"Interesting" NY Times Article

That's an interesting one. Thanks for sharing.

I'm curious why they can't account for the hours flown. The article
indicates that they don't have data on past hours flown so they can't
speculate whether or not the increase in accidents has anything to do with
an increased number of hours flown as more companies come into the business.
I'm not sure I buy that. They should have maintenance records on these
birds and they have to do certain routine maintenance proceedures based on
hours flown. Why wouldn't these numbers be available?

The last paragraph said that several operators stated that they "do not"
pressure their pilots to take on high risk missions. I hope I'm wrong but I
have a hard time believing that one too!

Fly Safe,
Steve R.


"The OTHER Kevin in San Diego" skiddz "AT" adelphia "DOT" net wrote in
message ...
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/28/na...er=rssuserland

Interesting indeed.

Up here in Alberta Canada, we have STARS Air Ambulance, operated by
the government ( I presume ). They run a yearly lottery to raise
additional funds, and the lottery always sells out within weeks.

It is highly thought of by the general population and has proven its
worth more times than could be counted.

Based in our two largest cities, Calgary in the South, Edmonton in the
North, they cover a Province whose size is larger than Texas with four
BK-117 twin engine machines.

http://www.stars.ca/what_we_do/fleet.asp

Although there are private air ambulances operating fix wing jets
and turboprops, to the best of my knowledge there are no private
helicopter air ambulances in Alberta, and possibly none in Western
Canada, or all of Canada.

My fellow Canadians can correct me if I am wrong on that.

Well Kevin I don't know if there is a future in the air abulance field
for you...... At a minimun you probably have about 1450 more hours
to go before some of the operators would give you a look.

And getting those 1450 more hours is always the problem.

Interesting to note that the article mentions the looming possibility
of a helicopter pilot shortage.

For anyone interested in helicopters as a flying career the problem
always seems to be the high number or hours required before the
industry will look at you and the lousy pay scale once you have clawed
your way into a seat....... Correct me if I am wrong on those two
points.

Steve R. wrote:
That's an interesting one. Thanks for sharing.

I'm curious why they can't account for the hours flown. The article
indicates that they don't have data on past hours flown so they can't

speculate whether or not the increase in accidents has anything to do
with
an increased number of hours flown as more companies come into the
business.
I'm not sure I buy that. They should have maintenance records on
these
birds and they have to do certain routine maintenance proceedures
based on
hours flown. Why wouldn't these numbers be available?

The last paragraph said that several operators stated that they "do
not"
pressure their pilots to take on high risk missions. I hope I'm
wrong but I
have a hard time believing that one too!

Fly Safe,
Steve R.


"The OTHER Kevin in San Diego" skiddz "AT" adelphia "DOT" net wrote
in
message ...

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/28/na...er=rssuserland

Steve R. wrote:
The last paragraph said that several operators stated that they "do not"
pressure their pilots to take on high risk missions. I hope I'm wrong but I
have a hard time believing that one too!

FWIW, I saw a public affairs guy who works for one of the helo
ambulance operators. One of the points in his presentation is that
the go/no-go decision making process emphasizes risk management. The
pilot in command is not told anything about the patient(s) before
he/she makes their decision. IIRC, anyone in the crew is also free
to refuse the mission. All in all it seemed like a sound work
environment.

Of course, as you say, it would be naive to take that at face value.
After all, anything that warrants an airevac will be a serious life
or death matter, that and nobody wants the reputation of being the
proverbial guy who cancels whenever there is one cloud in the sky a
hundred miles away.