Ppc's And Pcc's

[Blackmac]

GOOD POINTS RandyG; You know the old saying"if it ain't broke don't fix", well in my book it has been broke for years on the enforcement side. I was involved with a third party for years inspecting some canadian operators. Should TC elect to go that way and have the inspection tied to your OPS certificate, it would work. The cost becomes an operating expense and can be written off, the same as any other operating expense.

TC has been in the enforcement bussiness for years and can't even enforce some of there own people.

TC should make rules and regs as required for and by the industry. With there limited enfocement people they would only have to see that the third party is carrying out there inpections.

Living by the rules of your operators manual and mm starts from the top of the company and with the proper inspection procedures evreybody in the company becomes involved. So in theory every employee in the company knows what position the company takes on inspection and safety matters and can make up there own mind if they should be working for said company.

The condition of the helicopters, the attitude of pilots and engineers on the job are the selling factors to the customer, not the rate per hour or the expertise of the marketing manager overselling the machine.

IMHO

Don McDougall

 

[Charles W.]

How did you become so wise Blackmac?

Chas W.

 

[Blackmac]

Reverend: Remember the old joke?

Question: Do you know Martin.

Reply: Martin who?

Martin Up.

I am a firm beleiver that if you live long enough you eventually "Martin UP".

Other than having been around for awhile, I have no excuse.

Good of you to notice and I do beleive you suffer from the same malady.

Cheers Buddy

 

[bleed air]

The preamble to the Vortex questionnaire leads one to wonder why TC is even asking the question as to what the “potential impact of discontinuing the…(PPC)†would be.

Would TC rather not be in the PPC business? If not, why not?

Question #5 seems to indicate a possible answer. The question asks who should be accountable? Reading between the lines, I think choice "b" reads “the Chief Pilot†because under the PCC system that’s whose signature will be on the document certifying competency.

Suppose that a “certified competent†pilot has an accident. We all know that it happens easily enough and to the best of us. Now imagine a judge (or coroner) asking “Who certified this pilot as being competent?†Right away all fingers point to the chief pilot.

Will the operator go to bat for the CP? Remember, it's the CP's signature on the certification, not the operator's (unless owner/operator/CP are all one and the same).

Is there such a thing as insurance for chief pilots who would become liable in the above mentioned scenario? TC would no longer have any liability exposure, would they?(Convenient, eh?)

Are there any Freelance ACP’s out there? Do you guys carry some kind of insurance for this kind of thing? How about company check pilots under the present ACP system?

Most operators I know feel that the PPC is a pain in the a$$ and an extra expense. I’m sure they’d love to see it go away provided that the alternative does not cost them any more (time or money,…same thing?).

Do all you Chief Pilot's out there really want the TC PPC to disappear?

 

[T-rex]

The PCC is a logical choice! Company's can train their people for their particular business! The PPC is a Basic flight test, around 0.6 Hr long. PCC is about an hour long and can have any choice of air/ground exercices to the CP's liking. Company's can customize the ride for the business! As for the signature at the Bottom, Your damned if you do, Damned if you don't! TC is still able to conduct any ride they feel like on the monthly list you supply to them! There are some very professional inspector's out there that know their business, I respect that and respect the knowledge they pass forward!

 

[recirqe]

does emergency training reduce accidents? Seems to me most accidents occur while doing a normal part of the job wheather its confined areas (blade strikes )heli-skiing (whiteout ) etc... Perhaps if we want to reduce accidents more time should be spent in these areas during recurrent training.Personally as far as I am concerned though the more auto's & pedals the better.
just a thought

 

[MagSeal]

we could always stop all training and see whether the numbers go up or down

there is never any 'new' accidents. always the same thing someone, or more accurately, some people have done before them. i guess we're striving for the 'better' accident than the guy before.

i say train the basics, then train where you feel you are lacking better skills. a few extra hours spent making sure you're comfortable with the situation makes all the difference.

 

[Jet B]

we could always stop all training and see whether the numbers go up or down

there is never any 'new' accidents. always the same thing someone, or more accurately, some people have done before them. i guess we're striving for the 'better' accident than the guy before.

i say train the basics, then train where you feel you are lacking better skills. a few extra hours spent making sure you're comfortable with the situation makes all the difference.

Let's face it, a PPC doesn't really test most pilots on their operational capability. Going up for half an hour with someone who is going to give a couple emergencies and ask for an auto or two isn't testing me on what I do all day long. Maybe a change in the training environment is in order. If a company is responsible to train a pilot on any danger areas involved in the type of work they will be doing, then make them liable to serious investigation when an accident occurs. If a guy is going out on seismic, then his training should include some intensive longline safety training ( I have never even had a ppc where I was asked about safe longline prodedures and that is what I do almost all the time). If a guy patrols pipe or hydro lines then when he is done his annual training he should be dreaming about wires and power poles. My point is that PPC's do make pilots dig into the books every year and that is good, but if Transport somehow could bring in accountability without the 45 minute silly checkride maybe more resources could be diverted for companies to do the real training that people need. :wacko:

 

[CTD]

Excellent points. I'd LOVE to see a PPC where the pilot was actualy tested on what he or she did on a day to day basis - but you know what? The bast majority of pilots, and EVERY SINGLE operator would consider it as being TC sticking their nose in where it didn't belong. HAC would freak. I'd love to elaborate on that, but I'd be overstepping my bounds....