I notice that SM didn't mention the incident where a Bristow S76 ONLY just made it to Nigg lighthouse because a Shell platform refused to allow him to land and refuel.

HC,

Your comment about being able to do HJMS downloads while rotors are turning rang a Bell.

What is your experience with that procedure......how many instances of HUMS analysis during a Rotor Running Turnaround where the decision was made to cancel or delay the flight dude to some HUMS abnormality have there been?

Is the number of events significant enough to warrant making either Rotors Running Turnarounds proper only if the downloading of HUMS is possible....or should aircraft that cannot do the downloading be required to shutdown to accomplish the analysis before the next flight?

Should this HUMS download be done at the end of each Sector.....done on the Rig/Platform before the aircraft departs homeward bound?

SAS

I think you have a good point. The availability of mobile HUMS stations is limited but not insurmountable. Getting data sent for analysis from remote locations is not always easy though even in this day and age.

SM

SM Has it taken this long for you to come up with a prediction which many others have been making these past weeks?

"Roll on some competition!" sounds exactly like the threat we've been anticipating from a representative of an exceptionally profitable oil giant, which would unhesitatingly employ the divide-and-rule tactic to force down the profitability of the sub-contractors.

Problem is that if the re-introduction of a fourth and even a fifth helicopter operator to the area should happen, as it did when BP brought in British Caledonian Helicopters, then the rivals can't afford to invest in more than the absolute minimum levels of safety as required by the authorities.

I'll probably be retired by the time that another helicopter company sets up in Aberdeen, but I hereby make a solemn declaration to our offshore-working passengers: If in the coming years after a fourth helicopter offshore operator sets up in North East Scotland, there starts to be a rise in helicopter offshore accident statistics, you should consider that investment in flight safety such as Bristow currently pours in, could have been pared back to the minimum required. This will in all likelihood have been as a consequence of one or more oil giants squeezing the operators "until the pips squeak".

In this life you "gets what you pays for" and safety costs money. I'm now going to avoid entering into further exchanges with SM since my decades in North Sea helicopter flying have shown me the truth of what I've stated and I have nothing much more to add.

Shell Management,

Just an honest and curious question....do you speak for Shell management? If so, I find it strange that you are allowed by your "management" to use such a public forum to present Shell's view of the safety records and viability of subcontractors, and make predictions on the naming of and potential business activities of Shell subcontractors.

A good point, and HUMS is only as good and useful as the user allows it to be. It is a tool and not the be all and end all, but a very useful tool at that. I believe there are companies that do a full HUMS download and analysis between every flight and it would be interesting to see their safety stats as a comparison. I am fairly sure that in Norway it is common practice and that certainly CHC HS do not do rotors running turnrounds for this very reason. Not sure about Bristow though, but quite probably the same. Perhaps someone with more info will confirm this.

Hot turnarounds
 

I can confirm Bristow Norway do not do hot turnarounds
even when we backup operations 'short term' in ABZ we stick to shutting down between flights to let technicians check aircraft and hums before next flight
I know there are pros and cons for this procedure but,
In the recent past this has paid off when a technician found damage to a tail rotor drive shaft after a flight that would have ended up with a shaft failure :eek:

fly safe
Pv :ok:

I remember in Nigeria, (Warri), back in early 1969 Shell wanted to have Bristow and Schreiner on the same contracts, Shell would throw out a requirement and the first one airborne got paid! Alan Bristow refused point blank and threatened to withdraw his helicopters from Warri.

Shell's idea of divide and rule isn't new!

SAS, to do a rotors running download and analysis of the HUMS data on the 225 takes about 5 minutes. The output at the top level is a traffic light system, green obviously requires no further thought, amber or red and the engineers "drill down" to the problem. We have a support contract with EC (something not all operators have) and so a well defined process to determine what to do about it. There have certainly been plenty of cases where a departure is cancelled or at least delayed because of a non-green traffic light.

We can RRTR HUMS analyse on all our fleet - the old IHUMS aircraft such as 332L, S76A, S61, B214, and the new ones although I am not sure about the S92. When the L2 was introduced, with OEM HUMS system, in a typical failure to understand how oil support aircraft are operated, it did not cater for RRTR downloads but we did not operate any L2s so not a problem for us. When we were contemplating the 225 it was a stipulation that we must be able to RRTR download the M'ARMS. EC modified the design to cater for this and of course charged us a considerable sum for the pleasure. This is the kind of thing that Bristow does, that some other operators wouldn't have done. Of course the other operators now benefit from our investment since RRTR HUMS download is now standard on the 225.

There could be an argument for downloading after each landing. Crews would have to take a laptop and process the data offshore. That is fine when you get a green traffic light. If there was a slight problem then it would be difficult to despatch the a/c even though it would probably be OK, and it would be back to shore on a boat a a fairly routine occurrence! That sounds like I am saying we would rather not know that there is a problem because we want to get home, and I suppose there is some truth in that sentiment. The saviour is that in nearly every case, HUMS picks up problems many hours before a failure and to fly for say 3 hrs between downloads is quite adequate if not ideologically perfect. ALARP springs to mind.

HC

Of course not. He has been a pain in the neck on the West African thread for years. Real Shell managers haven't got time to post on pPrune; there too busy stabbing other Shell managers in the back.

Does anyone have the factual info on what was picked up on the M-ARMS for the recent Bond drive failure.

Lots of stories about 'step changes' and upward trends, and the official preliminary report mentioned (I think) that the part was being monitored having shown an increased vibration for 6.5 hours.

I've not heard from anyone that has actually seen the data.

S92 vs EC225
 

I am so glad to see that the EC225 is not immune against MGB failures/problems and that the 30min dry run capability is just a means of doing a controlled ditching - not an extended flight back from offshore (especially 265nm over the Atlantic at 80kts)! I flew all the AS332 types and enjoy the S92!

Why would that make you glad..............:ugh::ugh::ugh:

That would be the 3 hours and 20 minutes run dry time......

Chopperjog,

Remind me again of the S-92 run-dry time?

Or, if there is a deck within 30 miles or so, a controlled landing.

Is it about the same or maybe longer than a 225 gearbox with a failed emergency lube system?

It is about the same. The difference is that there is a good chance that on the 225 the emergency lube system will not be failed (especially once the reason for the failure during the recent Bond ditching is understood and corrected). On the S92 the emergency lube system is permanently failed because it doesn't exist!

HC

FED,

Unless something changed.....the last item on the Check List says "Land Immediately" for the 92.....for the failure under discussion.

That does not equate to 30 miles.

That kind of thinking created a problem for the Cougar crew as you recall.

Yet, but it will.