to pull out of the Vic contract since they missed out on the NSW contract. Maybe the $$$ not looking so good without the NSW contract now.

[pa60ops]

Ahhh...the old all or nothing technique? Very interesting....:ooh:

[Captain Nomad]

I see Pel-Air are looking for a Flight Ops project manager. Criteria including:

This person will be responsible for:

Coordinating the Flight Operations aspect for inclusion of the King Air B200 onto the Pel-Air AOC
Drafting and implementing King Air B200 Standard Operating Procedures
Coordinating the recruitment and training of experienced and suitable King Air B200 flight crew
Liaising with stakeholders on the contract transition
Ensuring all Flight Operations timelines in the overall Project Plan are met
Producing project plans, budgets, resource schedule and risk assessment
Planning, scheduling, monitoring and reporting on project milestones
Continuous liaison with key stakeholders


Leaving their run a bit late to find someone to implement all that before July 1 2010 aren't they?! :ooh: (that's what the ad says)

No mention of B350 either.

[Howard Hughes]

Contract starts July 1 2011. Either way it's going to be hard work for the appointee to complete the tasks in time! Any takers? Wally?:E

[Wally Mk2]

Hi HH, how's Syd? Savin' up to buy a 1 bed duplex within 1000 miles of Syd are we?:}

I don't know anymore about what's goin' on with the new contractors than pretty much anyone else in here. Oz is full of Govt contracts these days that are lost in the blink of an eye so security in ANY industry is tenuous to say the least all for the sake of the might buck:sad: Am sure those that made the decision don't/didn't have a clue but that's just my opinion. I've stopped thinking/worrying about it as it won't be the same there anyway once the "Rufdus" have packed up & left. I've enjoyed my 10 yrs there been the best job one could ask for with the best crew the Ambos at ground level are terrific:ok: but it's time to move on.
As for the advertised Flt Ops Manager? well tall order indeed to fill that job. The person/s whom now do it need a bloody gold medal to make it all work so whomever they (PelAir) secure or have in mind I only hope he/she is extra ordinary!

As I have said b4 I wish PelAir well but those wishes are directed at the ones who actually make it all work, the slaves in steerage class:)

As they say the RFDS will go on but it won't go on for all:{



Wmk2

[Dances With Dingoes]

I have just heard of the third experienced retrieval pilot that has put in an expression of interest/resume on the RFDS website, 2 NSW, 1 QLD, and have had no response. I know one that called the section they had applied to and were told that that particular application on the website does not work.

It costs money to run a website, and I believe there is a price to pay for an add on the AFAP site. Why is money going into something that has not worked in ????? long.

PelAir don't have donations coming in but they also don't seem to be p!ssing $$$ up the wall just because they can. Is that how they are getting a foot in?

Before I started flying for a living I was on good money, and I used to donate, so excuse me if I am a little sh!tty, because my perception is that things can be run better if there is a bit of a shake up in the organisation.

DD :suspect:

[Dances With Dingoes]

I've asked it before but will casa update their AOC with b200s inlight of norfolk? Big, possibly pointless, task ahead of whomever takes up that offer.

Ecovictim, I have been wondering the same thing. Is there not a rule against updating AOC's that are under investigation?

Anyone?

DD

[BULLDOG 248]

Might be a silly question, but do you have to have, in this case a B200 or B350 in you hands before getting it on your AOC. IE proving flights with CASA????

[Stationair8]

Only 365 days to go!

[Wally Mk2]

.............indeed "S8" one year to go. Has been a hell of a ride for us that have been there from the beginning of the current contract. I'll look back over the years & call this time the best in my flying career, but you never know!:} GA wise none better. Great crew shame to break it up. I only hope the decision makers in AAV (Air Ambulance Vic) know what their doing.
Like I have said before the RFDS will go on but it won't go on for all:ok:.


Wmk2

[Stationair8]

Game on, as they say.

Whats the serial numbers of the B200's?

[truth boy]

Back in 1996 the winner of the Defence target tow contract was announced. Everyone thought National jet was a 100% certainty to win it again. BANG. pel-Air was announced as the winner much to national jets anger. They hung around hoping,wishing,preying Pel-Air would fall over. They even kept a few planes around ready to swoop in if it happened.

Well it didnt happen and Pel-Air became the new Target Tow contract holders.
7 or so years later it was contract time again. Once again many other bidders all convinced they would beat Pel-Air this time.
BANG. Pel-Air wins again. At this point they were the first contractor to win it twice since the target contract started in the 80,s.

My point being things will never happen as you anticipate. And you would be wasting your time expecting them to fall over.

I was actually part of the Target contract back in 96.
They were convinced 100% that they would still be working for national jet.
Then they were told the winner to which they all asked.

WHO THE F@#K IS PEL-AIR. They are survivors thats for sure.

[B58]

WHO THE F@#K IS PEL-AIR?

Everyone knows who PEL-AIR is. They are the guys who ditched a perfectly good westwind are'nt they Truthboy?

[rmcdonal]

PEL-AIR? I thought they were called REX these days?

[Fat_Bulldog]

The turboprop operation is all Rex procedures. Westwind are still in their own class. Pretty sure the turboprop boys at Pel-Air don't like to be referred to as
the guys who ditched a perfectly good westwind
:ugh:

[betaman]

B58 said
WHO THE F@#K IS PEL-AIR?

Everyone knows who PEL-AIR is. They are the guys who ditched a perfectly good westwind are'nt they Truthboy?

Pel Air also lost a Westwind in 1985 off Sydney with the loss of two crew members and another in 1995 at Alice Springs with the loss of three crew members.

There aren't too many companies around that have lost a transport category jet aircraft at the rate of approx one airframe per decade and still get to keep operating.

So when truth boy said
WHO THE F@#K IS PEL-AIR. They are survivors thats for sure.

It is probably not too far from the truth, pardon the pun.:E

[Wally Mk2]

"1more"obviously yr angry & that's fine we can all be that at times amongst these pages but as far as the RFDS goes it won the Govt contract back in 2000 yes but it's not a commercial operator in the strict sense as any profits made by a commercial venture/contract (such as the current AAV contract) goes back into the traditional workings of the RFDS & not to share holders as would be the case on a publically listed Co such as REX. The RFDS as far as I know lost the contract based on cost, can't for the life of me see any other reason as to why.
The RFDS I believe are simply the best operator for this type of work as that's all it does but am not saying somebody else can't do it.
A PIC is ultimately responsible for the flight. Now whether Dom was at fault or not he takes the first kick up the ass followed by the operators etc etc. PelAir don't have a good track record that's for sure but neither do a few others either so perhaps some poor words have been composed here.
I doubt the Mods will pull yr post although they do at times remove posts for perhaps personal reasons.
Finally if you find this garbage then simply don't participate. We live in a free democratic world (well mostly) where freedom of speech is a foundation for our society & we do have choices (meaning close yr eyes):ok:.



Wmk2

[Jamair]

RFDS is the only Aeromed operator in Australia whose motives are transparently altruistic - their commercial operations in Government contracts provide the funding to support their non-commercial primary response roles and their primary health clinic work.

They have a world-class stand-alone operation in all regards, with their own aircraft, pilots, C&T, medical, nursing and admin.

If they missed out on the Vic Ambulance contract on a cost basis, it would be because they operate all facets of the organisation UP to a (very high) standard, not DOWN to a price.

Their 'shareholders' are the patients and their families who depend on them for routine and emergency medical (and social/psychological) care, who in turn support them by donating to the charity.

This is the essence of a great Australian icon and world renowned service provider. It is not all about cost. I believe the Vic Governemnt / ASV will come to realise this in the not-too-distant future.

[Wally Mk2]

'Jamair' I'll second all that but few know that anyway:ok:

It simply costs the RFDS too much to provide the service at a high level, sadly cost to a Govt is everything. Then again when you think about it the Govt is only minding OUR money & not very good I might add!!:ugh:


Wmk2

[betaman]

onemore said

But then again there are not too many companies that have operated as many transport category flights for three decades either.


I could probably think of few as would anyone else who has been in the industry more than 5 min.


Dont really care about about Pel-Air but dumbfounded by the carry-on about a commercial arm of a great charity loosing a commercial contract to another commercial operator.


So why get so worked up over it?


IT was the Victorian Govt Ambulaunce Contract won by Pel-Air/Rex not the Royal Flying Doctor Service


onemore we know who won the contract hence the thread.:rolleyes:

Thats funny, I am sure there is another thread around here that puts all the blame on the pilot - oh okay I get it, if you have no idea about what you are talking about just make it up because you are bored.....

Seriously, it may be a rumour network but this place is more a "I have no xxx idea forum"


From what I can see from this thread most of the posters have raised legitimate questions. The gist of which is summarised below which is far from "I have no xxx idea forum" or "oh okay I get it, if you have no idea about what you are talking about just make it up because you are bored....." :ugh:

Operator A who:

Has a proven track record in domestic aeromed.
Has proven track record with the aircraft type.
Has been doing the job safely & efficiently for a number of years.
Is funded by the Australian public through donations & govt funding.Loses out on a state government awarded contract to

Operator B who:

Doesn't have a proven track record in domestic aeromed.
Doesn't have a proven track record with the aircraft type.
Who's only real claim to fame is as a freight company.
Is not Australian owned any more.If you can't see what the problem is with this picture then, as you insist on over using the phrase "NFI", maybe you should have a closer look in the mirror.:mad:

[betaman]

Nah Im not angry, but I just find it frustrating to read some of the tripe in this thread as it has little or no truth about it that could even come close to rumour


onemore do you have examples of this "little or no truth about it"? Or were you "talking about just make it up because you are bored.....":hmm:

[PA39]

:rolleyes: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ win trophys

[bushy]

Non commercial primary response roles?????
Do you blokes really believe that the RFDS does the medical work in the outback with no government funding?
I know that in past years they were paid for every flight by governments and insurance companies. They also got a subsidy from government to help purchase new aircraft. On top of this they got donations, bequests and income from the race meetings, gymkhana, camel racing etc and from most of the roadhouses in the outback. At least one aircraft flew around with advertising on it. And each state had their own separate RFDS operation. (N.T. was Alice springs only and was controlled from Adelaide.)
So the RFDS has a sound financial base with government contracts and income from the public. It is a commercial operation with benefits.(inccome from public donations)
It is a good operation that can afford aircraft that most other operators cannot. There is no level playing field, and no-one is playing. The government is getting cheaper services this way.
I know the RFDS provides an essential service, and I flew aircraft for the RFDS for over a decade. I also live in Central Australia and may need their services one day.
But let's stop pretending that there is a level playing field. The RFDS has definite advantages.

[bushy]

And I am horrified by what I believe is happening in the top end.

[Jabawocky]

Lester

Lets be fair here also...RFDS have a much better overall rate I am sure than the other operator when you look at the number of hours of aero med work and usually under far from less than perfect conditions. The other operator has had just as many problems in far better circumstances......unless I am wearing rose tinted glasses. And I have no reason to at all.

J:ok:

[The Voice]

Hey Bushy, what is happening in the Top End?

[Wally Mk2]

Healthy debate about such things as this topic is good,keeps us all on our toes:)
But lets not forget the core reason behind the RFDS,to assist people medically in remote area's. That is the mainstream of the RFDS starting with a non money making vision but we live now in a very commercial world where the all mighty dollar rules so for the RFDS to continue & expand it's network then they have to compete with the business sector of the world that doesn't have roots such as the RFDS.
Look the RFDS is not 'owned' by anybody. It's not run by any one person whom has a financial interest in the business it's 'owned' or belongs to for want of a better word by every Aussie in this country:) The RFDS is made up of employees it has a heart, it beats unlike most Co's who are in business purely for profit & their employees are just 'tools' in which to make money with. Don't forget also the RFDS employs many people spread far & wide in this brown land of ours so essentially the Govt kind of owns the institution & who is the Govt? All of us:ok: So any monies going into the RFDS by donations etc isn't for personal gain by someone at the top it's for the benefit of all Aussies. I feel very disappointed that the Govt of the day here in Vic saw to replace the RFDS with another operator. (I with the new operator every success) The reasons as to why are being sort thru the FOI act so will be interesting to know when a few of us walk out the door after many years in the best GA job around:ugh:

'Jaba' ya won't win with the 'Lesters' of today they have different views of which they are entitled to.



Wmk2

[KABOY]

We are a not-for-profit organisation. Supported by the Commonwealth, State and Territory Governments, we also receive generous donations from the community and corporations, find out more about our partners and how you can support us.

Now is the time for the RFDS to focus on the regions that require their charitable support, not commercial contracts that undercut stand alone operators. I served with the Air Ambulance for a number of years, the Victorian contract was for the supply of aircraft and pilots, not medical personnel. Their is an abundance of operators who can supply this to a very high standard, please don't insinuate that this a loss for Victoria because of who they are.

[Harry Cooper]

A few rumours I have heard about the Victorian contract;

To make their proposal viable (financially) Pel Air had to gain approval from the Victorian Govt to allow non-priority patients to be transported on commercial (i.e Rex) flights. This does not occur with the RFDS.

The Victorian Govt has had to underwrite the financing for the new Pel Air aircraft. Again this would not occur if this was the RFDS.

The rumour that the RFDS (read BHI management) was told they would never be given a contract in Victoria again due to their (his) meddling in Metro Ambulance politics seems to be true.

Just because a tender may be cheaper does not mean they are required to accept it. I feel the RFDS would of been a much better proposition than what has been appointed as I am sure many also feel. However there seems to be a lot of maneuvering by the Govt (or factions of) to ensure that the RFDS did not get this contract back.

[bushy]

I agree with most of your most recent post. I think the RFDS was the best flying job I had too.
The point I am making is that organisations that are supported by government and funding from the public or churches etc should not be tendering for government contracts, because they have a significant financial advantage and can drag prices down, resulting in an impoverished industry.
Our governments are getting cheap medical and other aviation services, that are subsidised by the public. And very few non subsidised organisations can survive for long providing the ame level of service.
Government supported organisations tendering for government contracts??
So the chosen ones do well while threst of the industry remains impoverished, in a low price environment.
Our governments should pay the required price for the services they require, and not rely on topups from the public. They save by not providing local medical services in isolated areas.

[morno]

Bushy,
Whilst I respect your opinion, I can't help but gather that you're basically saying one of two things:

1) RFDS should stick to have very minimal bases, doing very minimal work, and not getting with the times.

or

2) RFDS should no longer be a non-profit organisation and try and make money off everything they do, become a public company and piss off everyone and then fold because no one will want their services because they charge like wounded bulls. After all, 1st class products and 1st class safety cost money.

Both sound just as stupid as each other.

RFDS has proven itself as a leader in innovation throughout it's 82 year history. Why can they not expand on the services they offer, to all parts of Australia? Should it be only for the far flung parts of Australia?

The whole Pel-Air vs RFDS for the Victorian Air Ambulance contract has 2 sides. One is the side that supports RFDS entirely and believe they're the only one's who can do it.

The other is a side which see's this as the start of huge problems in Australian Aeromedical operations. Why? Commercial operators, fighting for these contracts. Take a look at the American aeromedical scene, and the amount of fatalities that occurr over there because of it, and you'll see what I mean.

RFDS has it flaws, that can't be denied. But why is a 1st class operation (in safety and the way the crews operate) run by an organisation who has done nothing BUT aeromedical operations, for the last 82 years, being knocked down by an organisation who has next to no experience in this type of operation? And why are people suggesting RFDS should not be getting involved in these types of contracts?

morno

[Wally Mk2]

G'Day 'Morno':-) Trust yr well??:)

Why you ask?.

MONEY...............there is no other single reason as to why the RFDS lost the Vic contract.
I've been there since the start of the current contract & it has worked safely & efficiently since day one, obviously at a cost not acceptable to whomever made the dumb decision to let it go to someone else. I believe the new contract will be more difficult to administer meaning there are more penalties placed on the new contractors for poor performance.
Just like our dismal public transport here in ML those operators get penalized constantly same goes for any Govt contract. I don't believe PelAir have any idea what they are getting themselves in for here (that's a personal opinion too so save the personal attacks) but I truly hope I am proved wrong 'cause at the end of the day all political reasons aside we are talking about peoples lives here not some stupid ticketing system !!!!
"LB" us RFDS pilots are well aware that it's over (there's zip we can do about it at our level) no one is crying about it as such we are now resigned to the fact that this Govt hasn't got a clue but we are talking about people here who have provided a damn good service at the coal face for AAV & they turn around & throw it back in our faces,that's what we where angry about. The people at that coal face the guys/gals who actually run the show (both sides AAV & the RFDS) are fantastic, real people with a genuine desire to be part of something not just a job where someone at the top is making money.

Perhaps as has been suggested here the RFDS should not be allowed to tender for such contracts but there would have to be a very good reason as to why exclude the ONLY operator with that level of experience that does just one type of flying, Aero-Medical flying for the good of all Australians where the profit/services stay at home.........

Wmk2, proud to be part of the RFDS:ok:

[FGD135]

The RFDS, said bushy:


... should not be tendering for government contracts, because they have a significant financial advantage and can drag prices down, resulting in an impoverished industry.


Err ... make that "drag prices UP". The RFDS is a high quality operation and quality costs money. The RFDS, in fact, is the highest quality operation (and therefore most expensive).

This would, no doubt, be the reason they lost the contract. The Vic government would be of the belief that the less expensive option, although of a lesser quality, would still be satisfactory.

[KABOY]

The RFDS supply aircraft and personnel, nothing more. The medical personnel and equipment is supplied by the Ambulance service of Victoria.

Why are the RFDS prices higher for aircraft and pilots? They are being subsidised by the public and corporations within Australia including QF who contribute a very large donation annually.

The RFDS unfortunately have tried to meddle within the Health department of Victoria, bypassing departments to run the operation as they see fit with their own personnel. Unfortunately this will always cost more when you place a Doctor and Nurse on every flight and upset the very people who run this contract!

To all the current pilots, the Air Ambulance have respected your experience and will always encourage the new operator to carry you over. Don't let company politics colour you perception on who should or shouldn't have this contract.

[FGD135]

Let's not be naive, RFDS are not dragging any prices up.


Lester,
The RFDS is a far more expensive operation to run than a purely commercial one such as Pel Air. This is due to the sheer quality of the RFDS operation. The only other operation with comparable quality (and comparable operating costs), I would suggest, would be the RAAF!

THERE IS NO WAY THE RFDS CAN DO ANYTHING MORE CHEAPLY THAN AN OUTFIT LIKE PEL AIR.

I would suggest that the RFDS have not really undercut the commercial operators, but rather, creative (government) accounting has made it look that way.

A healthy dose of politics was involved in the Queensland decision, I believe.

[TBM-Legend]

at least the RFDS is Australian "owned" and controlled unlike the other "show"..

....more chili crab anyone?:hmm:

[Jamair]

Lester Burnham: We should also all remember that the latest fatality in Aust medivac was RFDS at Mt Gambier and the next major incident before Norfolk was RFDS at Coffs Harbour.
Sorry, wrong. CQ Rescue, Cape Hillsborough, 2003.

[scarediecat]

Thanks for those kind words of encouragement and the handy tip "KABOY". I am assuming you are involved on the AAV side of things, the way you worded you comments. I believe all current pilots are capable of seeing through company politics. From where I sit, its more to do with the lack of any news from Pelair or Air Ambulane Victoria. So how about a little bit of colour in regards to the new T&C's and we can all gain an honest opinion???

[CharlieLimaX-Ray]

First of Pelair B200's already at Hawker Pacific Bankstown, VH-ZKA BL-154.

[PPRuNeUser0161]

Lester Burnam
The RFDS cannot be considered as one entity, so please do not attempt to generalise. There are four sections, all operating under different funding models each with vastly different levels of expertise in each. You are correct in that the RFDS can gain from FBT exemptions, airservices exemptions etc. However they do suffer lack of efficiency from an archaic national structure, lack of fleet planning and purchase leverage and management duplication.
ie. to many chiefs!

On top of this the industrial relations situation pilot wise within SE Section and QLD section is by far the best of most if not ALL GA operators. This all costs money. It will be interesting indeed if CSection wins the NT contract. It will be the first job they will have won whereby they will be held accountable performance wise. Lets watch and see, what you pick up on the roundabout you lose on the hurdygurdy!!
SN

[bushy]

The RAAF is the only australian organisation that has had a fatal crash with a jet airliner.
We must differentiate between having lots of new machinery, and "high quality."

[Under Dog]

Lester
You seem a little peed off with the RFDS.
Just curious where you got your figures that they were millions cheaper than your mob from.Serious question.

The Dog;)

[ANCDU]

I think what people miss here is the RFDS don't bid for these contracts just because they want to. They use these contracts to help with things like economies of scale and to provide funding for rural health and keeping the traditional parts of the RFDS operating. They arent in this for shareholders or company directors, but for the general public in rural Australia.

To state they use their donations or otherwise to help them get these contracts is crap, they have had their funding reduced dramitically over the last 10 years, and have to compete with a myriad of other charities chasing peoples money. They are also very extensively audited in how they spend the money they receive.

They aren't perfect, the RFDS is a hugely political machine (which i have experienced), and they have had problems with the AAV contract, especially earlier on (remember those day Wally!) but i think maybe the government and MAS has made an error here.

All the best for the current crop of pilots..good bunch of guys and girls.:ok:

[Wally Mk2]

Well said "ANCDU" :Ddespite what the "LB's" of the world say the RFDS is made up of PEOPLE with no financial stake in the business unlike the winners of the Vic contract who are in it for the money alone.I've said all along I think AAV will regret the decision but that's that. Nothing is 4ever especially in aviation!


Wmk2

[Wally Mk2]

"LB" I don't know or pretend to understand why you have the hates for the RFDS, fortunately there would be few who share yr thoughts.
Everyone is motivated by money LB (obviously) & to get the best deal wages wise is normal from any business so am not too sure what yr on about there. To the man at the coal face within the RFDS (Pilot for Eg) the RFDS is just another employer in some ways BUT that employer having roots with integrity also is part of a great Aussie institution, shame you don't share that but I respect it also
Still we each have our own beliefs, you have yrs ( in the minority thank God) & the rest of us still believe that the RFDS is going after Govt contracts for good moral reasons, to help support the great work we/they do:ok:

You linked here "RFDS receives record funding boost" Great I hope they get a hell of a lot more & edge out in the future any commercial operator who does it for money not pride.


Wmk2

[morno]

Lester you share the same sentiments about the RFDS as Lim Kim Dim Sim Hai, whatever his name is. The Singaporean arms dealer who own's Rex/Pel Air.

Is it really you Lim?

morno

[truth boy]

OK. This is a honest question. If RFDS has such a wonderful glow around them,cant do no wrong and for these reasons they should recieve future contracts without going to tender. What happens to other companies in Australia? Not just Pelair but anyone they go up against. Would there not be a risk that this power would be abused. If there is no risk of loosing the contract or having to being financially viable. What is to stop the above happening.How would you feel if one year they start looking at a contract your company holds. How would you feel about an unlevel playing field then.
Tenders keep companies honest. Best tender wins. Simple as that.

And the fact that companies that make profits are giving RFDS a run in these contracts should sound warning bells as it is. Remove all competition and then see what happens to running costs( Our taxes).

[glekichi]

Perhaps Pel-Air could set up a non-profit division and compete that way. You know, out of the goodness of their hearts. :}

[Rural]

Maybe the RFDS had a misprint in their past AV contract and it said 100 years instead of 10 years........

[Al Fentanyl]

Truthboy saidBest tender wins. Simple as that Is the "BEST" tender the CHEAPEST, or the one that does the task most effectively, with the highest quality and standards? For my money I would prefer that I, my friends and family are flown by RFDS. If it costs a few more dollars in my taxes, I can live with that.

How would you feel if one year they start looking at a contract your company holds Given that to my (limited) knowledge RFDS does not and never has considered entering General Aviation charter; if they did, using their same philosophy of the most appropriate and up-to-date aircraft and crews trained to the highest standards, it is unlikely they would do much, as the GA marketplace is crowded with operators who offer a rock-bottom price in the oldest and cheapest airframes and drivers they legally can. A 'level playing field' in the context you suggest would be one where all prospective aeromedical operators had to match the standards set by RFDS.

I am DAMN sure that if Julia or one of the State leaders, or their family, needed aeromedical transport, they would not be using the cheapest bidder. Why should the taxpaying public be treated any differently?

I have worked in FW & RW aeromedical services with a number of government and private providers. I know several RFDS people as well as Careflight and other aeromedical people and I like what the RFDS do and the way they do it. I like that they put anything they make out of service provision, contracts and donations into continuing their traditional services in the unprofitable bush, which no other operator does or is interested in doing, while keeping their standards high, and that they have done so for the past 85-odd years when no-one else was interested because there was no money in it.

RFDS is not perfect, but they have a great record and a great philosophy. It is sad to see Aussies rubbishing one of our National icons.:(

[Skynews]

On what basis do people claim RFDS has the "best" pilot training?

[KABOY]

Is the "BEST" tender the CHEAPEST, or the one that does the task most effectively, with the highest quality and standards? For my money I would prefer that I, my friends and family are flown by RFDS. If it costs a few more dollars in my taxes, I can live with that.

You are muddying the waters with that quote. This is about providing aviation services to the Victorian Health Department, not charitable medical care to the rural people of Australia.

I suggest you look at the history of the Air Ambulance Victoria and the services they have provided to the people of Victoria.

[bushy]

Do you blokes actually think that the RFDS in outback Australia finances it's services with money from donations and bequests only?????
It doesn't! Governments pay a per mile charge just the same as anywhere else. With that and the donations and bequests they have more money than other operators, and can afford better equipment. And the governments are not paying as much as they should for those services. The public is subsidising services that government should be paying a proper price for.
The end result is that no other operator can compete without that second cash flow.
Apart from this incorrect business arrangement, I have great respect for the RFDS operation. I flew their aircraft for over a decade, and some very good freinds of mine are now flying RFDS aircraft. I also live in an area where I may one day require their services.
But with the RFDS, Missionaries, and Aboriginal organisations, to compete with, I am not surprised that the rest of GA is impoverished.

[glekichi]

The public is subsidising services that government should be paying a proper price for.
The end result is that no other operator can compete without that second cash flow.
Apart from this incorrect business arrangement,

People like supporting not for profit organisations.
How is that an incorrect business arrangement?

What is wrong with people's donations allowing an organisation to charge the community less? So what if it means that a company that is out to line its owner/shareholders' pockets cannot compete!

At the end of the day the community is better off!

[PPRuNeUser0161]

bushy
In some areas you are almost correct. Remember it costs a lot of money to fly your patients around in decent equipment, although even the RFDS still fly airframes that are 30 years old. Its about time the governments were held accountable and provide a minimum standard for aeromedical operators as the Australian public would expect a higher standard than that provided by the RFDS and certainly would consider most other operators and their equipment totally unacceptable were properly informed.

The RFDS is far from perfect but it is by far the best on offer to patients and employees alike and that wont change as any competition is totally driven by profits and bragging rights rather than service and pride.
SN

[morno]

Australian public would expect a higher standard than that provided by the RFDS

I'm assuming that's a typo SN? How much higher a standard can you get?

Skynews,
Having worked for RFDS now for sometime, I can attest to the level of training being absolutely second to none. How many other operators train you to safely land in a black hole on nothing but car headlights? Or just a single line of kerosene flares?

I'm sure many others will agree that the training RFDS provides as well as the constant checking, is well above what is a) required, and b) provided by any other organisation Australia wide.

morno

[Captain Nomad]

Well said Morno. My experience also :ok:

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

How many other operators train you to safely land in a black hole on nothing but car headlights? Or just a single line of kerosene flares?

Hmmmmmm?

I was trained on a single line of kerosene flares back in the 70's - we were too lazy to put out two rows.

Dr :8

[morno]

Lester,
I can't personally attest to the training every other operator provides. I have no problem admitting that.

I base my view that I posted, on my own personal experience and also the views of other colleagues with whom I work. The cross section of experience throughout the RFDS is immense, both with hours flown, years in the industry and the various backgrounds from which we all come. Major airlines (both locally and from overseas), GA, regional airlines, the corporate industry, the list goes on. Every RFDS pilot, both past and present, boasts about the level of checking and training through which we are put through, as being among the best they have ever experienced.

While I'm not at all saying that what other organisations have is inadequate or rubbish, if anyone asks me on what basis does RFDS have the "best training", rest assured I can safely say that RFDS is up there among the best when it comes to the training that we are put through, simply by what my 100 or so other colleagues Australia wide, as well as the many who have since moved on, say in comparison to many other places they've worked.

morno

[bushy]

That's because they have the money to do it. Most of the others do not.

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

That's because they have the money to do it. Most of the others do not.

......and perhaps that is because they do not operate under the same commercial reality that others have to!

Dr :8

[Captain Nomad]

Since when has transporting a patient in a remote area ever been a 'commercial reality.' It is because it is usually NOT that the RFDS was even born in the first place. If I was on the receiving end I would want to know that I am being looked after like anyone under Australia's relatively high healthcare standards and not a commercial annoyance that has to be transported at the lowest cost in the most efficient manner so as to make the most profit for the owners/shareholders...

As for RFDS being good, do you really have to eat a bad apple to know what a good one tastes like? Do we really want to end up like the USA (again) where a multitude of entities fight tooth and nail over contracts which has proven to be at a cost to both the level of care and safety of the aeromedical operations?

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

Since when has transporting a patient in a remote area ever been a 'commercial reality.'

Oh yes, silly me! You need bases in Cairns, Townsville, Rockhampton, Bundaberg, Brisbane, Charleville and Mt Isa to do that, don't you?

Dr :8

[Al Fentanyl]

You need bases in Cairns, Townsville, Rockhampton, Bundaberg, Brisbane, Charleville and Mt Isa I travel extensively around this country and would like to think that if needed, me and mine would be be in reasonable range of emergency care. With centralised medical systems requiring (aeromedical) transfers to major centres as well as primary responses, a state the size of Qld probably does need that many bases..... unless you would prefer to spend a few extra hours waiting in Upper Thargominda or Lower Leonora :hmm:

I have worked with several Government and NGO aeromedical providers....RFDS gets my vote:ok:

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

a state the size of Qld probably does need that many bases..... unless you would prefer to spend a few extra hours waiting in Upper Thargominda or Lower Leonora http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/yeees.gif


Brisbane - Birdsville = 165 min
Bundaberg - Birdsville = 157 min
Rockhampton - Birdsville = 139 min
Townsville - Birdsville = 127 min
Cairns - Birdsville = 144 min

Kinda hard to see, isn't it!

Dr :8

[morno]

Forky,
CV-BDV can be 2hrs alone if it's the middle of winter. That's 2hrs FLIGHT time. Let's add on the time it takes first of all to alert the crews, get to the aircraft, load the aircraft, plan, taxi, take off, cruise, approach, land. You're looking at more like 3hrs then. And that's just to the airport at the other end.

A long time if you're hanging upside down in a vehicle with a broken leg.

morno

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

A long time if you're hanging upside down in a vehicle with a broken leg.

Yes Morno, they are good stories for PR people.

Listening to the Foxtrot Deltas flying around the place, however, I suspect that those spectacular emergency retrievals from the middle of nowhere are a relatively small part of RFDS business.

Much more of it these days seems to be the sort of job that FDW did last Thursday when sharing the sky with the FTDK:

Out of Charleville for a patient pickup at Longreach and delivery to Townsville.

Don't get me wrong, I think that RFDS do a great deal of admirable work, but, in my opinion, using their charity status to out-compete mainstream tax-paying GA is not one of them.

Dr :8