NSW EMS (NGO or Private operator)
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Question time again
Why is it that Careflight doctors will only work on a Careflight aircraft?
How does the Canadian proposal put lives at risk? Is CHC unsafe?
Careflight doctors are concerned that new proposed management and equipment will not meet safety stands. What are the concerns that Careflight doctors have with the equipment to be provided.
Luis Gallur appears to have killed off Careflight, as it appears that he has not assessed the situation or appraised what equipment is to be provided or discussed the future management structure.
Dr Gallur said that the government would have to take out unqualified junior doctors from the public sector. I was told that NSW Health System already have a state paid and employed medical retrieval system that is superior to Careflight, the public does not hear from these teams because they do not seek media attention.
What motivation is there for this out cry? Is it MONEY, TAX Lurks, positions of power etc? This is a very fishy situation and more scrutiny needs to be applied to this bunch of premadonnas
How does the Canadian proposal put lives at risk? Is CHC unsafe?
Careflight doctors are concerned that new proposed management and equipment will not meet safety stands. What are the concerns that Careflight doctors have with the equipment to be provided.
Luis Gallur appears to have killed off Careflight, as it appears that he has not assessed the situation or appraised what equipment is to be provided or discussed the future management structure.
Dr Gallur said that the government would have to take out unqualified junior doctors from the public sector. I was told that NSW Health System already have a state paid and employed medical retrieval system that is superior to Careflight, the public does not hear from these teams because they do not seek media attention.
- Out of the 35 Doctors withdrawing services how many are registrars?
- How many are employed from over seas?
- How many hours a week do each perform in retrieval?
- How many have second and third jobs with NSW health
What motivation is there for this out cry? Is it MONEY, TAX Lurks, positions of power etc? This is a very fishy situation and more scrutiny needs to be applied to this bunch of premadonnas
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Presumably, should, would, could... give me a break!
Mark Six,
The reason CHC were put into Wollongong in the first place was because Westpac could not provide the service that was required, period. So, we are now NOT comparing like V's like. CHC have the capacity to provide additional services (read: crews, airframes, engineering services, competent management systems) well above what the NGO's can.
I don't by my clothes from charities such as Life-Line or the Salvo's just because they are cheaper, I buy them from various commercial business’s that supply what I want, when I want, albeit at a premium price.
You get what you pay for Mr Six!
No lives will be lost, the only thing that will be lost will be the salaries received by the big executives of Careflight.
Quickdraw.
The reason CHC were put into Wollongong in the first place was because Westpac could not provide the service that was required, period. So, we are now NOT comparing like V's like. CHC have the capacity to provide additional services (read: crews, airframes, engineering services, competent management systems) well above what the NGO's can.
I don't by my clothes from charities such as Life-Line or the Salvo's just because they are cheaper, I buy them from various commercial business’s that supply what I want, when I want, albeit at a premium price.
You get what you pay for Mr Six!
No lives will be lost, the only thing that will be lost will be the salaries received by the big executives of Careflight.
Quickdraw.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: aust
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think Ian Badham should be careful how he words things, is he inferring CHC the "canadian" company (with all it's "Australian" workforce - If it was still Lloyd helicopters would he have so much to gripe about, and nothing major has changed in australia with regard to the company since then) is unsafe. He must be getting desperate to try and save his job.
As far as the Docs are concerned while I appreciate that they want CareFlight to remain, saying they won't do the job with any other service, is IMHO a little narrow minded, and I said in another subject post one must wonder if they do it for the public, or do they do it for themselves?
This whole situation is only going to get messier, and much more mud will be slung by the NGO's before it all finishes, and that is quite sad really. If they want to complain, fine, but slinging mud and mis-information at a company that only tendered for a contract, will not make them look any better. I realise that because CHC is a big company they have a target the size of a huge maple leaf on their flank!
fatty
Quickdraw,
I have merely pointed out why it is not impossible that the Careflight bid could have been $100 million less than CHC, as you seemed to have a problem believing that was possible. I don't know how the numbers stack up or what differences there were in the services offered by the respective bidders for that matter, and I assume you don't either. I also stated that they should argue their case on the basis of cost AND service, which is supposedly the criteria the Health Dept looked at (according to their web site). I have never suggested that NSW tax payers should accept a cut rate (ie inferior) retrieval service. I have no doubt that CHC would do a good job - I'm not trying to denigrate them in any way. They bid for a contract, and they were successful - good for them, however I would like to know why an NGO didn't win the contract if their bid met all the tender requirements, but presumably at a considerably lower cost to me, the taxpayer. Maybe there is a perfectly valid reason, but I haven't seen it yet.
I have merely pointed out why it is not impossible that the Careflight bid could have been $100 million less than CHC, as you seemed to have a problem believing that was possible. I don't know how the numbers stack up or what differences there were in the services offered by the respective bidders for that matter, and I assume you don't either. I also stated that they should argue their case on the basis of cost AND service, which is supposedly the criteria the Health Dept looked at (according to their web site). I have never suggested that NSW tax payers should accept a cut rate (ie inferior) retrieval service. I have no doubt that CHC would do a good job - I'm not trying to denigrate them in any way. They bid for a contract, and they were successful - good for them, however I would like to know why an NGO didn't win the contract if their bid met all the tender requirements, but presumably at a considerably lower cost to me, the taxpayer. Maybe there is a perfectly valid reason, but I haven't seen it yet.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Perth
Age: 70
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well go away for a day or two and the world sure does change
.
Boys and Girls this is not rocket science it is not about money. This is about service provision. Now the figures that are being thrown around are just absurd. If you take time to read my previous threads you will see that every thing that has occurred I predicted. I normally don’t pass on rumour, as I am unable to conclusively confirm that Careflight the community caring service did not provide a helicopter crew on the night of their awards night. Instead they decided that the community could do without for that night. Not good Mr Badman
So I will go back to what this is all about, it is about Service provision.
For the media that monitor this site I will provide some fundamental questions that need to be asked and answered.
- [*]
- [*]
- [*]
- [*]
- [*]
- [*]
SERVICE PROVISSION and customer focus is what was required. By being online and available you can provide the service that the customer requires.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Aus, Europe & everywhere in between
Posts: 391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whoaaaa there Sandblaster!
Ask all the questions you want but don't bring up the decling of a mission due to weather as something that has to be explained.
Treading on shaky ground there.
Ask all the questions you want but don't bring up the decling of a mission due to weather as something that has to be explained.
Treading on shaky ground there.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Vic.Aust
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some finer points in mind ware political thinking while tendering for government contracts.
1.The amount of Money was never a problem, look at Vic Police Airwing Tenders over the last 10 years. Many good company's much cheaper, but LLoyds (chc) still prevail, how many years did it take to provide newer aircraft for the airwing. Must have been clauses in the contracts i didnot see
2. Who are the experts who provide the unbiased views that determine the ultimate contract winner. A fair and level playing field??
Comiserations to the losers, congratulations to the new pilots and crew of chc, step up to the plate and provide the best service possible to the state of nsw and when money is no option, there should be no shortcuts taken, and 100% availability 24 / seven
1.The amount of Money was never a problem, look at Vic Police Airwing Tenders over the last 10 years. Many good company's much cheaper, but LLoyds (chc) still prevail, how many years did it take to provide newer aircraft for the airwing. Must have been clauses in the contracts i didnot see
2. Who are the experts who provide the unbiased views that determine the ultimate contract winner. A fair and level playing field??
Comiserations to the losers, congratulations to the new pilots and crew of chc, step up to the plate and provide the best service possible to the state of nsw and when money is no option, there should be no shortcuts taken, and 100% availability 24 / seven
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Australia
Age: 65
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
congratulations
As a person that is not directly involved in aviation I can only say congratulations to the successful tender and may they carry out the work in true and professional manners
Please don’t let politics get in the way of saving lives and just do the job
Well done
Please don’t let politics get in the way of saving lives and just do the job
Well done
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Australia
Age: 65
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
congratulations
As a person that is not directly involved in aviation every day I can only say congratulations to the successful tender and may they carry out the work in true and professional manners
Please don’t let politics get in the way of saving lives and just do the job
Well done
Please don’t let politics get in the way of saving lives and just do the job
Well done
Whilst all this discussion about which organisation did / didn't - can / can't - will / won't deliver a particular level of service, is amusing to read. Perhaps an important point is being overlooked. Namely, the ability of a particular tenderer to supply tender conforming aircraft within the specified timeframe. Buying your EC145's or particularly the AW139 is not like going down to your local Holden dealer and picking which colour you want ... there is significant lead-in times from contract signing to delivery. CHC Australia may (?? I don't know) have had access to these airframes through CHC Global and as such were always going to be better positioned to win this tender.
Well done to CHC AUSTRALIA
Well done to CHC AUSTRALIA
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Papua New Guinea
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Careflight doctors do not have an issue with what label of helicopter on which they fly .
Their objection is the Dept. of Health., an incompetent bureaucratic organization which they know well from their day jobs . Their motivation to fly for Careflight
is professional satisfaction .Apart from the flying operation ,Careflight is affiliated
with the teaching hospital at Westmead and trains specialists from all over the world
in trauma medicine and awards qualifications .Careflight is at the cutting edge of trauma medicine. The independence of these research specialists has always been a
thorn in the side of the time –servers in the Dept. of health and the morons with the
6th grade education who occupy the upper echelons of the NSW Ambulance Service.
This is the reason for the determined attempts over the years to replace Careflight with a tame and compliant commercial operator , even at vastly increased cost to
the public and the destruction of an institution of medical and academic excellence.
The Specialists donate their time and talents to this unique organisation at great
sacrifice to their income .The payment for a 48 hour tour of duty away from home
equates to about one hour spent on practicing their specialty in the operating theatre.
Without the revenue supplied by the flying operations and the donated time of these
dedicated specialists, this immense resource of NSW will be lost .
Their objection is the Dept. of Health., an incompetent bureaucratic organization which they know well from their day jobs . Their motivation to fly for Careflight
is professional satisfaction .Apart from the flying operation ,Careflight is affiliated
with the teaching hospital at Westmead and trains specialists from all over the world
in trauma medicine and awards qualifications .Careflight is at the cutting edge of trauma medicine. The independence of these research specialists has always been a
thorn in the side of the time –servers in the Dept. of health and the morons with the
6th grade education who occupy the upper echelons of the NSW Ambulance Service.
This is the reason for the determined attempts over the years to replace Careflight with a tame and compliant commercial operator , even at vastly increased cost to
the public and the destruction of an institution of medical and academic excellence.
The Specialists donate their time and talents to this unique organisation at great
sacrifice to their income .The payment for a 48 hour tour of duty away from home
equates to about one hour spent on practicing their specialty in the operating theatre.
Without the revenue supplied by the flying operations and the donated time of these
dedicated specialists, this immense resource of NSW will be lost .
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Perth
Age: 70
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whoaaaa there Sandblaster!
Ask all the questions you want but don't bring up the decling of a mission due to weather as something that has to be explained.
Treading on shaky ground there.
Oogle
You are very correct however I stand by my Question
4. How many times have missions been knocked back because of weather constraints?
This tender has been decided on the bases that Service capability is not at a level that is required for a modern fleet. The CEO Ambulance and I believe the Health minister have said that we need biger faster helicopter with longer range and better weather capabilities.
So my question is, what is the total number of missions that helicopters decline because of weather restraints. I am not saying that declining missions because of weather restraints is poor practice I would like to know if there is a need for larger bigger machines with longer capabilities enabling them to hold the fuel load for any given destination.
Ask all the questions you want but don't bring up the decling of a mission due to weather as something that has to be explained.
Treading on shaky ground there.
Oogle
You are very correct however I stand by my Question
4. How many times have missions been knocked back because of weather constraints?
This tender has been decided on the bases that Service capability is not at a level that is required for a modern fleet. The CEO Ambulance and I believe the Health minister have said that we need biger faster helicopter with longer range and better weather capabilities.
So my question is, what is the total number of missions that helicopters decline because of weather restraints. I am not saying that declining missions because of weather restraints is poor practice I would like to know if there is a need for larger bigger machines with longer capabilities enabling them to hold the fuel load for any given destination.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This has been really interesting reading. Where to start?
Well done CHC.
I watched the news reports last night about Mr X who had been involved in a motorcycle accident somewhere around Orange. He said that if careflight were not there then he would have lost his leg for sure. It's not the company that does this life saving (or leg saving) work, it's a combination of the medical staff on board and the profesionalism of the crew up front to be able to get the medical crew to the scene safely and efficiently. So Mr Badham - aren't CHC capable of doing this? you've said they're unsafe!
CHC holds the contracts in Vic, ACT, QLD and also in Wollongong along with RAAF SAR contracts throughout Australia. They've been in Australia for 30 odd years. Talk to the medical crew involved with these contracts and you will find they are very happy. From what I've heard from the guys and gals at Wollongong, they've never been happier.
The only change you are really going to see is a different work platform - better aircraft, safer aircraft, faster aircraft.
The Careflight Doctors are "cutting their nose off ..."
A single operator, uniformity across the board. You will be able to work on any aircraft and know that where equipment is, what equipment is used, procedures involved. You will more than likely still be working with the same aircrew that you have been working with for the past years.
The general public are being brainwashed into thinking that no one else is capable of doing the same job. Well, sorry to say this but there are other company's that can do it just as well as the Careflight and Westpac models.
Well done CHC.
I watched the news reports last night about Mr X who had been involved in a motorcycle accident somewhere around Orange. He said that if careflight were not there then he would have lost his leg for sure. It's not the company that does this life saving (or leg saving) work, it's a combination of the medical staff on board and the profesionalism of the crew up front to be able to get the medical crew to the scene safely and efficiently. So Mr Badham - aren't CHC capable of doing this? you've said they're unsafe!
CHC holds the contracts in Vic, ACT, QLD and also in Wollongong along with RAAF SAR contracts throughout Australia. They've been in Australia for 30 odd years. Talk to the medical crew involved with these contracts and you will find they are very happy. From what I've heard from the guys and gals at Wollongong, they've never been happier.
The only change you are really going to see is a different work platform - better aircraft, safer aircraft, faster aircraft.
The Careflight Doctors are "cutting their nose off ..."
A single operator, uniformity across the board. You will be able to work on any aircraft and know that where equipment is, what equipment is used, procedures involved. You will more than likely still be working with the same aircrew that you have been working with for the past years.
The general public are being brainwashed into thinking that no one else is capable of doing the same job. Well, sorry to say this but there are other company's that can do it just as well as the Careflight and Westpac models.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A Thought!
I believe CHC and CareFlight are both outstanding, capable and safe
providers. I believe sandblaster has completely lost it and someone needs
to balance his opinion!! And seeing a how he is gaggin for it....
Let me say a wee bit of research from Ambulance Website may have helped here
sand sprayer. Sandy said
"it is not about money. This is about service provision."
Ok lets forget the $70million dollar difference for the moment.. We can
overlook that. Lets look at service provision.
* How many hours have each helicopter base in the greater Sydney area been
without helicopter services since the commencement of the current contract.
Lovely false argument. Why should anyone compare the availability of a 50%
(or less) funded operation to the fully funded future one? How does that
help anyone understand? Why are you so fixated on this irrelevant issue?
* How long did it take the NGO's to provide the services that they were
contracted to?
Um let me think. Try 10 to 15 years BEFORE they were contracted they were
providing a service! Anyone around the world got an example of a commercial
provider doing same?
So what is your point?
* How many times have missions been knocked back because of weather
constraints?
Lets hear the facts rhetorical one. Can CHC operate to better weather
limits than the NGOs?
You then replied that "This tender has been decided on the bases that
Service capability is not at a level that is required for a modern fleet.
The CEO Ambulance and I believe the Health minister have said that we need
biger faster helicopter with longer range and better weather capabilities."
Lets state this very clearly for sandy, the CEO and the Minister. ALL
BIDDERS HAD TO BID ON SAME SOLUTION. So the answer the CEO and Minister
provides answers the question about why a tender was run, not why CHC were
successful.
* How many times have each helicopter been without winch capabilities
Ah, fully funded apples Vs partially funded oranges again. Fixation or
obsession?
* How many times have missions been compromised because of payload issues?
Once upon a time there was a B412 in the partially funded system that became
impossible to run on funding levels. Ambulance did not see any capacity
issues and did not provide funding commensurate with payload. B412 was
replaced by BK117. The 0.12% (fat patients over 140kg) had to wait for the
Newcastle machine, and now Wollongong 412.
Maybe ambulance valued the superior reliability of the 117 over the capacity
and cost of the 412 given they had one not far away in Newcastle and now
Wollongong.
Bit harsh to use the lack of 412 as a reason to get rid of the NGOs when
they had to get rid of one because of the ambulance funding isn't it?
* What were the current tender bids?
No idea. You?
And what did each NGO offer?
Well, a compliant bid would be required to get you to the table. Based on
ambulance website, that would be 4 X 139 and 1 X 145. it would be safe to
assume any NGO in the game would have a bid that ticked the very same boxes
that the commercials had to wouldn't it?
And when would the greater capability be available to the community.
I think you need to qualify "capability" and what you want to know in this
garbled multi point question.
According to the website there is an interim solution (what now to provide
until 139s on line) leading to the final solution (139/145).
The winner is providing some 412s (classics and an EP) from may 1. The NGO
are already in place, thus win the interim solution by 5 months.
In terms of capacity, the 0.12% of missions involving obese patients that
you seem to want to increase operating costs by heaps more than 60% partial
funded Bk v full funded 412) to cover could still be done by the 412s. Are
you obese perhaps?
Based on a previous post now deleted, an NGO would have the first 139 in
service 7 months ahead of the winner.
So we have ruled out money (NGO is $70M cheaper), we have ruled out end
state (all bidders had same solution, NGO 7 months quicker) and we have
ruled out interim solution (NGO 5 months quicker). Next argument
sandsprayer?
Maybe it is because they are the largest helicopter company in the world.
Hugely resourced, buckets of track record and experience, Depth an NGO can
only dream about. And in 10 years time when it pops up for renewal, the
competition will be????? Reminds me of mc hammer. "You cant touch this!"
I don't think CHC are in anyway not up to the task but lets not bash the NGO
opposition with such subjective rubbish - CHC can win it without your
slander and have done so.
providers. I believe sandblaster has completely lost it and someone needs
to balance his opinion!! And seeing a how he is gaggin for it....
Let me say a wee bit of research from Ambulance Website may have helped here
sand sprayer. Sandy said
"it is not about money. This is about service provision."
Ok lets forget the $70million dollar difference for the moment.. We can
overlook that. Lets look at service provision.
* How many hours have each helicopter base in the greater Sydney area been
without helicopter services since the commencement of the current contract.
Lovely false argument. Why should anyone compare the availability of a 50%
(or less) funded operation to the fully funded future one? How does that
help anyone understand? Why are you so fixated on this irrelevant issue?
* How long did it take the NGO's to provide the services that they were
contracted to?
Um let me think. Try 10 to 15 years BEFORE they were contracted they were
providing a service! Anyone around the world got an example of a commercial
provider doing same?
So what is your point?
* How many times have missions been knocked back because of weather
constraints?
Lets hear the facts rhetorical one. Can CHC operate to better weather
limits than the NGOs?
You then replied that "This tender has been decided on the bases that
Service capability is not at a level that is required for a modern fleet.
The CEO Ambulance and I believe the Health minister have said that we need
biger faster helicopter with longer range and better weather capabilities."
Lets state this very clearly for sandy, the CEO and the Minister. ALL
BIDDERS HAD TO BID ON SAME SOLUTION. So the answer the CEO and Minister
provides answers the question about why a tender was run, not why CHC were
successful.
* How many times have each helicopter been without winch capabilities
Ah, fully funded apples Vs partially funded oranges again. Fixation or
obsession?
* How many times have missions been compromised because of payload issues?
Once upon a time there was a B412 in the partially funded system that became
impossible to run on funding levels. Ambulance did not see any capacity
issues and did not provide funding commensurate with payload. B412 was
replaced by BK117. The 0.12% (fat patients over 140kg) had to wait for the
Newcastle machine, and now Wollongong 412.
Maybe ambulance valued the superior reliability of the 117 over the capacity
and cost of the 412 given they had one not far away in Newcastle and now
Wollongong.
Bit harsh to use the lack of 412 as a reason to get rid of the NGOs when
they had to get rid of one because of the ambulance funding isn't it?
* What were the current tender bids?
No idea. You?
And what did each NGO offer?
Well, a compliant bid would be required to get you to the table. Based on
ambulance website, that would be 4 X 139 and 1 X 145. it would be safe to
assume any NGO in the game would have a bid that ticked the very same boxes
that the commercials had to wouldn't it?
And when would the greater capability be available to the community.
I think you need to qualify "capability" and what you want to know in this
garbled multi point question.
According to the website there is an interim solution (what now to provide
until 139s on line) leading to the final solution (139/145).
The winner is providing some 412s (classics and an EP) from may 1. The NGO
are already in place, thus win the interim solution by 5 months.
In terms of capacity, the 0.12% of missions involving obese patients that
you seem to want to increase operating costs by heaps more than 60% partial
funded Bk v full funded 412) to cover could still be done by the 412s. Are
you obese perhaps?
Based on a previous post now deleted, an NGO would have the first 139 in
service 7 months ahead of the winner.
So we have ruled out money (NGO is $70M cheaper), we have ruled out end
state (all bidders had same solution, NGO 7 months quicker) and we have
ruled out interim solution (NGO 5 months quicker). Next argument
sandsprayer?
Maybe it is because they are the largest helicopter company in the world.
Hugely resourced, buckets of track record and experience, Depth an NGO can
only dream about. And in 10 years time when it pops up for renewal, the
competition will be????? Reminds me of mc hammer. "You cant touch this!"
I don't think CHC are in anyway not up to the task but lets not bash the NGO
opposition with such subjective rubbish - CHC can win it without your
slander and have done so.