Am I the only one that thinks this isn't necessarily a good thing. To provide a safe and quality product does require a certain staffing level. A 50% differential sounds potentially dangerous! :eek:

I think you will find that Malabo was being ironic.

In that case I need a chill pill :}
If he was not being ironic I stick to my case,no actually I do anyhow ;)

Let's try and make my very first post On Topic in stead of slagging off NHV, DanCopter, Bristow, Bond, CHC etc. :ugh:

Shell contract; If rumours are true about DanCopter winning Shell, does anyone know if they have the capacity to start this contract by July?

Cheers,
RP

Why do you ask ?

Why do you?

As far as I know the 155's in Nigeria haven't been released. If you read the topic about news in west africa it mentions 2 139's have been delivered but not used commercial...
This is one of the reasons why I wonder if anybody else than the current contract holder (bristow) can start the contract from July onwards but who knows.....?

The contract is now flown with 3 - 4 aircraft? From norwich and den helder.
Would be interesting to see if this will remain the same and if aircraft type used will be 155.

If shell does decide to go for Dancopter's 155 (order and delivery 139 is up to a year now), Dancopter would still need time to mod the aircraft to Shell requirement with crashworthy
fuel tanks. If Shell doesn't require that from Dancopter then they are very hypocrite and measure with two standards.

My guess is they go for a one year extension with Bristow and than maybe go for Dancopter. This way Dancopter would have more time to setup two bases, arrange crew, mod the aircraft or even go for a 139.

I do say maybe, because it could well be that shell will just continue with Bristow, since this would be more logical, commercially and financially i.e. the shell contract also consist s of them operating out of Aberdeen, as far as I know.

Is it not currently DanCopter who is flying extra work for shell out of norwich?
Double standards have been a problem for ages... If the current supplier cant deliver, standards are all of a sudden not so important...

Anyway.. Will be interesting to see what the outcome will be. Not only the shell but also wintershall. The last one most likely to go to NHV... Bummer for the CHC guys but they will survive. If shell goes to DanCopter that will be the end for Bristow Den Helder?!

Nice variaty of aircraft colours though!

TorqueStripe,

From the outside looking in, what are the "2 different 'philosophies'" between DanCopter and Bristow and why wouldn't they mix?

Clearly they are two companies of very different sizes and therefore the supporting staff numbers will vary but what's so significant that makes you think people wouldn't jump from one to another (big to small)?

I'm not after a bite BTW, or a whaa!

Are you sure the Dancopter machines don't have crashworthy tanks? They are all B1s which have self sealing bladders, I believe. It's true the SPDC owned B models in Nigeria don't, but they are not owned by Dancopter.

Pretty sure. Friend of mine flew both types of 155B1, one with and one without crash-worthy fuel tanks. Difference is about 41 kilos of fuel you can take less in the crash-worthy one. I do think it is standard on a 155B1, but apparently you can go for an extra safe option which makes them even more crash-worthy, so to say? :\

SNI -
I guess 'pretty sure' does not confirm the same level of confidence as your bold statement re-iterating that a certain company's pilots do not go to the sim - which turned out to be incorrect.........
- you must be getting wiser!
;-)

It wasn't years, it was 1 year to be exact. And yes, that was a temporary add hoc contract if I am informed correctly.

EESDL.

Maybe, who knows! ;-)

Have you considered the fact though that they might have gone from none to once a year? Which is still half of what other companies do, but that would coincide nicely with ones comment here that they have half the cost per revenue hour compared to other companies. ;-)

@SNI

With some interest I am following your comments concerning the "Crash worthy" fuel tanks.

Working on EC155 for quite some time, I never heard anything on this "crash worthy" tanks.

So based on your comments, I have checked the SB/MODS/FLM and Type certificate and can not trace any reference to these tanks. I even checked out the original Bristow order for the EC155 that now operate for Shell, without any trace.

Could you please share more information concerning these tanks?

Regards,

Mark

Mmm, you could well be right. You might wanna contact Bristow about this, since they are pretty convinced about the subject, according to my friend.

Might be interesting to see what they have to say about this.

SNI - can you respond to my earlier remarks about the tanks? Or do you have to ask your friend?

I did, scroll back.

Post-edit to MarkH1 and 212man: Like mazdadriver says below... He is the friend I was talking about! :O

B1 has sef sealing bladder tanks for sure. The aircraft operated by DanCopter out of Den Helder a while ago are also B1's.

At the moment I dont see the point in switching operators if the type of aircraft flown will still be the (underpowered) 155..... Or Bristow must have pissed off shell big time... Not unlikely i suppose :cool: