Jump to content


Senior Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Winnie

  1. Saw someone mention Paraclet up here somewhere, my recommendation is to RUN AWAY! We got a few for our NVG Program and they are poor copies of Gentex SPH=5s with a ****** liner that does not fit a head at all. out of 4 helmets and 8 crew guys 1 wears the Paraclet, with little issues, 1 with migraine issues, everyone else got their own. I'd rather weatr my heavy old SPH-5 that the Paraclet garbage...
  2. Do not even THINK of mentioning to the CBP that you are "looking" for employment, you'll get an automatic 5 year ban... There are a few websites you can search for that do help with the Visa or even green card applications, but in general you need a job offer to get a visa, and the employer has to prove you are the only one that can actually do the job. So getting a visa is very difficult. The green card option could be easier, but depending on where you are from. If you are Canadian, it is tougher than say Scandinavian for some reason. And Pilots are not considered "Skilled Workers" in most situations, so the visa process is tough... But visit various companies and ask, the worst they can say is no.
  3. We use Cirro, I find it less than stellar and still requires foreflight as the nav model lacks a lot... It is also clutzy to use, and require a separate nav log for accurate timekeeping.
  4. If you are civilian, you have to pass a controlled goods assessment, which is not in itself a security clearance. You have to provide a Enhanced Police Record, detailing everything within the past 10 years I believe, and solid financial records, Then a company person who has been vetted by the government can approve you under the Controlled Goods Act. This will allow for the use and also for transporting the goggles. Cheers W.
  5. I'm sure the windows are the same on the 737-8 max... Not an engineer, but... from a stability standpoint, could you really do any better? local base, with usually a fairly fixed schedule? Now obviously none of that matters if the pay sucks, but that goes into bargaining.
  6. n general the purpose of the per diem payment (or the deduction of expenses when inadequate reimbursements are provided) is to alleviate the burden on taxpayers whose business or employment travel creates duplicated expenses. That is straight from the CRA. Most per diems today are not even close to what the government allows, yet this is tax deductible and can be included in the rate for the aircraft in a per hour basis anyway. At $40 which seems to be the lowest rate today, is 11 dollars short of what CRA considers standard, and does NOT include incidentals. CRA today considers MEAL allowance only to be $90.10 CAD with an additional $17.50 for incidentals. It has nothing to do with supplementing income, but getting businesses into the 21st Century. How many here are issued cellphones from the company? Lap Top Computers? Do you use your own for anything related to the business? hence the increased per diems. $51 + incidentals seem to be the lowest they should be today, unless you feed me on site, then I can accept ONLY incidentals, but if I have to use anything of my own, I should get the current rate at a minimum.
  7. Your latest was wonderful! loved it!
  8. A friend hired a machine in Sweden, for 30 minutes, full cabin on a 206B, $2000+... 30 mins... So we are most decidedly behind the times.
  9. OK, I am trying to argue new rates of Per Diems, but seem to run against a wall of "they are generous enough,,," Any of you fine chaps and chapesses willing to cough up what is the going rate these days? I have had $46 ( 6 years ago), $52 2 years ago, and currently at less than those. Any inuts and arguments are welcomed, even in private. So post here to share, or send a PM so I can do a "survey" to convince the guy in charge we deserve and need more... Cheers W.
  10. Winnie


    Hello Wingman1 Training in Canada can make trouble for you, unless you find work in Canada right after training due to ICAO rules. Canada has a few excemptions, one is to hours required. which means that even if you leave Canada with a commercial license you do not meet the minimum requirement from an EASA standpoint, and will have to cover those. Also in Canada you can't become an instructor and build hours that way. you'd basically have to start as a low timer on the hangar floor. In the US, with the right school (FAR 141 approved) you can get a J1 Visa, which gives you 2 years to get a license, get a job, and build hours quickly so that you can go to Europe (Denmark/Norway perhaps) to convert your license and get a job. It SHOULD be possible to gain about 1000 hours in 2 years if you manage to find a busy school to train and teach. So from that standpoint, US wins hands down. Now... there are numerous schools in Canada, from BC to the east coast, and they should be able to get you a commercial license, but you will struggle to find a job with your possible 18 months left on your visa. and if you DO find a job, you will not gain many hours. this is unfortunate but true, anyone tell you differently are lying. Search for threads in the main forum such as "lowtimers" https://forums.verticalmag.com/topic/22889-where-does-a-lowtime-start/?tab=comments#comment-154205 There are 2 large schools in Florida, and 1 in Oregon that used to do 141 and EASA training, but I'm unsure if I'd recommend the EASA training, simply for the reason that you will leave with virtually no hours. Anyway, that's what I can say so far... Haaber det hjelper lit..
  11. I've done 12.5 in a day... was a LONG A$$ day. Some really long legs too, 2.8 hours one way on a couple of them...
  12. So to clarify the above responses. YES, you can go by yourself and do 3 circuits to become legal (3 takeoffs and landings every 90 days to be current. after that you need to fly 5 take offs and landing within 6 months to maintain currency. The takeoffs and landings MUST include a full take off and landing, so a full circuit. In the US you can do that with Air taxi. Hope that helps.
  13. Yeah, good story man! I ferried an R44 from Torrance to Blenheim, ON. Was quite an adventure, but nothing like yours! My favorite part was the morning we left Dodge City, and I slipped out a "Let's get the **** out of Dodge!" The fuel truck driver said: "I say the same every day..."
  14. Sounds like the master volume is not turned up at all, which is a screw-driver adjustable volume on the actual radio themselves?
  15. I currently fart around in the 135 and love it, it has some peculiar vibrations but has lots of room in the cabin for an airframe that is as long as a Jetbox... The H145 (BK-117D2 and D3) will be better than previous iterations but the D2 with the 4 blades has some pretty severe vibrations and issues that cause airsickness amongst the people in the back. I know, who cares... But again, size IS a thing and this is simply not the machine needed. As far as the UH-1Y, the low cost was due to parts being used were from older airframes, UH-1N bodies, and Cobra tail booms, with the new 4 bladed rotor system and T-700 engines (CT-7). In Europe, they have very short distances to travel, and don't need much endurance, but Canada is HUGE and the distances are enormous as most of you already know. 2 hours+ reserve simply isn't enough. Wether the machine is assembled in Germany, or Texas matters little in the end. Capabilities count.
  16. Absolutely right! There are some quality guys at Topflight with the new generation coming up.
  17. As if I should have written it myself (No I'm not an authority, it just is exactly true!)
  18. Are you ok with Excel? I can give you a 206L sheet, and you'll just have to jiggle around the numbers to make the correct one for the 407?
  19. The DOC for the H145 is about $1450 USD an hour, As mentioned before it has very short legs, at 2 hours, plus reserve, the aux tank is small and adds maybe another 30 to that. it has no space/weight for armour or armament. is super sensitive to ground operations with a Mast Moment indicator that will go off for nothing, and as stated before, all the control cables for the engines go up the center windshield post, and can be taken out by a bird... the UH-72 is a great machine for Liaison, and training, and medevac, but it will not be able to carry two M134 minigus, so it can be top cover for the chinooks, and where the CH-146 struggles to get even 8 troops on, you wouldn't get 2 on a H145 if it was up-armoured and armed... Edited to say, that the cost for an H145 is also staggering, at $13.5 million, you can get an AW139 for that, with double the capacity, and 30 knots faster cruise speed. The H135 cost about 3.5 to $5 million and are only about 1000 to 1500 lbs behind the H145 in max gross weight and carries fuel for 3 hours...
  20. the H145 certainly isn't in the same class as the CH-146, it cruises at roughly the same speed, has fuel for just 2 hours plus reserve, and can't carry near the crew the 146 can with full armament. I agree that there are better airfames than the UH-1 style/age fuselage, but the H145 certainly isn't it! It is extremely vulnerable to birdstrikes from the front, as in both engines quitting bad, with all control cables running up the center windshield post. Also, they are 2 separate weight classes. Look at the UH-72 Lakota, basically a EC145D1, it's sole duty is stateside liaison, Air Ambulance, and training. No weapons, no international ops. Cheers H.
  21. Well a few days anyway, I don't mind a nip of scotch, but certainly I'm able to do my 3 week shift without one. A good bottle last longer that way too...
  22. Blackmac, the 139, the 169, the 135, the 145 etc are all capable of Cat A Flyaway, so not a real problem of flying single engine. All the ones operating in Canada now are H1 capable to helipads I believe, so good for us I guess. In the US they have gone away from Single engine IFR. but they still do single engine night VFR and NVG, which I find quite risky. The only ones operating single engine VFR at night in Canada are police operations and OMNR. every other operator are Night VFR twins, as the minimum requirement is IFR capability to carry pax. In the US, the major operators all use A109/EC135/145/S76/MD900/902/BK117 and AS365, with more newer modern types most prevalent. They still most run single pilot IFR, but only in machines with good autopilot systems. The smaller operators and some bigger ones run AS350 and Bell 407 but night VFR/NVG only. Most IFR except inadvertent, is done to recover back to an airport or a hospital. Here In Canada we don't really do much IFR other than training, as the rewards aren't big, and the risks are high. Cheers H.
  23. As far as my limited experience on google searches, everything stopped dead (at least in the public eye) after the Vertical mag article. The concept seemed interesting and should have been ideal to compete with "the big two (CAE and Flight Safety International)," But they'd basically have to get the operators of both those advanced machines to dedicate all their training there. As far as the VFR sim goes, a great concept, but unsure if there is market enough to do it like that? Most companies seem to do their training inhouse? H.
  24. Most accidents in EMS in the states are night VFR machines, 407, 350, with the occasional twin. no more single engine IFR in unstabilized aircraft. But I agree the statistics speak for themselves. Single Pilot IFR, whilst seemingly harsh, I don't find too intimidating in an aircraft outfitted for it. Heck the guys are doing it in Cessna 208's, and PC12s, no problem. Until there are problems...
  • Create New...