Kirsten Stevens

[Blackmac]

For your info:

 

This was taken from AVCanada web page and as it relates to SMS, it will have an effect on every body in the "Air Taxi" which includes "Helicopter Industry"

 

None of the newspapers in Canada are doing any investigative reporting on TCCA or their in- ability to carry out any reasonable function related to "Air Taxi" operators.

 

This function will be debated as indicated in Parliament, shortly.

 

Their has been nothing reported on this web page to date, and I am wondering WHY??

 

This is very important to this industry "helicopters" as to fixed wing. If you are not aware, the present SMS will become a regulation and gives the "Owners Club" the right to regulate themselves and you.

 

PS: Truth be told the CBAA self inspecting "SMS" is a FARCE and is also a not a commercial operation. The original TC Audit is a take-off of ISO 9000 and was improved upon, "check list"over the years from the ORIGINAL RECOMMENDATION I MADE IN 1993.

 

 

Quote:

Notice of Motion

October 6, 2009

 

Dennis Bevington

Member of Parliament for Western Arctic

 

"That the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities engage in a study of Transport Canada’s enforcement of air safety regulations and implementation of safety management systems for the aviation industry, and report the results of the study to the House of Commons."

 

 

This motion is expected to be debated on October 19th. If the motion passes, it will mean a chance for witnesses to make public presentations before the committee, including concerns and recommendations.

 

Here is the current list of members for the Committee.

 

Quote:

Chair: Mervin C. Tweed

Vice-Chairs: Mario Laframboise, Joseph Volpe

Members: Dennis Bevington, Lois Brown, Sukh Dhaliwal, Roger Gaudet, Candice Hoeppner, Brian Jean, Gerard Kennedy, Colin Mayes, Jeffrey David Watson

Links to member pages (and emails) here

 

PLEASE! Let the Committee members know how you feel prior to the October 19th debate. Write to the press, and ask them to cover the story.

 

This is your chance to make a difference!

 

 

 

_________________

Stay safe.

(DHC2)Widow

 

SafeSkies.ca

Dhc2widow.ca

QuestforJustice.ca

 

 

TIME TO BE HEARD GUYS/GALS OR SUFFER THE CONSEQUENCES.

 

 

Cheers, Don

 

[Grasshopper]

Don, I've disagreed with many of the things you've said and positions you've taken on these forums over the years and, though I've been pretty quiet until recently, I've got to say that I believe you're further 'off the wall' than you've ever been with your apparent stance about SMS, as reflected in this and other posts.

 

Sadly typical of you is your allusion to an "Owners Club" and a call to be heard or "suffer the consequences." Whether through design or ignorance, I find your usual attitude more reprehensible on this issue than any other.

 

God knows the safety record of the helicopter operating industry has been nothing to be proud of for many years. Like others, I've racked my brain and 'picked' those of others in an attempt to come up with some meaningful measures to truly bring enhanced safety to our industry.

 

Transport Canada has had far less success than anyone hoped for. largely because they are increasingly less able to bring the necessary numbers of qualified people to the task. Their initiative, however, to bring the benefits, proven around the world, of safety management systems to our industry has the potential to be the greatest advance the industry will ever experience, including the turbine engine.

 

That said, none of the naysayers such as yourself bring anything positive or constructive to the equation, preferring instead to play 'dog in the manger' or 'Chicken Little.' What a shame such a wealth of experience and knowledge as your own has become so jaded and negative it can only bring negativity to such important attempts at progress and modernization.

 

Hopefully, more open minds will be the determinants of these matters although, in the hands of politicians the worst can, and most often does, happen. Should this be the case, and more people are ultimately killed, injured, and rendered jobless as a result, I hope your smug negativity will bring you some kind of ethereal satisfaction.

 

P.S. I don't particularly choose to 'hide behind' anonymity and, if you don't know who I am, but want to, just say so.

[chopper_guy]

Don, I've disagreed with many of the things you've said and positions you've taken on these forums over the years and, though I've been pretty quiet until recently, I've got to say that I believe you're further 'off the wall' than you've ever been with your apparent stance about SMS, as reflected in this and other posts.

 

Sadly typical of you is your allusion to an "Owners Club" and a call to be heard or "suffer the consequences." Whether through design or ignorance, I find your usual attitude more reprehensible on this issue than any other.

 

God knows the safety record of the helicopter operating industry has been nothing to be proud of for many years. Like others, I've racked my brain and 'picked' those of others in an attempt to come up with some meaningful measures to truly bring enhanced safety to our industry.

 

Transport Canada has had far less success than anyone hoped for. largely because they are increasingly less able to bring the necessary numbers of qualified people to the task. Their initiative, however, to bring the benefits, proven around the world, of safety management systems to our industry has the potential to be the greatest advance the industry will ever experience, including the turbine engine.

 

That said, none of the naysayers such as yourself bring anything positive or constructive to the equation, preferring instead to play 'dog in the manger' or 'Chicken Little.' What a shame such a wealth of experience and knowledge as your own has become so jaded and negative it can only bring negativity to such important attempts at progress and modernization.

 

Hopefully, more open minds will be the determinants of these matters although, in the hands of politicians the worst can, and most often does, happen. Should this be the case, and more people are ultimately killed, injured, and rendered jobless as a result, I hope your smug negativity will bring you some kind of ethereal satisfaction.

 

P.S. I don't particularly choose to 'hide behind' anonymity and, if you don't know who I am, but want to, just say so.

The SMS system is probably an advance as far as safety systems go, however, it must also involve very close Transport Canada oversight, and what is needed is more effective TC oversight, not less. Anyone who thinks that the owners of the companies can be trusted to maintain safety standards in difficult times is a Pollyanna living in a fools paradise. Human beings just don't operate that way. Good operators will keep up standards without anyone looking over their shoulders but we all know that there are some operators that are pretty sketchy now. Without anyone checking up on them there will be people dying in accidents. This move by TC has nothing to do with safety but with cutting costs. TC and the government should be ashamed that they have lost the vision of where their duty really lies and are letting expediency control policy.

[Grasshopper]

The SMS system is probably an advance as far as safety systems go, however, it must also involve very close Transport Canada oversight, and what is needed is more effective TC oversight, not less. Anyone who thinks that the owners of the companies can be trusted to maintain safety standards in difficult times is a Pollyanna living in a fools paradise. Human beings just don't operate that way. Good operators will keep up standards without anyone looking over their shoulders but we all know that there are some operators that are pretty sketchy now. Without anyone checking up on them there will be people dying in accidents. This move by TC has nothing to do with safety but with cutting costs. TC and the government should be ashamed that they have lost the vision of where their duty really lies and are letting expediency control policy.

 

 

Haven't you folks realized that it's the market that's going to drive SMS, not TC? TC are merely providing the framework to give operators wanting to play with serious customers (on a playing field of their specifications) the tools to play by the client's rules. TC are NEVER going to have the manpower needed to fully police the industry, or shipping or rail for that matter. And if you don't think the serious segment of the market, either corporately or through their industry associations, aren't going to be able to effectively police the operators, you better shake your heads. And, yes, there'll still be 'nickle & dimers' who'll do it on the cheap and play with lives and property, but maybe TC (ably supported by the insurance underwriters) WILL have enough resources to police them, given that the marketplace will be policing the responsible operators and not even considering the 'cheapos.'

[drkrider]

Well written Grasshopper.

 

I just got back from a QA course that was being taught by the guys who are teaching Transport how to do the next round of PVI audits. I went down there all ready supporting the concept of the SMS initiative but not really sure as to how to build the system, and have an effective QA program in a small company where we can't afford another employee solely for QA.

 

After taking the course I have the tools to actually setup a proper Quality Assurance Program rather then just another Quality Control program like we've had in the maintenance side of the industry for years. Yes there is a difference, grab a dictionary and look it up.

 

Customers are demanding more accountability from our industry through their own safety programs. The operators who actually use the principles of SMS whether they call it their SMS System or Quality Assurance Program will move forward and become successful while those who don't will fail because very few customers will use them.

 

Transport is forcing us as an industry to become better business people. Most companies are all ready doing 90% of what's required but don't have the systems in place to quantify what they are doing and measure whether what they are doing is effective. Ultimately we are all in the business to make money and the best way to make sure we do that is to continually improve how we do business.

 

Why is their so much opposition to this?

 

Is profit really such a bad thing?

 

DrkRider

 

 

[chopper_guy]

Why is there so much opposition to this?

Is profit really such a bad thing?

These last 2 sentences are at the crux of the problem. Why is their so much opposition to this?

Because SMS without TC oversight is contrary to human nature. Trust but follow up. Without follow-up, trust will eventually be betrayed. Maybe the clients and their aviation safety consultants will keep their helicopter operators on the straight and narrow but there are a lot of operators and clients that don't require that type of non governmental oversight and their passengers will be flown without that protection.

Is profit really such a bad thing? This, of course, is why honest safety oversight is required. The temptation to cut corners will be too much for the chizzle operators to resist.

[drkrider]

TC will still be coming in and auditing your company, if any thing it will be a bigger deal. They will be using a zero based sampling method which means they have to audit a certain number of your records, the sample is based on the number of records you have in a particular area i.e. pilot files. If you have 1 error in the sample you have a non-compliance. The theory being that if there's 1 error there's more.

 

How your records are kept and maintained is up to you, but it has to be documented if you say your going to do something a certain way, you better do it that way or again it's a non-compliance.

 

Non-compliance means enforcement will be involved and most likely your certificate will be suspended or canceled until you fix the problems.

 

Here's the link to the staff instruction

http://www.tc.gc.ca/civilaviation/manageme...sur/sur-001.htm

 

But obviously you don't think that losing your certificates would be motivation enough to keep operators on the up and up.

 

Man you have a poor out look on life.

 

DR

[Critic]

If everything is AOK with the way TC is implementing SMS, then why are so many current and "retired" TC staff speaking out against the methodology? Why do so many industry experts disagree? Have you read the Moshansky/Van Dyke paper? Have they got it all wrong?

[Stab Bar]

Well written Grasshopper.

I just got back from a QA course that was being taught by the guys who are teaching Transport how to do the next round of PVI audits. I went down there all ready supporting the concept of the SMS initiative but not really sure as to how to build the system, and have an effective QA program in a small company where we can't afford another employee solely for QA.

After taking the course I have the tools to actually setup a proper Quality Assurance Program rather then just another Quality Control program like we've had in the maintenance side of the industry for years. Yes there is a difference, grab a dictionary and look it up.

Customers are demanding more accountability from our industry through their own safety programs. The operators who actually use the principles of SMS whether they call it their SMS System or Quality Assurance Program will move forward and become successful while those who don't will fail because very few customers will use them.

Transport is forcing us as an industry to become better business people. Most companies are all ready doing 90% of what's required but don't have the systems in place to quantify what they are doing and measure whether what they are doing is effective. Ultimately we are all in the business to make money and the best way to make sure we do that is to continually improve how we do business.

Why is their so much opposition to this?

Is profit really such a bad thing?

DrkRider

Who did you take your course with??

[drkrider]

 

Who did you take your course with??

 

DTI Training consortium http://www.dtiatlanta.com/CanadianCourses.html

 

They have the contract to teach TC inspectors on how to audit Operators. Their main business is teaching Quality Assurance to various industries from NASA and Lockhead Martin on down.

 

Sol and Dennis are excellent instructors they take what could be a very dry subject and make it interesting and show you how to apply it to our industry.

 

The best part is they aren't trying to sell you any thing like most other "SMS Courses". They don't audit and they don't sell canned programs.

 

DR