How To Get Rid Of Contrail?

[canook pilot]

We didn't fail the inspection because we didn't meet the requirements, we failed because they wanted us to do something that the DOM said that it was wrong and they got into a pissing game and we lost. :angry:

[cap]

Hurler -----Blackmac is exactly correct. You can't break MoT on the "bad side", but you can sure as **** break those rules on the "good side". In otherwards, if some client wishes to make the supplier of services EXCEED MoT rules, you'll not hear a peep from MoT....and they may even be in silent agreement with those conditions. Break then on the "bad side" and MoT will see you in court. There is NOTHING that Contrail is proposing in their regulations that does not meet or exceed MoT regulations. They have proposed some new ones, but no part of them breaks an MoT rule and therefore we do not have them as an ally in this because they have nothinbg to enforce. Meet the MoT rules on an approach and in doing so break the clieent's and Contrail's rules and you've possibnle lost the contract with that client. MoT isn't going to go after the client or Contrail if the rules they established ar even stricter than MoT's. Thei9r answer will be something like, "you've not broken any of our rules and so that fight is between you and your client, so we're not involved in any way".

 

It's all a "moot point" anyway because all parts of the aviation services of three large gas companies will come to a stop anyway within the first two weeks of '06 because of those rules they have signed-onto. We'll see how popular Contrail is THEN and how quickly THE CLIENT gets pissed-off with loosing money because he can't service his gas fields like before.

[hurler]

Cap

 

You have a good point about profits driving the matter, perhaps it is a Moot point as you have suggested.

 

I am very surprised that downwash hasn't weighed in on the matter.

 

H

[ray]

Back to the original topic, you're not going to get rid of Contrail.

 

Companies that use helicopters on a regular basis but know nothing about the industry hire an independant person to tell them what to look for, and to check various companies to see if it's safe for their employees to fly with that operator.

 

There was a requirement that needed to be filled to do this, and Contrail came about. Get rid of him, (not that you can), and someone else will fill that need.

 

Most of what he comes up with are not ideas he pulled out of the sky. He talks to guys in the field about safety concerns, what they would like to see to make their jobs 'better', and presents these ideas to the companies that hire him.

 

Presenting these ideas does not make it law.

 

Having dealt with BVH many times in the past, I do not find him to be an unreasonable person. He has his job to do, we have ours, and we have always managed to meet in the middle.

[T-rex]

Hurler,

 

Maybe before you speak you should look at who the board members work for and what they do!!!

I know for a fact that two of them directly work directly with the oil and gas industry, and no they are not the "big" players in the industry!! They have made a strong presence with the operations that they operate.

 

Whinning will get you no where, wait,....... maybe one day you may get the chance to work with Shell, BP, or Exxon.....now you will see RULES!

 

Get off this topic, what a bore...and a waste of time!!!!

[Skids Up]

You forgot one selection on the poll.

 

Play by their rules until they can't afford it anymore. Never break weather mins with their people ON BOARD, never break TC rules when you are BY YOURSELF!

 

We all know it won't work, and after they don't get out a few times, and after their crews are left in the bush (make sure that they have proper equipment before you take them out) a time or two, the mesage becomes clear.

 

Don't reinvent the wheel, just keep it on the road they provide...

 

And take care of your other customers to the best of your ability...

[cap]

Skids Up -------EXACTLY and well put! That is EXACTLY what both my company AND three of their clients have stated...........and NOT ONE of their field personnel or their Managers were interviewed by Contrail about ANYTHING........ nor had any of them ever heard of Contrail before this episode......nor was he present at ANYTIME in their fields to even use the bathroom.

 

I am paid to service my customer on behalf of my company to the best of my abilities. If that customer wishes to operate by new rules that will dig him a big hole in the process and not listen to his Managers and people in the field.......... then allow me to be of service in driving that point home also.........and it most surely will be.......NO MATTER how reasonable and well-intentioned Mr. Humbeck wishes to be. I've personally seen these types come and go before and this is NOT the first time I have encountered them. Those that have done their "due diligence" have been rewarded with success and those who haven't have met with abject failure. The vast majority of the Mr. Humbecks have not and have since left the scene. If Mr. Humbeck believes that a 500' minmum height is safe for IFR traffic and anything below that is not........well I think he's in for a bag full of arguments from a whole bunch of people in the F/W and R/W world that operate daily, weekly, monthly and yearly at Decisions Heights that are lower than that goig into all sorts of locales......and have done so for decades. All I can attest to is that Mr. Humbeck DID NOT do his "due diligence", nor did anyone else representing him in my corner of northestern BC. He will either drop those conditions altogether for us, curtail them, modify them or operations in those gas fields will come to a grinding halt, both on the ground and in the air.

[hurler]

Cap

 

I am begining to see the error of my ways in assuming that Contrail was going to be a persistant problem, you are right! I have also seen these types come and go.

 

Do you suppose things would be different if it where one of our own who was advocating to improve safety standards? It is very difficult to accept new rules legal or not, when its comming form somebody who has less knowledge or operational experience that ones self. I think what is clear is that it has been the industry its self over decades that has been the inovator, or the various operators.

 

You may take off from a site with an acceptable cieling, but on the way home conditions drop and the pilot must go IFR ( I follow river- road). So is the pilot in violation of contrail rules? It's happened to me many times, when it gets to bad setting it down is often the only thing that can be done and wait it out. I wonder if the cieling requirement applies to weather forcasts and probable deteriorating conditions.?

 

I still think that what is being proposed is rediculous, and I would have an easier time accepting rules if they where comming from somebody with some credibility.

 

 

Moot point that will self terminate as you have suggested.

 

Hurler

[Blackmac]

Hurler:

 

Caps a good guy (you owe me one), your probably a good guy and everybody on this site are good guys.

 

As individuals we can accomplish very little, but as an association we can accomplish a helluva lot.

 

As an association you could form safety committee's from very experienced people and have a positive role in the betterment of life as a whole.

 

I know for a fact that TC safety would rather deal with an association on safety matters, than individuals.

 

An association speaks for the industry it represents as a whole, majority rules.

 

Who do you think Contrail represents????????, $$$$$$$, for him.

 

Bull #### prevails.

 

 

Cheers, Don

[cap]

Blackmac --------thank you for the complement, but you can forget about the "buy me ONE" routine. I was born at night, but not last night. I've worked with too many of your ex-RCN buddies over the eons and NONE of them EVER went for just ONE. I know that because I stock more than ONE in my house and I also fell into my bed too many times at 2AM in the morning after having just ONE with them over those same eons. Better try another "line".

 

Hurler ----- to answer your question, a good idea is a good idea, whether is comes from someone we consider "one of our own" or comes from someone on the "outside". This is a bad idea whether it comes from "within" or "outside". The beauty of this all is that by obeying religously the rules that are about to be enacted, the "System" will gradually "seize-up" and I'll give it until July of '06 at the extreme latest. Right now, the potential problems will simmer on the back burner because the recent winter roads have negated the importance of R/W. That changes about the end of March and then the pot gets put onto the front burner with the temp set on "High". Then the "wringing of the hands" takes place when a compressor on one of the fields goes down and they can't get at it to service it. At that point the cash register starts "cha-ching, cha-ching, cha-ching", the share prices start falling in the NYSE and the TSX and then they'll find out the price of this so-called "New Standards of Safety Program" that they've signed-onto. That "price" will run about $250,000/day for EACH compressor that "goes down" and can't be jumped on right away. My field has 64 of them and some go down 2-3 times a day........ergo, that's why me and others are there. Remember now, that first you have to get out there and find out what the problem is AND THEN you have to get the parts out there to correct the problem and all the gear to install that part. The 2-3 mechanics who arrive can touch NOTHING until an Operator signs a permit for them to do so. They also can't use a quad, etc to get there nor any other means of transportation and that mileage can be 35-40 miles many times.

 

It will be "interesting" to witness how they dig themselves out of THIS one. Perhaps at that time, Contrail can be of some further service in providing advice and answers on this problem.