Bristow CEO to retire
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Aarhus
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its a shame Bill is retiring because he has done a lot of good stuff - if we remember the Bristow before his time, for example there had been no significant investment for years. And now look at the fleet! He is definitely a "builder" as opposed to an asset stripper, a few of the latter of whom we have had in the past. Not the sort of guy you wanted to get on the wrong side of, but fair and reasonable if you didn't! And he was passionate about safety, whether because he genuinely didn't want to preside over folk dying, or because he knew how costly accidents were (or probably both) doesn't matter. However of course we all knew it was only a matter of time before he retired.
But it's good news that Jonathon is taking over. We can perhaps let him off being an accountant when we know that he was previously a fast jet pilot in the Air Force. He has been to Aberdeen a few times and has tremendous people skills. When I was in the crew room with him, he had the pilots eating out of his hand! So, he understands aviation, has a good financial brain, and comes across very well in company. What more could we (they) want!
But it's good news that Jonathon is taking over. We can perhaps let him off being an accountant when we know that he was previously a fast jet pilot in the Air Force. He has been to Aberdeen a few times and has tremendous people skills. When I was in the crew room with him, he had the pilots eating out of his hand! So, he understands aviation, has a good financial brain, and comes across very well in company. What more could we (they) want!
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Aer
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow HC, what a glowing report from you, are you alright? Supporting management, whatever next?
Yes, Bristow is doing well, much better than its competitor it seems. That is, as you say down to good management. I agree with you, Bill has done much to improve the show.
It is good to see Bristow investing in new aircraft after their customers had continually demanded newer technology. But, Bristow still has its share of old 332s that they will roll out if they think there is a $ in it. Hopefully JB will take safety up another notch and make some bold decisons. Keeping pressure on the OEMs to take better care of their business would be a good place to start and finally retiring 32 year old helicopters before they retire themselves would also be appreciated by the poor passengers who have to ride in them.
Yes, Bristow is doing well, much better than its competitor it seems. That is, as you say down to good management. I agree with you, Bill has done much to improve the show.
It is good to see Bristow investing in new aircraft after their customers had continually demanded newer technology. But, Bristow still has its share of old 332s that they will roll out if they think there is a $ in it. Hopefully JB will take safety up another notch and make some bold decisons. Keeping pressure on the OEMs to take better care of their business would be a good place to start and finally retiring 32 year old helicopters before they retire themselves would also be appreciated by the poor passengers who have to ride in them.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Scotland
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TM,
The 332Ls in Aberdeen, if those are the ones you are referring to, were only put back into service after the EC225 was grounded and no other airframes were available. I think you will find that they will all be 'retired' again as soon as all the EC225s are ready to fly and the crews fully re-trained.
bondu
The 332Ls in Aberdeen, if those are the ones you are referring to, were only put back into service after the EC225 was grounded and no other airframes were available. I think you will find that they will all be 'retired' again as soon as all the EC225s are ready to fly and the crews fully re-trained.
bondu
Becoming an American run Company turned out for the good did it HC?
SAS, I think you should look at the people not their nationality. There is plenty of dreadful American management around, plenty of good uk ones. It's just that we seem to have had some poor UK ones and now a good US one. And let's not forget that Bill cut his teeth in the N Sea oil industry of the 70s so he is to some extent a product of the UK.
Did I like being part of an American company? No, not really. It drives me mad that they can't spell, so every time I wanted to reply to an email I had to change the language from US to the Queen's English. And ridiculous safety messages about being sure to stop at the US's favourite traffic sign, the STOP sign. At least we didn't have to go to helicopters whose blades rotate the wrong way (well, some of us didn't anyway).
But am I glad we had Bill? Yes.
Did I like being part of an American company? No, not really. It drives me mad that they can't spell, so every time I wanted to reply to an email I had to change the language from US to the Queen's English. And ridiculous safety messages about being sure to stop at the US's favourite traffic sign, the STOP sign. At least we didn't have to go to helicopters whose blades rotate the wrong way (well, some of us didn't anyway).
But am I glad we had Bill? Yes.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: texas
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HC - "Britain and America, two countries separated by a common language"
Back in the 70's, while home on leave from Abu Dhabi, I found an article in the Washington Post about a BBC program that detailed how America had saved the English language. In a nutshell, had it not been for American slang, the British would still be speaking old English.
I posted the article on the bulletin board back in Abu Dhabi where it remained until Mr. Bristow was scheduled to visit - it suddenly disappeared.
Back in the 70's, while home on leave from Abu Dhabi, I found an article in the Washington Post about a BBC program that detailed how America had saved the English language. In a nutshell, had it not been for American slang, the British would still be speaking old English.
I posted the article on the bulletin board back in Abu Dhabi where it remained until Mr. Bristow was scheduled to visit - it suddenly disappeared.
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Canada
Age: 53
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Response to TM
This would have been way off topic in the Chiles thread:
Unlike an airplane there isn't much beyond a data plate that is 32 years old in that 32 year old helicopter. Even the most basic structural airframe components are scrutinized like no wing spar ever is. Avionics mature to a degree, yes.
I'll fly whatever you want to pay for, but if it was my money, I would never put a design on contract that had less than 10 years operational 'experience'. That gives time for the quirks of the design to be learned and fixed/understood.
As far as comfort...if that is an issue we should still have 61's on the line, sure beats a 332! Or just fly them all out one at a time in 135's. Nice lie flat beds in the back (a la British Airways First Class). At no time will more than one passenger ever be at risk in a single incident.
It's a fine line for an operator...trying to give the customer what they demand but staying within the budget they are willing to pay. Goalposts that are constantly on the move.
It is good to see Bristow investing in new aircraft after their customers had continually demanded newer technology. But, Bristow still has its share of old 332s that they will roll out if they think there is a $ in it. Hopefully JB will take safety up another notch and make some bold decisons. Keeping pressure on the OEMs to take better care of their business would be a good place to start and finally retiring 32 year old helicopters before they retire themselves would also be appreciated by the poor passengers who have to ride in them.
I'll fly whatever you want to pay for, but if it was my money, I would never put a design on contract that had less than 10 years operational 'experience'. That gives time for the quirks of the design to be learned and fixed/understood.
As far as comfort...if that is an issue we should still have 61's on the line, sure beats a 332! Or just fly them all out one at a time in 135's. Nice lie flat beds in the back (a la British Airways First Class). At no time will more than one passenger ever be at risk in a single incident.
It's a fine line for an operator...trying to give the customer what they demand but staying within the budget they are willing to pay. Goalposts that are constantly on the move.
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Aer
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pilot and Apprentice, thanks for your insight but I have been in the business long enough to have delivered some of the 332s from the factory when they were new 32 years ago and flown S-61Ns. I understand maintenance schedules and what is replaced and what is not.
You can fly what you like or whatever your employer pays you to fly. If we all waited 10 years to contract a new type, we would not see much progress. It's not your money that pays the bills so while your individual opinion is respected, it's irrelevant.
I don't care if you offer us a 32 year old 332 for half price or quarter price, we won't use it. Our max age for helicopters on contract is 15 years through life of the contract. I spend my company's budget on the types that meet our technical specifications (139, 189, 225, 92 etc) and those which are demanded by our workforce.
Furthermore, our research shows that over a long contract life of 10 years, contracting new helicopters which require less heavy maintenance and offer far superior reliability, speed and performance improves our productivity. Having a modern fleet with reduced seating, more room and cabin ECU also reduces workforce fatigue for which we get Union and IR credit under our offshore workforce fatigue management plan. This, gives us greater helicopter schedule flexibility, improving aircraft utilisation and reducing excess fleet capacity and ad hoc flights which optimises our contracted fleet cost.
So the immediate allure of a seemingly cheap price is a veneer in our case.
Sadly, you lose any credibility by making juvenile comments about EC135s and lie flat beds. Evidently, you are more apprentice than pilot.
I am sorry if your customers' goalposts move, we make a point of not moving ours to give our contractor certainty to be able to invest in new helicopters for our contract. In fact, 50% of our fleet is new while the rest is less than 3 years old.
You can fly what you like or whatever your employer pays you to fly. If we all waited 10 years to contract a new type, we would not see much progress. It's not your money that pays the bills so while your individual opinion is respected, it's irrelevant.
I don't care if you offer us a 32 year old 332 for half price or quarter price, we won't use it. Our max age for helicopters on contract is 15 years through life of the contract. I spend my company's budget on the types that meet our technical specifications (139, 189, 225, 92 etc) and those which are demanded by our workforce.
Furthermore, our research shows that over a long contract life of 10 years, contracting new helicopters which require less heavy maintenance and offer far superior reliability, speed and performance improves our productivity. Having a modern fleet with reduced seating, more room and cabin ECU also reduces workforce fatigue for which we get Union and IR credit under our offshore workforce fatigue management plan. This, gives us greater helicopter schedule flexibility, improving aircraft utilisation and reducing excess fleet capacity and ad hoc flights which optimises our contracted fleet cost.
So the immediate allure of a seemingly cheap price is a veneer in our case.
Sadly, you lose any credibility by making juvenile comments about EC135s and lie flat beds. Evidently, you are more apprentice than pilot.
I am sorry if your customers' goalposts move, we make a point of not moving ours to give our contractor certainty to be able to invest in new helicopters for our contract. In fact, 50% of our fleet is new while the rest is less than 3 years old.
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Canada
Age: 53
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello TM, I guess the mods want this here....
From your posts I was confident that you have a strong flying background. That is obvious. I find that on PPRuNe I am often adding to what I write to fend off the peanut gallery, bad habit I know. But I must say, given your often reference to the pilot as "sky god" in a most derogatory fashion, I wonder at how in touch with that past you are.
Happily, I no longer have a position higher than line driver, so these issues are no longer mine. I concentrate on getting the pax from A to B as comfortably as possible, and without incident.
One point to clarify, I referred to design experience, not airframe. New builds are fine. You should be well aware of the adage: "never fly the A model of anything". It's good advice.
I agree that cheap is not the best, but so often over the last few years I have seen we, the operators, given strict constraints by big money customers that defy [aviation] common sense. Later, when the inefficiency of these demands become obvious, it is 'our' fault. There is no winning.
If your employer is truly as wonderful as you portray here, then I applaud you. Thus far, I have not seen the like in real life.
As for the 135 quip, it is the logical extension of the sum total of all the comfort and exposure comments made on the various 225 and Puma threads. Taken to the extreme result. It's absurdity should put a spotlight on much of the highly shortsighted comments made by both sides.
From your posts I was confident that you have a strong flying background. That is obvious. I find that on PPRuNe I am often adding to what I write to fend off the peanut gallery, bad habit I know. But I must say, given your often reference to the pilot as "sky god" in a most derogatory fashion, I wonder at how in touch with that past you are.
Happily, I no longer have a position higher than line driver, so these issues are no longer mine. I concentrate on getting the pax from A to B as comfortably as possible, and without incident.
One point to clarify, I referred to design experience, not airframe. New builds are fine. You should be well aware of the adage: "never fly the A model of anything". It's good advice.
I agree that cheap is not the best, but so often over the last few years I have seen we, the operators, given strict constraints by big money customers that defy [aviation] common sense. Later, when the inefficiency of these demands become obvious, it is 'our' fault. There is no winning.
If your employer is truly as wonderful as you portray here, then I applaud you. Thus far, I have not seen the like in real life.
As for the 135 quip, it is the logical extension of the sum total of all the comfort and exposure comments made on the various 225 and Puma threads. Taken to the extreme result. It's absurdity should put a spotlight on much of the highly shortsighted comments made by both sides.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Aarhus
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Sussex UK
Age: 67
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whatever people may say, Bill has done more for this company in the years he has been in charge than many before him. We get well looked after, decently paid and the company is doing well. All people have personal axes to grind but all in all he has done a great job.
