AVCANADA

It is currently Thu Oct 19, 2017 7:34 am

All times are UTC-07:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 32 posts ]  Go to page 1 2 Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Contrail Requirements
PostPosted: Wed Jan 07, 2009 7:03 pm 
Offline
Rank Moderator
Rank Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 11:38 am
Posts: 4614
Location: Now where's the starter button on this thing???
ImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImage


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 9:27 pm 
Offline
Rank 5
Rank 5

Joined: Sat Jan 13, 2007 4:10 pm
Posts: 354
Very straight forward.

Thanks for posting, I've heard many people ask over the years and the answer I've always heard was.."its complicated"
good to shed some light on it.

It would be interesting to find out how many people outside of the patch would not be qualified to do the job they already have.


_________________
The mouth is the anus of the mind.


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2009 2:38 pm 
Offline
Rank 1
Rank 1

Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2005 2:53 pm
Posts: 30
Are the contrail requirements for PIC on Large Turbo Prop about the same as the Large Jet requirements?


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Jun 22, 2009 10:49 am 
Offline
Rank 2
Rank 2

Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 10:21 am
Posts: 78
Location: uh, dunno
Wow a deep undercover agent on the inside of contrails. cool! How is the weather in Moscow this time of year?


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2009 9:48 pm 
Offline
Rank 11
Rank 11
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 8:10 am
Posts: 3155
Location: The Sandbox
What are these requirements for? Who made them?

_________________
“If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. If it stops moving, subsidize it.”
-President Ronald Reagan


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:39 am 
Offline
Rank Moderator
Rank Moderator

Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 5:21 pm
Posts: 5312
Location: Vancouver
Panama, when the Calgary corporate flight departments started getting shut down, there was a period of time during which charters were handed out to anyone and everyone with no thought to the safety of the operators. About the time the decision makers at the oil companies were starting to think this was a mistake, a certain corporate pilot saw a business opportunity, created contrails requirements, and sold the oil companies on it as a method of risk management.

So if you want to provide charters to the oil companies, you need to meet contrails requirements. On the pilot side this means meeting the matrix above, or getting a pass on them from the guy who writes it.

In my opinion it is more of a box checking exercise than actual risk management, but the oil companies seem to like it as it has been very successful.



Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Aug 10, 2009 12:26 pm 
Offline
Rank 11
Rank 11
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 8:10 am
Posts: 3155
Location: The Sandbox
Thanks, Ahramin, for the superb explanation!

_________________
“If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. If it stops moving, subsidize it.”
-President Ronald Reagan


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Sep 23, 2009 6:06 pm 
Offline
Rank 4
Rank 4

Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 8:15 am
Posts: 239
Location: Near YOW
Well they must not like all the low time hornet guys flying around over there heads then! Non of us could even get a job I don't think with the hours they want, and I am one of the higher time guys. Guess that limits getting a job there even though I flew over the patch all the time and regularly did approaches in Fort Mac.


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 11:19 am 
Offline
Rank Moderator
Rank Moderator

Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 5:21 pm
Posts: 5312
Location: Vancouver
Skyhunter, while it is at times pretty obvious that military pilots have a fraction of the hours that their civilian counterparts have, keep in mind that the quality and quantity of training is far in excess of any civilian operation, airlines included. You just could not put someone with civilian training and military hours in charge of an airplane and have a safe operation.

As far as contrails goes, arbitrarily removing North Caribou may be the mistake that becomes his undoing.



Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Oct 17, 2009 1:09 pm 
Offline
Rank Moderator
Rank Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 9:29 am
Posts: 3592
Location: The Frozen North
Contrail fading away seems unlikely.

The company's founder wasn't a generic corporate pilot. He was a pilot for one of the major oil companies. When he was with them, he headed up their safety & loss reduction program, which was the 80's precursor to SMS. While the makeup of all of these corporations may have changed in the last 30 years, people forget that this is a relationship-based business in a lot of ways. There are people floating around the south end of YYC and likely in the north end of YYZ who seemingly move every five or six years from one hangar to the next,with an office similar to their previous one. Contrail has a warm relationship with the oil companies. They provide an analysis of the safety culture of a company and say, "Here you are", in a fait accompli. Large oil companies, and large government organizations can afford the time and money to perform a detailed audit of charter companies. The vast majority of smaller companies cannot.

Of the audits most companies at the south end of YYC undergo, Contrail is no more or less arduous than most. All of them are more in-depth than the recently dis-continued TC audits. with less bluster, and more direct penalties. TC might have said to many companies: "Address thee discrepancies in 30 days or face out wrath!" (and many have). Oil companies simply say, address these in your own good time, and let us know when you are ready for us to re-visit your operation, and we will at that time re-consider adding you to our list of approved companies. In the meantime of course, the company is not working for that auditor's clients.

The early framework for Contrail's requirements echoed the requirements for Shell, but were less restrictive than Esso. Simulation was a comparatively recent change. In contrast with earlier Esso requirements, Contrail's are fairly benign. In the early 90's only 4 pilots from any one company for instance were permitted to fly for Esso. An accident or incident scratched the company for a year, and often for the pilot, an accident scratched them forever.

As corporate flight departments fall increasingly under the sphere of influence of the larger generic safety programs, I would look to see pilot requirements ratcheted up, not down. I recently noted an audit for a different client group, where the team of auditors spent a month auditing our training and checkrides, attended the groundschools, Flight training, sim training, & checkrides, and interviewed every pilot who was slated to work for them. Companies who have something to hide live in fear of audits like that.

Since TC has had their hands tied by their own minister, I see companies like Contrail as a genuine positive.

JC



Top
   
PostPosted: Thu Mar 04, 2010 1:28 pm 
Offline
Rank 6
Rank 6

Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 6:48 am
Posts: 468
Location: Where the job is!
About a year ago Sky's The Limit kindly set up this thread. It has been very useful. Several people have asked about the requirements and it is handy to be able to refer them to this thread.

Category "E" Pilot-In-Command is missing. This is for Large Prop > 5,700 kgs, > 19 pax (airline) and covers aircraft such as the ATR42 and DHC8. I noticed a poster above asked about this.

Is there anyone with a copy of Category "E" PIC who is able to post it on here? I tried a Google search for it but it came up blank.



Top
   
PostPosted: Fri Mar 05, 2010 11:28 pm 
Offline
Rank 3
Rank 3
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 22, 2005 11:02 am
Posts: 140
Attachment:
CategoryE.JPG
CategoryE.JPG [ 101.36 KiB | Viewed 36771 times ]



Top
   
PostPosted: Fri Mar 26, 2010 12:57 pm 
Offline
Rank 6
Rank 6

Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 6:48 am
Posts: 468
Location: Where the job is!
FPOKA, thanks for posting Category E.

All of the requirements above refer to fixed wing aircraft. Are there Contrails or similar minimum requirements for helicopters used by the oil and gas companies in Alberta and the mining companies in Saskatchewan?



Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 9:29 pm 
Offline
Rank 3
Rank 3
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 22, 2005 11:02 am
Posts: 140
...


Attachments:
HelicoptersCA.JPG
HelicoptersCA.JPG [ 131.52 KiB | Viewed 36555 times ]
Top
   
PostPosted: Thu Aug 19, 2010 4:16 pm 
Offline
Rank 11
Rank 11
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:58 am
Posts: 3240
Regarding the Shell qualifications can anyone shed some light on what the (4) beside the Multi Engine Command denotes?


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Aug 31, 2010 12:22 am 
Offline
Rank 3
Rank 3
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 22, 2005 11:02 am
Posts: 140
Notes:
1. Maximum Certified Take-off Mass (CTOM).
2. Instrument ratings are required to be tested at periods not exceeding 13 months. [Instrument base checks should be at 6 monthly intervals].
3. Requirement for Instrument Rating in all cases, with proven and annual current instrument competence (including Unusual Attitudes and Inadvertent IFR recovery training) required.
4 These Hours to be fully on aeroplanes. Up to 10% may be achieved in a flight simulator approved for the purpose by the regulatory authority
5. It is unlikely that a co-pilot will be required.
6. Flight Engineer and Navigator experience requirements are applicable to all Former Soviet Union (FSU) aircraft when flown in or outside the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS).
Section



Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Oct 19, 2010 9:52 am 
Offline
Rank 0
Rank 0

Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2010 12:37 am
Posts: 9
Very informative. I had no clue what a contrail was. Thanks a lot.


Top
   
PostPosted: Fri Oct 22, 2010 12:55 pm 
Offline
Rank 0
Rank 0

Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2010 12:37 am
Posts: 9
FlyingPat wrote:
Very informative. I had no clue what a contrail was. Thanks a lot.

I have a question with regards to Beech 1900D: MTOW is 17120 lbs, and is equal or less than 19 PAX, so it falls under category "D".
For a SIC, Category D, it requires 500 hrs TT, right?
Sunwest minimums for an FO on Beech 1900 are 1500TT, 200 PIC, and 300 Multi. I guess it's just them asking for higher minimums than Contrail? :?: If anyone is familiar with Sunwest, please let me know. This company really looks like a good company to work for, I'd really like to join their team :) I'm asking since I have 437 hrs on B1900D, but a TT of 840.



Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Oct 25, 2010 7:21 pm 
Offline
Rank 3
Rank 3
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 22, 2005 11:02 am
Posts: 140
I would imagine a company like Sunwest would be able to fill that position internally.

If you are looking for a direct entry flying job in YYC you'd have to at least meet the Shell Large aircraft requirements of 1000TT and 150MPIC. They are listed fully above. Also if you don't have Simulator experience you'd have to be retrained and your type rating is worthless. As all of the companies that use the above standards require sim training where one exists. Shell uses/subscribes/created the OGP standards. OGP guidelines are basically identical to the above Shell requirements.

I am going to tell it to you straight. I don't think your 1900 rating gives you any advantage in YYC. If you have a job flying a 1900D right now keep it until you get an upgrade.

If you don't... Your resume is a huge red flag to me. How did you get a 1900D job with less than 500 hours and why don't you have that job anymore?

If you're a good dude and a loyal employee you're going to have to prove it on the ramp to get a flying position. Even then I think you're making a bad move.

I don't recommend flying out of Calgary if you don't have any command time. Cariboo and Sunwest are great companies but they are horrible if you want to be anything either than an FO for the next 5 years. You'll be an FO for at least three to four years longer than if you go somewhere else. Calgary is becoming a captains town. Most FO's have to leave Calgary to get upgrades.

The requirements will only continue to go up. I can see Contrail getting trumped by OGP in the next 5 to 10 years.

There are other companies in this country that don't have client standards find them and go there. Once you meet the above standards then apply to a Calgary Oil and gas charter company.

FPOKA



Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Jun 06, 2011 1:10 pm 
Offline
Rank 2
Rank 2

Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 8:22 pm
Posts: 88
Location: hotel
ya


Last edited by Darkhorse on Mon Jun 27, 2011 5:08 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Jun 06, 2011 1:18 pm 
Offline
Rank 2
Rank 2

Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 8:22 pm
Posts: 88
Location: hotel
ya


Top
   
PostPosted: Fri May 04, 2012 9:55 pm 
Offline
Rank 7
Rank 7

Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 4:54 pm
Posts: 584
.


Last edited by Krimson on Wed Jul 02, 2014 8:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
   
PostPosted: Sat May 05, 2012 9:25 am 
Offline
Rank 7
Rank 7
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2012 9:35 pm
Posts: 620
I'm curious what makes the Contrails requirements for a King Air 200 to be a "ridiculous system" in your opinion?

The clients served by Contrails ... (or any other aviation consultant) have a right to set whatever standards they wish to establish sufficient confidence in the people that are flying their staff around. Bearing in mind that the "value" of a fatality of a staff member sits at roughly 5 million dollars per event, what's wildly excessive about a business to be looking for someone with a minimum experience level of 2,500 TT, 1,000 PIC, 750 ME TT, and 650 ME TT? To get that low, all they need is to have attended a proper sim training program. For a 200 with Proline 21 avionics, that's sure not excessive.

Does it make it tough on somebody joining an organization as an FO with minimal experience, yep ... likely it does.

This whole concept of a client specifying a minimum experience level sure isn't anything new ... when I worked in Ontario decades ago, Bell Telephone had some pretty high experience requirements to fly their technicians and engineers around the province. Lots of our staff didn't meet the requirements, some did. Same thing with the Ont Govt's "Lands and Forests" department that would be flown around in a 185 or 206 doing game counts. When the Health Dept was specifying what experience crew members must have to obtain certification to fly medevacs, they were pretty high too.

Or is this case where anyone expecting a pilot to have anything more than a licence and a PPC, and a charter company have an AOC hanging on the wall is unrealistically shooting for the moon?



Top
   
PostPosted: Sat May 05, 2012 11:01 am 
Offline
Rank 7
Rank 7

Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 4:54 pm
Posts: 584
.


Last edited by Krimson on Wed Jul 02, 2014 8:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
   
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2012 2:58 pm 
Offline
Rank 7
Rank 7
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2012 9:35 pm
Posts: 620
Thanks Krimson ...

Many other things go on behind the scenes in addition to specifying minimum pilot hours before a consultant advises a client that most likely there is a manageable level of reduced risk of their staff flying with "Al's Aviation," and with Krimson as one of the accepted pilots.

For example, there will generally be a company audit to see how well they maintain records, interviews with key personnel, and get a feeling for their general corporate culture. There will also be an on-going process of monitoring CADORS, do a follow up service with operators based on observations passed by the passengers about things they think may have not gone well on a flight, or would like some explanations for questions which may not have been answered by the pilot at the time because the answer has the aroma of BS or general inconsistency.

The simple fact is that responsible corporations look closely into the activities of their supporting companies at the very least because of being subjected to vicarious liability due to lack of due diligence, or by a genuine concern for the welfare, safety, and comfort of their employees on their way to and from work. You may not be aware of a mining accident in Nova Scotia now called "The Westray Mine Disaster." The hearings, court cases, and sentences which were levied against supervisory staff following the deaths of several their employees after having been informed of safety problems changed the conduct of executives who have any education in the ramifications associated with taking on those positions. Some are still many people blissfully unaware that by accepting the position of Chief Pilot, Ops Mgr, or Accountable Executive and not taking action to run a safe operation in the face of known issues has any "big picture" downside.

If that process of performing due diligence, conducting Risk Analysis and mitigation limits the advancement of someone from the FO position to Captain, its of no concern to those clients, and in fact may be viewed as a good thing.

So back to your original observation, are the minimums arbitrary? Perhaps, but those minimums are based on the cumulative experience of a group of aviation personnel with many decades of experience in the business that have seen and heard a lot.



Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 32 posts ]  Go to page 1 2 Next

All times are UTC-07:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: BE82 and 32 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
[ GZIP: Off ]

For questions/comments please send them to
avcanada@gmail.com


AvCanada Topsites List
AVIATION TOP 100 - www.avitop.com Avitop.com

While the administrators and moderators of this forum will attempt to remove or edit any generally objectionable material as quickly as possible, it is impossible to review every message. If you feel a topic or post is inappropriate email us at avcanada@gmail.com .  By reading these forums you acknowledge that all posts made to these forums express the views and opinions of the author and not the administrators, moderators or webmaster (except for posts by these people) and hence will not be held liable. This website is not responsible or liable in any way for any false or misleading messages or job ads placed at our site. 

Use AvCanada's information at your own risk!

We reserve the right to remove any messages that we deem unacceptable.
When you post a message, your IP is logged and may be provided to concerned parties where unethical or illegal behavior is apparent. All rights reserved.