Jump to content

Blackmac

Veteran Member
  • Content Count

    1728
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    22

Everything posted by Blackmac

  1. Picture showing helicopter doing a touchdown with two front wheels on a rock-outcrop, referred to as a"Pinnacle" landing is stretching it slightly. Any pinnacle landing I have ever done is normally with "ALL" wheels/skids on the ground, all though you can put a helicopter skid/wheel next to a rock outcrop or on the outcrop, but it is not referred to as a landing. Landing would normally require the machine to be collective down. If the pilot wanted to classify his manoeuvre as a pinnacle landing, he would have to drop the collective and become a statistic. If he wants to practice he can go to Ethiopia, southern Sudamo region @ 1100ft or North Yemen at the same using H500, 206B, 212, lots of fun.
  2. AIR TIME is applicable to all components on a helicopter or aircraft that have a lifetime between overhaul or life span be scrapped and destroyed. What is so difficult about understanding that? If an operator wishes to inflate the air time, he is the one who pays the bill. All pressurized aircraft, life of the fuselage is based on the amount of cycles on the airframe due to pressurization. Due to the fact that you seem to question everything that is applicable to aviation, I would suggest that you actually get a job with Transport or if you are an owner, try H-A-C and maybe they could enlighten you. For your information I was in aviation before Marc Garneau or the people that are working for him. Thanks for the opportunity to converse with you, but this is the last you will hear from me on this subject. Cheers, Don
  3. Back to kindergarten a whole five words. It's a simple world mon ami and if you believe people (operators) don't screw around with entries in the tech logs you are sadly mistaken. If you keep your airtime lower you also keep your overhaul costs lower, including items that are time expired. So if you think I am delusional, think again, because I'm not the one who has a problem with reality. I would appreciate it you were not so condescending and kept you remarks to yourself.
  4. I believe I made a comment about this years ago and as a contracting officer with PWGSC and responsible for trying to clarify how aviation charters should be billed to all department of the Federal Government, I had a clause inserted in all Contracts and Standing Offers issued to companies on how to bill: Fixed Wing: rate per mile from A to B and return, including allowable charges as agreed. Rotary Wing: Hourly Rate from takeoff to final landing. i.e. depending on the requirement and type of work where the engine was not shut-down, it would be considered a continuous flight. The same would apply to fixed wing doing surveys. Gravity Survey in the James Bay Hydro Electric Project: A normal day was approximately 120 landing and take-offs, on floats. Do you think the battery or engine could manage such stress with the cool down and start-ups 120 times. This would apply to both types of aircraft, charges should only apply when the aircraft is in flight mode, ceases when the aircraft lands. This IS referred to as "AIR TIME". The entry of "AIR TIME" is the TRUE COST to the operator and is reflected in the overall maintenance life of the aircraft. "Flight Time" should be removed from the Journey Log Book as it serves no purpose other than to HAVE THE DISHONEST OPERATORS USE IT FOR BILLING. DO YOU THINK THE OPERATORS ARE GOING TO MAKE A STINK ABOUT, HA, HA All the Auditors have to do is cross check the invoice for any given flight and the entry in the journey log and the tech log, you will be surprised. As stated before, I am a trained "auditor" trained by transport Transport Canada" and the United States Air Force. And as is well known in the industry, although Headquarters in Ottawa issues the regulations they are not applied in the same manner intended, each fiefdom across the country has it's own interpretation. Each Inspector has his own interpretation. SUCH IS WHAT YOU HAVE TO LIVE WITH AND DO YOU THINK THE INDUSTRY IS DOING ANYTHING ABOUT, GET A LIFE.
  5. The whole problem with you is that I guess I'm typing over your head as you don't seem to reply with anything worth discussing. Try explaining yourself, using more than one sentence. As most of your replies amount to nothing or are you just out of kindergarten.
  6. I don't know where you were in 1987 when de-regulation came into effect??? For all practical purposes TARIFF for the helicopter industry does not exist. You can change your TARIFF for every job you bid on, and file it in your drawer, if you had a desk. If you wanted a helicopter on a short term contract, you called operators over the phone and asked them to submit a fax bid and then brow beat them again to get the lowest bid. It's referred to as "SHOTGUN BIDDING". Sound familiar. That is why the industry needs a SHAKE UP. AIRTIME is what it COSTS the operator to operate the machine and is invoiced as an hourly rate and entered in the Tech/Eng logs. If you take the hourly rate entered in the invoice it should equal the hours entered in the Tech Logs. Flight Time is not applicable and should be removed from all log books.
  7. That's an excellent QUESTION, that only the tax man can answer, if any commercial operator can provide an endorsement and signed off by the training pilot, as is done know. Why can't the operator have the pilot seeking the endorsement have the pilot pay for it, Fill in the T11B tax form (operator) as a training course provided by the company. Common practice in today's climate, is for the operator to provide the endorsement at their cost and have the Pilot sign an employment contract for a certain duration. Going to a training school at best would have the same tax benefit, but not necessarily the same type of aircraft required for the endorsement. As previously stated, any PILOT endorsed on a particular aircraft can train another Pilot and endorse his log book and sign paperwork for TC. The most obvious association to take this to the TAX MAN is H-A-C, if they care. This would eliminate employment bonds and provide training in the industry. This could also be provided under the Apprenticeship Program, by enhancing employment opportunities.
  8. Couldn't ask for a better POSTING, congratulations to BC Hydro for being REactive and PROACTIVE in all areas of SAFETY around Power Lines. You will also notice that the helicopter services are all contracted out to the commercial sector, including Air Ambulance Services. The BC government realize that all they should do is provide the resources (funding as required) and oversight and there would probably be less mishaps. GOOD ON THEM.
  9. MERRY CHRISTMAS TO YOU AND YOURS AND HOPEFULLY IN THE NEW YEAR, YOU WILL APPRECIATE TAKING SOME KNOWLEDGE IN AND TRY AND UNDERSTAND THIS INDUSTRY AND QUIT LIVING IN DREAMLAND AND EXCEPT "STUPID IS AS STUPID WAS". Mid-Canada Doppler Detection System : 1956 Royal Canadian Navy, try landing an HO4S3 (S-55) with frozen lateral hydraulics, common occurrence at -30 degrees, wrong helicopter for the job. Mid-Canada Doppler Detection System: 1958 Spartan Air Services, coming back from Hopedale on the Labrador coast in a Piasecki H-21, did a full nose up rolled on our side and headed for the ground. Helicopter split in two and caught on fire. Crew spent the night out at -44 degrees. We all survived the crash and were picked up the next day and transferred to the Goose Bay Hospital, then I was transferred to the Montreal Neurological Hospital three days later with a severe concussion and frostbite. The cause of the accident was failure of a control cable to the rear head (tandem rotor). My head injury came from smashing my helmet (which broke) on the forward transmission. Transport Canada had an AWD concerning the cable problems on the H-21, but never sent it to Spartan Air Services. WHO IS TO BLAME??? I could write a book on the stupidity of Transport Canada and most Government entities programs, that they should not be involved in, people are DEAD because of them. If you think I am being ignorant, so be it, your opinion. WHY GLAZE OVER THE FACTS?? YOU ALWAYS HAVE THE OPTION OF NOT READING MY POSTS!!!
  10. If you had provided this info initially I would have told you it was a Bell-UH1N ,military helicopters are not certified as FAA approved. Do you have ground radar at your airport?
  11. Hughes Helicopters was bought out by McDonnell/Douglas years ago and is now referred to as MD Helicopters, the Twin Model is the MD920N. https://www.mdhelicopters.com/md-902-explorer.html Back in the early days when I was doing power line patrol with Quebec Hydro based from Quebec City doing patrols from Montreal to Manicouagan, I used to fly a Bell 47G2A for patrol. The patrol was carried out in between Two (2) 750KV lines for years. At a safety meeting I was asked what would happen if I had an engine failure or loss of tail rotor while flying between the lines, I stated that under both conditions I would be awfully lucky not to hit the power lines and kill both myself and the observer, but also cut power to Quebec City and Montreal. The cost would have been astronomical. From that date on all patrols were carried on outside the lines. The company I was working for held the contract for eight years (8) with NO incident along the power lines anywhere in Quebec, we had three bases, Quebec City, Rouyn and Forestville. After 15,000 + hrs in eggbeaters I learned from my own mistakes. SAFETY DOES NOT HAVE A DOLLAR ATTACHED TO IT. POLITICS MIGHT HAVE, THE HELICOPTER I AM RECOMMENDING IS NOT MANUFACTURED IN ONTARIO OR QUEBEC.
  12. TSB were not on site at the time of the accident, the helicopter was coming into a staging area and was witnessed by ground crew that something came off the side of the helicopter and went into tail rotor. Shortly thereafter, while the pilot was attempting to land, the helicopter departed from controlled flight, all 3 passengers became separated from the helicopter while it was still airborne. The helicopter subsequently crashed nearby.’ this part of the report is particularly disturbing I worked for Ontario Hydro in T-Bay and Kenora and the OMNR and they both need a shake-up, government employees have a tendency to get SLACK, while waiting for their pension. INMO. You can include ORGN with that statement. As for Ontario Hydro using that type of helicopter for that task, leaves quite a bit to be desired, as far as safety is concerned. Hydro Companies all across Canada use the same criteria when working around POWER LINES, single engine helicopters should not be used that have tail rotors. The ideal helicopter is the Hughes 500N (no Tail Rotor) , with built in crash survivability of any helicopter on the market. It can be ordered with two engines, which makes it even better when working at almost ground level altitudes. WHY do you think Transport Canada mandate twin engine helicopters for Air Ambulance with single engine take-off performance. Having worked thousands of hours around POWER LINES in Quebec and Ontario, I do have some idea what I am saying. It doesn't take rocket science to make a RISK MANAGEMENT MATRIX to find out the equipment you need to operate at 100% safety margin. IF YOU ARE STRIVING TO MINIMIZE COSTS, YOU ARE IN THE WRONG GAME. THERE IS NO COST TO SAFETY. MACHINES CAN ALWAYS BE REBUILT, HUMANS TO DATE CANNOT.
  13. Bell 212 or Bell 212 converted to a single engine.
  14. Unless they are waiting to notify the next of kin, they already know. Anything else???
  15. Somebody GOOFED and four individual's paid for it with their lives. Why TSB is not releasing the cause is anybody's guess? May they all rest in peace and condolences to all Family and Friends.
  16. Freewheel: I would like to see a copy of that email, if possible. Finally one inspector who knows what's cooking. We need more of the same, somebody who thinks logically. Thanks be the Lord.
  17. Several readers have been in touch with us about the effect low pilot wages may be having on the pilot shortage in Canada. We'd like to speak with more of you for an upcoming story. Are you a pilot who believes low wages are the main reason for the shortage? Is the cost of flight training too steep to justify working for low entry-level wages? Would you be willing to share your story with us? Are you an operator who would like to shed some light on what factors influence the... See more in Skies Mag.
  18. Former and current pilots at Air Georgian, which annually handles 62,000 Air Canada Express-branded flights, allege it has a troubling approach to safety and maintenance, but the airline said it is one of the country’s most audited airlines, and the results of those evaluations put it in “the top tier” of Canadian operators. In "Skies Mag " in the news section, an article posted by the Financial Post "Cabin Pressure" shows the problem that Transport Canada is having with their monetary system "SMS". It reflects the same thing that is going on in the Helicopter Industry. If they do not wish to carry out their Mandate, why don't they close up shop????? ISO 9000 can do a better job.
  19. If operators invested in some off the software that "SpiderTracks" is offering it would eliminate a lot of headaches go thru their catalogue. INMHO
  20. So, I made a mistake on the name of the company ( I am thinking of buying one) I apologize To Mustang. What is being said by me applies to the Industry as whole and from now on I will call the plaintiff, Simpleton Helicopters.
  21. If you read the Judges Summary, you would notice that for some reason he seemed to take the plaintiff arguments for fact, when in fact they could say what they want and back it up with BS. ICAO terms are not recognized in the CARS as stated by Transport Canada. All that the judge had to do was have Transport Canada go into Mustangs office and cross check invoice charges with actual AIRTIME entered in the aircraft Technical Log (airframe & engine(s), if they are equal to the time recorded in Journey Log for AIRTIME. If Flight Time was used and is in excess of AIRTIME, the plaintiff is at fault. Actual Auditing by Transport Canada leaves a lot to be desired. When was the last time the plaintiff was AUDITED??????
  22. It would be helpful, if you explained your rationale for such a statement or are you with the plaintiff or TC????
  23. AUDITING THE OPERATOR: Any worthwhile Auditor carrying out an audit has a checklist, and one of the requirements, is to randomly pick out invoices that were billed to clients, and see if the charges are in accordance with air time, entered in the Journey Log, for that aircraft. That is where the confusion exists, there is only one COLUMN in the Journey Log that is required, and if Transport Canada would bother going back in history, in some of the older log they would find that, flight time was ignored and or AIR TIME was the same, SO WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF TWO (2) COLUMNS. The only operators using "Flight Time" for billing are over charging their customers as was Mustang. Cross check the Journey Log and the entries inTech. Log/Eng.(S) to equate with what was charged. The Judge was WRONG in his lack of education in the Aircraft Industry and was totally misled by Transport Canada in B.C. Having been in the business longer than most people that were mentioned in the Lawsuit, was compounded by Transport Canada when they De-Regulated the industry and any turkey with $2.00 could apply for a licence and operating certificate, but the deregulation really only applied the smaller operators (fixed wing & rotary) . The AIRLINES all have to have Tariff's, but not the little operators they can eat one another. Whatever the purpose of the Pilot was, I agree with him, he was factual in his statement. Patronage for all practical purposes, was invented in Newfoundland, transferred to Quebec and Ontario and the rest of Canada including B.C. and the Yukon, including all provincial or territory governments.
×
×
  • Create New...