RFDS QLD Advertising for Pilots
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀
Posts: 1,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'll throw in a hand grenade and ask if some of the people asserting that single pilot ops in that environment are safe also claimed that the PC-12 was a poor choice because it's a single engined aircraft? 
Guest
Posts: n/a
I will catch that grenade and throw it in the water.
Like any operation, it is as safe as it is made to be. Surely the record speaks for itself. After many years SPIFR operations, and still lasting to collect my pension, I would say it is, for the right operators, as safe as any other flying. Perhaps more so, you know you have no one to catch any mistakes so you avoid making them.
The single engine against the twin is a different kettle of fish. My personal choice would certainly be for a twin engine mount for SPIFR, or any IFR actually, having had in my career three engine failures, all of which were no great hastle as long as the other one kept breathing.
Like any operation, it is as safe as it is made to be. Surely the record speaks for itself. After many years SPIFR operations, and still lasting to collect my pension, I would say it is, for the right operators, as safe as any other flying. Perhaps more so, you know you have no one to catch any mistakes so you avoid making them.
The single engine against the twin is a different kettle of fish. My personal choice would certainly be for a twin engine mount for SPIFR, or any IFR actually, having had in my career three engine failures, all of which were no great hastle as long as the other one kept breathing.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Human factors in modern aviation suggests that the weakest link these days is the human element..Just sayin'
Human factors in modern aviation?? I do believe that statement is correct, trying to figure out why it is so in this day and age with so much fail safe technology, the ability to know what your exact position is at any time via GPS, the vastly improved range of Air Traffic Control Radar for separation, etc etc etc why human factors are such a problem is certainly a cause for concern.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Enroute from Dagobah to Tatooine...!
Posts: 791
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Folks, the main reason why RFDS does not have 2 pilots is cost. RFDS would have to at least double its pilot numbers to operate as a 2 crew operation. The cost impost of this on a non-profit organisation would be horrendous. Sure there is big money in RFDS contracts and fund raising but there is never enough to go around as it is... It is also likely that a competitor will tender a cheaper contract saying that they only require a single pilot to fulfil the terms of the contract and bingo, RFDS goes 'out of business.' The government surely won't pay for it and fund raising would most likely be insufficient so risk vs reward returns to default...
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The cost impost of this on a non-profit organization"
The RFDS like Care flight is not a not for profit organization.
They bid for, and win commercial contracts. They do not do that for any other motive but "PROFIT", where that profit gets absorbed is up to them, directors fees and bonuses, management salaries and bonuses, etc. etc. entirely up to them.
The RFDS like Care flight is not a not for profit organization.
They bid for, and win commercial contracts. They do not do that for any other motive but "PROFIT", where that profit gets absorbed is up to them, directors fees and bonuses, management salaries and bonuses, etc. etc. entirely up to them.
Just another question on this if I may. Is there internal progression options onto the Kingair for people initially employed on the 208? Always wanted to be a part of the RFDS but yet don't meet the requirements for the Kingair. Seems like a good chance to get into the organisation
PMs welcome
PMs welcome
Depends how you define "profit" thornbird. The days of RFDS relying on the CWA to sell cakes to keep the local aircraft in the air, are long gone. To continue providing the mantle of care, other avenues are required to obtain these funds in the modern environment.
So "profit" to the RFDS, is simply excess money that they have after receiving money from various contracts etc., that they can then further invest into providing a health service to ALL Australians. Classic examples - new aircraft. I believe VH-FDN, a brand new 350 for QLD, touched down in Australia the other day.
The RFDS annual reports are all on their website. Nothing to hide. While I'm sure that the directors etc. are all earning comfortable salaries, I doubt that they are extravagent.
Spyderpig,
Yes, there is. Regardless of hours, they're looking for the right type of person. Get the right type of person, and after a while, hours fade away into the background.
A37575,
Do I sense some sour grapes or something? I spent a number of years working at RFDS, and "Superman pilots" definitely was not the attitude by any of the pilots. We were/are all quite down to earth guys who were lucky enough to be flying for an organisation which put the effort in to employ people with the right attitude and the will to learn the tricks of the trade.
One thing that was heavily heavily stressed during every training event, was the need to not become complacent any time you were in the cockpit. Recognition that single pilot was our downfall, so therefore self discipline and a non-complacent approach to every flight was required.
I did several years at RFDS. Enjoyed it, learnt a lot, got some invaluable experience out of it, saw some things that I'd rather not see again in my life (both in the cockpit and behind the curtain, or on the tarmac), and met some people who were true characters in many ways.
One thing I will add - don't go to RFDS purely to get some flying experience, you won't last. The 'air ambulance' bases, you could get away with it for a while, but if you're sent out to the 'traditional' bases, then you're there to provide a service and a helping hand to the community. They (the community) expect someone who is professional in every way, and approachable and easy to talk to, especially when their loved one is lying on your stretcher with the doctor and nurse busy working on them, and you're the only person there for that person to talk to. You are the RFDS to those people, so make sure you live up to the reputation of professionalism.
morno
So "profit" to the RFDS, is simply excess money that they have after receiving money from various contracts etc., that they can then further invest into providing a health service to ALL Australians. Classic examples - new aircraft. I believe VH-FDN, a brand new 350 for QLD, touched down in Australia the other day.
The RFDS annual reports are all on their website. Nothing to hide. While I'm sure that the directors etc. are all earning comfortable salaries, I doubt that they are extravagent.
Spyderpig,
Yes, there is. Regardless of hours, they're looking for the right type of person. Get the right type of person, and after a while, hours fade away into the background.
A37575,
Do I sense some sour grapes or something? I spent a number of years working at RFDS, and "Superman pilots" definitely was not the attitude by any of the pilots. We were/are all quite down to earth guys who were lucky enough to be flying for an organisation which put the effort in to employ people with the right attitude and the will to learn the tricks of the trade.
One thing that was heavily heavily stressed during every training event, was the need to not become complacent any time you were in the cockpit. Recognition that single pilot was our downfall, so therefore self discipline and a non-complacent approach to every flight was required.
I did several years at RFDS. Enjoyed it, learnt a lot, got some invaluable experience out of it, saw some things that I'd rather not see again in my life (both in the cockpit and behind the curtain, or on the tarmac), and met some people who were true characters in many ways.
One thing I will add - don't go to RFDS purely to get some flying experience, you won't last. The 'air ambulance' bases, you could get away with it for a while, but if you're sent out to the 'traditional' bases, then you're there to provide a service and a helping hand to the community. They (the community) expect someone who is professional in every way, and approachable and easy to talk to, especially when their loved one is lying on your stretcher with the doctor and nurse busy working on them, and you're the only person there for that person to talk to. You are the RFDS to those people, so make sure you live up to the reputation of professionalism.
morno
A37575,
Do I sense some sour grapes or something?
Do I sense some sour grapes or something?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I apologize for the poor wording of my earlier post and am horrified that it was taken as "trumpet blowing", not my intention.
My point was they go to a lot of effort to employ the right people with the appropriate personality and skill set for the type of flying we do and equally as diligent in selecting the right people for check and TRAINING. You know "Old School".
My point was they go to a lot of effort to employ the right people with the appropriate personality and skill set for the type of flying we do and equally as diligent in selecting the right people for check and TRAINING. You know "Old School".
Last edited by Swamp Duck; 25th Mar 2015 at 08:20.
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Australia
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Folks, the main reason why RFDS does not have 2 pilots is cost. .........fund raising would most likely be insufficient so risk vs reward returns to default...
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Enroute from Dagobah to Tatooine...!
Posts: 791
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Famzos, I raise you by one. It would take more than internal RFDS change - it would require external government contractual requirement change. If not, a single-pilot contract tendered (by RFDS or otherwise) will win hands-down on cost every time. Now when the government does not always fully foot the bill for these contracts there is already a cost shortfall so the government would have to make a strong case for why the contract requirement should change. Then the bun fight over who should pay would really hit overdrive...!
