Oil Rig Explosion

#226
#226
From what I've read, the "company man" (in this case, BP) is in charge of what all the subcontractors on the drilling well do. No, he can't force people to do stuff (physically) but he runs the show.
 
#227
#227
Velo Vol said:
From what I've read, the "company man" (in this case, BP) is in charge of what all the subcontractors on the drilling well do. No, he can't force people to do stuff (physically) but he runs the show.
Click to expand...
I don't know the story, but I have to assume that folks from Chesapeake can absolutely say no to the well owner.
 
#228
#228
Velo Vol said:
From what I've read, the "company man" (in this case, BP) is in charge of what all the subcontractors on the drilling well do. No, he can't force people to do stuff (physically) but he runs the show.
Click to expand...

From "what you read" - I'll ask you this and try not to sound like a smart-ass... how many days have you spent on a drilling rig? I've spent more than a few. The BP company man absolutely can not over ride the tool pusher, tower pusher, and OIM (offshore installation manager) in an area of safety. In fact, ANY material change to ANY procedure requires a management of change process that involves bringing onshore management into the loop.

If the driller allowed the company man to override him - then, he killed himself and his crew.
 
#229
#229
IPorange said:
Like I said before, I don't understand why you are defending or minimizing this. I never said it's the end of the world. But it is an ecological disaster that was likely preventable.
Click to expand...

On this we can agree. In fact - I believe that EVERY accident is preventable.
 
#231
#231
Velo Vol said:
From what I've read, the "company man" (in this case, BP) is in charge of what all the subcontractors on the drilling well do. No, he can't force people to do stuff (physically) but he runs the show.
Click to expand...

That is correct. The company man is the ultimate boss on the rig. His company basically rents the rig and the crew.
 
#232
#232
Orangetoes said:
From "what you read" - I'll ask you this and try not to sound like a smart-ass... how many days have you spent on a drilling rig? I've spent more than a few. The BP company man absolutely can not over ride the tool pusher, tower pusher, and OIM (offshore installation manager) in an area of safety. In fact, ANY material change to ANY procedure requires a management of change process that involves bringing onshore management into the loop.

If the driller allowed the company man to override him - then, he killed himself and his crew.
Click to expand...

he can't override those guys but he certainly can encourage them to disregard their own common sense so that a job doesn't get behind. that appears to be what happened in this case.
 
#233
#233
droski said:
he can't override those guys but he certainly can encourage them to disregard their own common sense so that a job doesn't get behind. that appears to be what happened in this case.
Click to expand...

I think we'll have to agree to disagree. I am a "company man" contracted to a fairly large oil company whose name can be spelled with two letters. Presently, I happen to be in an area of high national visibility for said company. I do not work on the drilling rigs now - but, I am on a large construction vessel with ROV's. It may be possible to get one person to cut corners when it comes to safety. But, you sure can't a whole crew to do so.

In fact, in a well control issue (which they had), the company man is just as likely to be on the drill floor as not. So, why would he cut corners on safety when his own life was on the line?

By the way - it's been proven time and again that the fastest way to drill a well is to do it safely. Let's say the BOP didn't fail and the company had asked to break the rules and start displacing mud early. What would they do then? They would have to go back in with heavy mud to kill the well - which is exactly where they were in the first place. Believe me - that is NOT an efficient way to work. Instead, it would be much more efficient to run another cement job. Yes, lost time and delays - but not nearly as much as repeating what you've done by cutting corners.
 
#235
#235
droski said:
i'll bow to your greater knowledge in this area. all i know is from media reports
Click to expand...

I don't trust a lot of the media reports due to some "odd" circumstances since this has all happened... I've been intimately involved in some very specific operatons that the media has gotten completely wrong. Without getting into specifics, there is no way the misinformation was unintentional. That leads me to believe they have their own agenda and it's more profit driven than political.

With all that said - if it ever comes out that short-cuts were taken - the company man, the OIM, and the tool pusher will all have their asses handed to them on a sling. In fact, they could be prosecuted for criminal negligence. I wouldn't want to be in their shoes then... which, come to think of it, is one of the reasons why I follow the rules...
 
#236
#236
I'm glad you jumped into this thread, orangetoes. Very insightful.


Why do I keep hearing from people that the media is getting stuff wrong on almost everything they cover?
 
#237
#237
Orangetoes said:
I don't trust a lot of the media reports due to some "odd" circumstances since this has all happened... I've been intimately involved in some very specific operatons that the media has gotten completely wrong. Without getting into specifics, there is no way the misinformation was unintentional. That leads me to believe they have their own agenda and it's more profit driven than political.

With all that said - if it ever comes out that short-cuts were taken - the company man, the OIM, and the tool pusher will all have their asses handed to them on a sling. In fact, they could be prosecuted for criminal negligence. I wouldn't want to be in their shoes then... which, come to think of it, is one of the reasons why I follow the rules...
Click to expand...

good point. it would obviously be in transoceans benefit to pass the buck to BP and leak this information.
 
#238
#238
IPorange said:
I'm glad you jumped into this thread, orangetoes. Very insightful.


Why do I keep hearing from people that the media is getting stuff wrong on almost everything they cover?
Click to expand...

Thanks... I'd like to be more specific but I can't. Maybe when this is all over I can give a little more detail. You just have to "take my word" that the media changes things. Some of it is too blatant to be considered just "getting it wrong."
 
#239
#239
droski said:
good point. it would obviously be in transoceans benefit to pass the buck to BP and leak this information.
Click to expand...

And.. to be fair, it would also be in BP's interest to pass the buck to Transocean. At the end of the day, the three drill rigs that are on location are owned by Transocean and have been leased by BP for a long time. So, the blame game can only go so far.
 
#241
#241
Orangetoes said:
The BP company man absolutely can not over ride the tool pusher, tower pusher, and OIM (offshore installation manager) in an area of safety. In fact, ANY material change to ANY procedure requires a management of change process that involves bringing onshore management into the loop.

If the driller allowed the company man to override him - then, he killed himself and his crew.
Click to expand...

If there's a dispute over a process, the company man can essentially make the options "do X or quit", can he not? And, if the financial incentives or strong enough, there's going to be a lot of pressure there.

Also, in this case, it's been reported that that some people raised safety concerns to the management and were told not to worry about things because they were being taken care of--when apparently they weren't. That's another way a company man can short circuit safety.
 
#242
#242
Orangetoes said:
In fact, in a well control issue (which they had), the company man is just as likely to be on the drill floor as not. So, why would he cut corners on safety when his own life was on the line?
Click to expand...

A lot of speeders (falsely) think that it won't cause an accident . . . until they find out that it does.
 
#243
#243
Why do people not believe BP?

In its 2009 exploration plan for the Deepwater Horizon well, BP PLC states that the company could handle a spill involving as much as 12.6 million gallons of oil per day, a number 60 times higher than its current estimate of the ongoing Gulf disaster.
Click to expand...

Close. But I just heard Limbaugh say that oil can be good fertilizer, so I guess there's no problem.
 
#244
#244
Velo Vol said:
If there's a dispute over a process, the company man can essentially make the options "do X or quit", can he not? And, if the financial incentives or strong enough, there's going to be a lot of pressure there.

Also, in this case, it's been reported that that some people raised safety concerns to the management and were told not to worry about things because they were being taken care of--when apparently they weren't. That's another way a company man can short circuit safety.
Click to expand...

Wrong. There are no "options." As a "company man," I can tell you emphatically - I can NOT materially change any process (especially in regards to safety) without following a management of change procedure. I'm sure pressure gets applied to do things quicker - but, they have to be done according to the approved plan. There is nothing wrong with working with a sense of urgency - as long as it is done safely.

I don't think I need to reply further to what's "been reported" other than to say I don't need to reply further... You'll believe what you want to believe. We'll just have to agree to disagree even though I am more than likely right...
 
#245
#245
Velo Vol said:
Close. But I just heard Limbaugh say that oil can be good fertilizer, so I guess there's no problem.
Click to expand...

I didn't read the article other than the quote you posted. My internet connection is a bit slow right now. As for the containment of the spill - things happened here that were obviously not planned for. I'm not going to take anyone's side here because there was an obvious failure to "imagineer" the scenario we have today.

For instance, there is a structure that sits on top of the BOP called the LMRP. Each LMRP has an emergency disconnect on it that allows it to jettison away from the BOP to get the rig out of trouble. This is tested on a routine basis (I don't know the interval but I've seen it done many times). In the DWH case, it didn't work - along with many other BOP type functions. Had it worked, the Horizon would have been immediately disconnected from the BOP and could have gotten to safety and would not have sunk. How different would things have been then? We would have a fully functional drill rig on location that could have restabbed the LMRP, with a riser full of heavy mud, back into the BOP. Spill over...

Instead, there was a cascade of failures which included the drilling rig sinking and dropping the riser all over the spill site. Should it have been planned for? Absolutely. Was it? Obviously not. But, believe me when I tell you that it wasn't done because anyone was negligent. It wasn't planned for because drilling rigs just don't sink. Until a month ago...
 
#246
#246
how'd you like to be a part of the meetings for the root-cause analysis of the cascade of failures ... :banghead2::mf_surrender::spank::gun::bash::bash::bash::bash:
 
#247
#247
Daddy Gee said:
how'd you like to be a part of the meetings for the root-cause analysis of the cascade of failures ... :banghead2::mf_surrender::spank::gun::bash::bash::bash::bash:
Click to expand...

I think I would rather rewatch the Ole Miss game from last year... but, only once...
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top