Do you reckon some Bristow SAR folks might be enticed to leave for greener pastures? Afterall...if Bond got the contract...there will be some overstaffing at the outfits that lost the bid. Or am I wrong here? Rumbles from Nigeria seem to suggest that OLOG is intent upon replacing Brits with Local pilots.

Whoever won this contract would have had a problem finding the crews to man it. I don't believe that any of the contenders has 12 SAR qualified captains, flying non SAR line flights, available to fill this contract. There are also going to need pilots who are willing to live in Scasta!! or spend half their life on one of bp's rigs being constantly b*******d for not holding onto a stair handrail etc.

It will be interesting to see the terms and conditions that Bond are prepared to offer to entice suitabley qualified pilots to join them. As Night Watchman said you can't take an AS332L2 captain who has never night winched over water and turn him into a safe SAR captain in less than 6 months and with a 90 flying hr training bill (Seaking SAR course times).

Interesting times ahead for those who are SAR qualified and are willing to spend half the year away from their family!!!

AP

SASless

I don't think Bristow will lose SAR crews just because Bond have won the Jigsaw contract. The Bristow Jigsaw guys are mostly now working on a contract in Holland with the black and yellow Mk 2 that was at Helitech, and the Coastguard units still need to be crewed. Certainly no overstaffing at any of these units. I suppose it is possible that for some of the guys in Holland, they may make a move if they want to go back to UK and Bristow tell them there isn't a job for them at home. No doubt Bond would be interested in them as they were in at the start of BP's pet project.

As to OLOG wanting US pilots instead of Brits, I too have heard that, but a lot of the oil companies evidently want pilots with North Sea experience. Wonder how much longer that will happen though with those b*****d accountants in the contract departments of the oil companies who want helicopters out in Nigeria?

BHPS

As someone still in UK military SAR I would like to ask Mountainman why he says "Ex military pilots are generally very good, but it takes time to get them up to speed". Aren't most of the Captains in Bristow SAR ex-military anyway, or are there some purely civil-trained ones now? What about the aircrewmen? If the pilots have trouble, then surely all ex-military must have some problems adopting to civil procedures?

I cannot see what the difference is between the way military SAR crews work and the way Civil do except possibly when it comes to training. I understand that there aren't many hours to train each month in the civil world (and there aren't as many as there were in the military world these days), plus the CAA apply some restrictions which do not apply to the military. That aside, please explain?

Don't the procedures that Bristow use originally come from the UK military anyway?

As for the new contract with Bond, if Bristow had won it, wouldn't they have needed to get new crews, so they would have been in the same position anyway, despite what Mountainman says about a proven unit?

I wonder what the training will be for those that Bond take on? I guess it wont be anywhere near the amount that AllyPally suggests from the military course that he mentions. I agree with him and Night Watchman that it takes time to gain experience and I would suggest that even 6 months is too quick for a SAR Captain. More like a year at least.

However, even saying all that, I think there may well be some military crews interested if they can get their "get out of jail free" card arranged in time.

JKnife

JKnife,

The trouble is that there is not a standard military way to do SAR. As an ex military pilot myself, I know that the way the navy crewmen con a deck is different to the RAF way. The civilian way tends to take a bit from each service and tweaks it a bit, so ex military pilots have to adapt to a new(ish) way of doing things. More SAR pilots are being trained in-house as fewer military pilots join the N Sea these days.

Also the civilian SAR helicopters tend to be better equipped and the crewman's job involves using the FLIR, also the radar is in the front not the back.

Most oil companies impose minimum hours limitations on commanders, often specifying a minimum no of offshore hours as well. It is unusual for a military pilot to get his command in less than a year, even for fast-tracked experienced military SAR pilots. So, if Jigsaw suddenly need a lot of experienced SAR pilots the the choice is to poach current civilian SAR pilots (pay them big bucks) or get ex mil pilots and pay big bucks to train them.

Thanks Hambling Chaos for your input. You appear to suggest that the military do not have a standard way of doing things. I must strongly disagree. The Navy has its way of doing it and the RAF its way, I agree, but that doesn't mean that we don't have our standards. Surely you must realise this from your service days? Each service does standardise within its own and, by what you are saying, so does Bristow. Is it not that the RN, RAF and Bristow (plus now Bond who will probably have their own procedures), are really just different "companies"?

Are there not differences in procedures if you change between companies in the civil world? It surely doesn't take long to get used to the new procedures? I just get the feeling you and Mountainman are trying to make it sound more difficult than it actually is.

As for the equipment, well, it might be better, but you still need the pilots and aircrewmen to do the job at the end, which is winching. Not that difficult to learn new equipment and quicker than trying to get the overall experience of SAR, I would suggest.

I guess we'll have to see what Bond will offer for experience at the end of the day as you say. I suspect (hope?) that if they really need SAR experienced crews they may just ask the oil companies to reassess their minimum hours limitations, or does the CAA have a say as well?

JKnife

Hello JKnife,
(s)Hambling Chaos has really answered your question, but let me elaborate slightly.
Of course the military have standards, but you make the point yourself that they are not the same standards.
If you left the RN (for instance) and joined a unit staffed wholly by ex-RN aircrew, you would have no problem fitting in. However, when you join a civvy outfit like Bristows, you will be working with Ex RN, RAF and civvy aircrew (yes we do have home-grown captains now)
How long does it take to convince an ex RAF pilot that it is not the best idea to change from aircraft to boat axis in the middle of a transfer? I fly with ex RAF pilots who have been out of the forces for 10 years and they still revert to type when under pressure. You cannot afford for this to happen on a dark and stormy night.
It's equally difficult to stop ex RN crewmen from saying "easy, easy, steady" and although it's not a killer, it does emphasise the point that a good SAR crew MUST know what each other are going to say and do when under pressure. Surely your standards teams would agree?
When we do a transfer from a yacht under way, we will get the yacht to go on a port tack,close hauled rather than sails down. This allows us to effect a hi-line transfer whilst the mast is held off to Starboard by the wind, safe in the knowledge that our down draft will not blow the yacht over....why? Because our winching position is just behind the cockpit rather than well aft like the Seaking.So there's your next problem, you also have a differant aircraft to contend with.
Once you have got all this sorted out, and feel ready for command, you will then have to convince all the other aircrew on the unit that you are up to scratch and dependable. Your rank will not give you any respect on a civvy SAR unit, it only dictates how much you get paid.
Training wise, each unit gets 45 hours a month for training, and this will give you about 15- 20 hours training per man.
If this all sounds like civvy "spin", then speak to any of the ex-mil guys on the units and ask them how they found the transition.
Finally, yes, the CAA have an enormous input, as I believe Bond are now discovering.
Launching off with a hearty "Hi Ho Silver" and returning for tea and medals does not go down well with them (sadly, as I miss those days)

I have a feeeling that SAR experience was most definately NOT the reason for the contract being awarded to Bond, but more the fact that BP are trying to utilise the aircraft that would be spare in the new contract about to start. Remember, when the contract was awarded to Bond it was for x amount of L2's, then BP subsequently sold off Forties, Thistle, Montrose and one or two others, result- too many helicopters.... No doubting the fact that G-JSAR is a state of the art piece of kit, and very experienced crews along with it, but can bond now lure these guys their way????

Mountainman

Thanks for your comments. I would question you more on some of them, but this topic is not for that and I think we have taken up enough space.

JKnife

Simfly,

So you are saying that Bond picked up the work because BP had bought them too many L2s? Sounds like the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing!

Experienced civil licensed SAR pilots and experienced crewmen are at a premium - what do you think the going rate will be to sit and get bored stupid offshore? The Norwegians pay their offshore based crews something like £200+ a day on top of their normal salary. I think to jump ship from a land based SAR unit to live on a N Sea Platform I would need at least that much encouragement!

Anyone know what Bond/BP are paying?



Running In

Running In

I think it will take more than just pay (unless it is lots and lots and lots, in which case I might be interested!) to get people to "jump ship".

Conditions of employment, the equipment and training will all come into play. If Jigsaw is to be done on a shoe string then retaining people could be a problem.

H Chaos

I agree that retention could be a problem, look at the civilian SAR operator across the water!

I hope that BP/Bond will appreciate that SAR is more complex than ferrying people to a rig.

running in,

Across which piece of water are we talking about? If it's Eire, we're having absolutely no problem with retention, in fact, there is a waiting list of people to join.

Sailor Vee

Which I suppose is why Bristows had a spate of crewmen joining them from Ireland.

I see that Bond have just accepted their first L2. Does anyone know when the first SAR aircraft is arriving?

Heard SAR part doesn't start till 2005ish.

According to an item on Rotorhub at this link http://www.shephard.co.uk/Rotorhub/D...2-4ad0a85df59c it says that the SAR aircraft will not be delivered until August 2005. The other 5 aircraft in passenger configuration will all be delivered by July this year.

Anyone know if Bond Offshore have sorted out their AOC yet? Heard that the CAA weren't happy with some things and haven't issued it yet.

BHPS

JKnife,
I appreciate your restraint.
Please feel free to PM me anytime for a chat.
Mountainman

If jigsaw isn't due to start until late 2005 why has the Mk2 been chosen for the job when more capable aircraft will be in service by then.

Both the S92 and Ec225 are more capable than the Mk2, have better safer systems, for example a run-dry gearbox. The S92 has a bigger cabin, always a plus when picking up lots of survivors. The EC 225 is faster than the Mk2 and has better hover performance.

It does seem strange that a soon to be obsolescent aircraft has been chosen for a system which is meant to improve safety, when the new types on the N Sea will offer much more. Unless it boils down to cost, or am I being cynical again?

Running in:

Are you sure of your facts about the run-dry gearboxes?