HNZ wins SAR in Oz
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the blame for the cheap part, if it is true has to lie with the oil/gas company that has contracted HNZ.
If money wasn't an option why did they change from BHL to HNZ, especially if Bristows were so shiny with all the SAR guys to match.
The company's letting the contracts out are the ones driving the prices down so if HNZ can do it cheaper good on them but the customer gets what they pay for.
If money wasn't an option why did they change from BHL to HNZ, especially if Bristows were so shiny with all the SAR guys to match.
The company's letting the contracts out are the ones driving the prices down so if HNZ can do it cheaper good on them but the customer gets what they pay for.
I suspect the rush to a cheaper service will only change when a evenings mainstream news coverage starts with pictures of a lot of people in orange being pulled from the water. Australian operators & O&G companies are fortunate in that the rest of the country has no idea what goes in in the NWS or Timor Sea.
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Except the customer isn't getting the All-weather SAR service they asked operators to bid for! Maybe if BHL had tendered to 'deliver' by not even delivering day only SAR, 3 months after the contract start date and All-weather SAR possibly 6-12 months after that, they would have been slightly more competitive too!!
I think that is the whole point here - it costs a certain amount to provide a 24-Hr all weather SAR service, BHL know what that is and will have bid with a modest (or even zero) profit on top (I think they bid at a loss for UKSAR).
It is easy enough to undercut the competition if you are prepared to cut corners or don't accurately know what the costs of that service are.
So in going for the lowest bidder, the customer has ended up with a bag of crap instead of what they asked for. Surely CASA should pull the plug on this operation or the customer should sack HNZ.
It is easy enough to undercut the competition if you are prepared to cut corners or don't accurately know what the costs of that service are.
So in going for the lowest bidder, the customer has ended up with a bag of crap instead of what they asked for. Surely CASA should pull the plug on this operation or the customer should sack HNZ.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Antipodea
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And its completely disingenuous for HNZ to blame the regulator for being 3 months late on delivery of a SAR service. Its any operators responsibility inline with bidding a contract to ensure they have the ops manuals, maintenance systems, training procedures and practices ready to go. If the regulator does an audit and finds you completely wanting in these areas you can hardly blame CASA for not having your s#@t in a pile its complete garbage!!!
Well if another company came along and took your job away from you by underbidding and then failing to deliver, how would you feel?
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ban Don Ling
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crab, it's taking you a long time to understand the commercial world! They didn't just come along, they were probably invited. And it would still hurt if the successful new bidder provided more money and a better service. Swear, curse, join management ..... but take it as an opportunity for pastures new!
No, the commercial world is very easy to understand - money talks and everything else comes second - doesn't make it good practice though.
Keynsian economics suggests that competition lowers prices and raises quality - sadly that theory doesn't survive first contact with reality where we just see lower prices and poorer standards, not a great way to do aviation.
Keynsian economics suggests that competition lowers prices and raises quality - sadly that theory doesn't survive first contact with reality where we just see lower prices and poorer standards, not a great way to do aviation.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Antipodea
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know about that, however the shame is its bad for the whole industry when such poor performance in such a critical role is allowed to enter the fray. I don't know how you feel about doing early and late shuttles involving two hours at night overwater in an extremely remote area without any SAR coverage, doesn't fill me with joy.
Bobbin' in the Oggin in the dark - no thanks.
Originally Posted by [email protected]
Bobbin' in the Oggin in the dark - no thanks.
What are you worried about?
Your life jacket has a light, and whistle, for attracting attention!
At least it's warm water.........
Twist - have you ever done night wets? Not a nice environment even in warm water when you find yourself alone.
the company with the clever marketing people that you are now defending who won sar and took your job in england
The difference is the BHL did stand up on time, albeit not quite within the contract terms as far as aircraft were concerned.
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: bright side of life
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by [email protected]
Well if another company came along and took your job away from you by underbidding and then failing to deliver, how would you feel?
Brother, I gather that there is time for you to qualify as a SAR pilot after all...
I have heard that Bristow have been asked to provide (continue to provide) LIMSAR for Shell and Inpex until the end of the year, due to the ongoing ATSB/CASA investigation into HNZ's "serious training incident".
That will be at least 6 months since the proposed contract start date, which was already watered down to be LIMSAR only.
Shell and Inpex are expecting HNZ to graduate to AWSAR 24/7 in February 18. Surely that can't be a realistic possibility, with the rate of progress at the moment?
Given that there are thousands of workers off shore, with Shell's flagship vessel Prelude inplace and the Ichthys at full capacity, the imminent cyclone season must be making the management of those companies slightly nervous (or maybe embarrassed).
To think that they could have had a 24/7 solution in place from the start.
Is there a precedent of an operator wining a contract (a contract that appears to have been modified to suit them at the last minute) and then not providing the service for at least 6 months? Surely the clients would tear it up and realise their mistake.
Is there anybody in the industry who can explain this abject failing?
Surely it cant be price alone? The HNZ bid must have been really cheap in comparison to the competitors, and presumably there are penalties for not fronting up?
Anyway safety first eh.......?
It is barking mad - someone will get hung drawn and quartered if there is an incident/accident that needs a full SAR response and people die
I think the old adage of 'If you think safety is expensive, try having an accident' applies here.
I think the old adage of 'If you think safety is expensive, try having an accident' applies here.