Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Rotorheads
Reload this Page >

UK HEMS Pilot Pay

Rotorheads A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss the things that affect them

UK HEMS Pilot Pay

Old 17th Nov 2019, 09:40
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Den Helder
Posts: 9
The times they are a changin”
I didn’t pay too much attention to the blurb at the time (as irrelevant in my case) but I believe it was announced that 2 CPL(H) pilots can now fly as Multi-crew on CAT - as long as various exams passed, boxes ticked etc
Mr EESDL,

which “blurb” ?, do you have a source for this statement?
SFIM is offline  
Old 17th Nov 2019, 09:59
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Den Helder
Posts: 9
. Absolute bollocks. The pilot has to abide by the Ops manual he is working to. If it states that it is a multi crew operation then the P1 must have an ATPL and the crew must be correctly qualified as per the authorisation granted by the authority. If these conditions aren’t met and it’s a single pilot operation with a TC, it matters not whether it’s a CPL holder or a paramedic sat in the LHS. It cannot be logged.
anecdotal evidence shows me that there are so many “dodgy” logbooks now because people who are not entitled to log P2 log it anyway as they don’t want to suffer the down side of being the TCM.

we have created a system of madness where people are employed as pilots but cannot log it, where they log it anyway and many are confused about the rules, and nothing is enforced.

and when they move into other sectors such as offshore, there is little confidence or no confidence about the hours they claim, so they have to go for a pre employment offer sim check because the system is broken.

and another thing, this whole mess of type ratings where people come from a type rating course MP only rated, EASA have completely confused the the type rating and the role in which it’s flown, so everyone should have the SP then add the MP should the role in which it’s flown require it, but instead we have the madness where AW139 Pilots of many years experience can’t fly it SP in any role even for a air test without doing an “SP course” which is a mechanism to take up to another €20k from them for no good reason.

Last edited by SFIM; 17th Nov 2019 at 10:26.
SFIM is offline  
Old 17th Nov 2019, 10:29
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: The South
Age: 54
Posts: 430
I believe the two CPL flying in a Multi-crew operation is currently a proposal in the U.K. and hasn’t been approved. A SkyWise will be issued with the requirements when it is.

The outline plan is that an Operator apply for an exemption to the ATPL requirement for MP operations and that application will be forwarded to EASA for approval. Passes in the ATPL(H) examinations will be required.

This is the latest information I have and may now be out of date.

FNW
FloaterNorthWest is online now  
Old 17th Nov 2019, 10:53
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 7,835
but instead we have the madness where AW139 Pilots of many years experience can’t fly it SP in any role even for a air test without doing an “SP course” which is a mechanism to take up to another €20k from them for no good reason.
or, like me, you can only fly 139 SP(as that was how my TR was issued) and have to undergo MP training despite 32 years of multi-crew experience in the military in order to comply - just like the CAA, it all seems down to generating money in EASA.
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 17th Nov 2019, 20:40
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 138
Originally Posted by EESDL View Post
Hot LZ
”The times they are a changin”
I didn’t pay too much attention to the blurb at the time (as irrelevant in my case) but I believe it was announced that 2 CPL(H) pilots can now fly as Multi-crew on CAT - as long as various exams passed, boxes ticked etc
If this is a change to the regulations/requirements it is making an absolute mockery of the system. Call me cynical but this situation has all come about due to a certain HEMS operator cutting quite a few corners to save a bit of ££ and under cut the competition. Frankly a dilemma the CAA should have nipped in the bud when it first started. Now the industry has a mess on its hands because the authority didn’t have the spine to pull an operator into line.

LZ
Hot_LZ is offline  
Old 17th Nov 2019, 21:14
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Used to be God's own County
Posts: 1,581
LZ - could not agree more
SFIM - looks like FNW has the answer for origin of blurb
i also heard that it was a specific company pushing for it to give cheaper crewing options for their onshore 139 CAT ops.
if anything, such machines in the ‘onshore’ role that attract the 2-pilot option, require a greater degree of experience and understanding to spot when it’s about to go Pete Tong, not lesser.
EESDL is offline  
Old 17th Nov 2019, 21:15
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Shropshire
Posts: 611
You raise an interesting point Crab, I've got a good many years in both MP and SP operations, helped set up a small MP offshore operation and later set up the first MP night HEMS operation in the UK. We developed both operations with similar training and procedures in the knowledge that the HEMS operating procedures would develop with experience. The introduction of the HEMS operation coincided with the recruitment of a number of pilots straight out of the military (mixture of ex SAR, Lynx, Apache etc.) and some civilian trained co-pilots; all went well and I went back to my day job. A few weeks later I was rostered to go and fly at the same base and since I avoid responsibility at all cost, I asked if I could be P2 but PF as I don't get 'hands on' very often. That was all sorted and some time later we were tasked on an incident - I didn't recognise the CRM or procedures! We completed the mission with me biting my tongue a few times but, I believe, totally safely. We happened to return to base just as the late crew and next day's visiting crew arrived, which resulted in an ideal opportunity for me to ask what was going on. It soon became obvious that each branch of the UK military and even different operations within the same service had a completely different concept of briefing, command, role of PF/PM etc. than we had established during training and written in the operations manuals! Because this was a new type and new operation and due to operational restrictions outside of my control, the unit operated 'constituted crews' i.e. the same commander consistently flew with the same co-pilot and in a surprisingly short time, the commanders reverted to type. I'm not saying any of the concepts were inherently wrong, just that was not how the civvy world MP operations have evolved, the discussion went on for some time time but was happily resolved in the end (I think!).

In the UK offshore world, the 'civilianisation' of military pilots tends to happen by osmosis, new pilots to offshore ops don't get a command (no matter what previous military experience they have) until they have flown at least one winter, during that time they will fly with most pilots within their base/fleet and 'generally' they will find every pilot doing things the same way, not because everyone spends their free time reading the operations manuals (obviously they do!!) but because from line training onwards, all but one or two 'individuals' will do things the same way! My initial briefing on MP courses now includes the following statement - "If an observer sitting behind a well performing MP crew doesn't know which seats the commander sits in, the observer should only be able to tell who is the PF and who is the PM, not which pilot is the commander (unless something out of the ordinary happens)"

Just my two bob's worth.

TeeS
TeeS is offline  
Old 18th Nov 2019, 18:01
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 7,835
Tees,

I don't have a problem with following the Ops Manual at all - and I know from experience that some mil pilots have a poor grasp of CRM, preferring the 'I'm in charge, do what I say' approach - it's why so much time on FS courses is dedicated to failures of CRM and how poor cockpit gradient can lead to disaster.

My gripe is that instead of reading the Ops manual and adjusting the particular words and phrases to achieve the same CRM and PM/PF relationship that I am familiar with from SAR, I have to undergo MP training (at a cost) just to satisfy bureaucrats who have little idea of how many areas of military aviation actually worked with regard to CRM.
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 18th Nov 2019, 18:47
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Shropshire
Posts: 611
I hear what you are saying Crab, I wasn't knocking the mil pilots for poor CRM or MP procedures, it was just not what we had training, they were top notch throughout!

Cheers

TeeS
TeeS is offline  
Old 18th Nov 2019, 22:33
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Europe
Age: 30
Posts: 42
Many burocrats in EASA don´t have aviation background, but they know everything as they are the regulator. There should be specific requirements for this rule makers without a clue about what airops are about.
Helisweet is offline  
Old 19th Nov 2019, 06:02
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: POLAND
Posts: 9
Originally Posted by TomAndreas-NOR View Post
With the cost of getting an IR in Europe, especially if you need ME, I have always wondered how they are able to get pilots in the UK that can afford earning as little as they do.
Agree, costs of IR is ridiculous.
RichiRich is offline  
Old 19th Nov 2019, 06:31
  #32 (permalink)  

Avoid imitations
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 12,688
Originally Posted by rudestuff View Post
..or as total time since you can't log P2 in single pilot ops. Which does beg the question why two people..
Correct, But two people simply because some aircraft owners don’t actually know or care about EASA and still prefer two pilots sitting up front.
ShyTorque is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.