Tuesday February 9th, 2010
- Last update:12 hours 15 min ago
Facts about purchase of helicopters
Published: 21 Aug 2009
I refer to the editorial of Monday’s Guardian, entitled “Will helicopter billions be well spent?” which questions the purchase of four helicopters from US manufacturer AgustaWestland and wish to respond and clarify some of the issues raised in the editorial.
First of all, AgustaWestland is a US-based company and not a wholly owned subsidiary of Finmeccanica. Indeed, export credit from the US Ex-Im Bank, which forms a major part of funding for this purchase, is not available to wholly-owned foreign subsidiaries. In fact, the US Ex-Im Bank focuses on supporting the export of US goods and services. Second, as with any high quality, sensitive equipment, the package includes not just the purchase price but also a maintenance component and a training component, over a seven-year period. The four helicopters cost US$93.56 million or TT$589.43 million and are being financed by the US Ex-Im Bank and Bank Paribas. Negotiations are underway with these institutions for training and maintenance packages at US$125.77 million or TT$792.26 million and US$129.74 million or TT$817.42 million respectively. In addition, the contract provides a training package up until 2015 during which time 136 pilots and crewmen as well as technicians could be fully deployed in helicopter operations.
Third, there are clear procedures for funds which are earmarked for the Heritage and Stabilisation Fund and for when money is withdrawn. This purchase falls into neither category. Fourth, acquisition of both naval and aviation assets is consistent with the strategic expansion and reorganisation of the T&T Defence Force (TTDF) as the country moves to developed country status by the year 2020. The strategic restructuring of the TTDF, as you are no doubt aware, has already seen the creation of the T&T Air Guard (TTAG). The four medium twin-turbine helicopters represent the first phase in the acquisition of capital aviation assets for the TTAG. The multi-functional roles of the helicopters will complement the operations of other security assets in national defence and security, maritime law and enforcement and maritime safety missions. Fifth, to perform those roles, the helicopters needed appropriate modifications and equipment, crews will require specialist training and the helicopters must be available on a 24/7 basis. The AgustaWestland Inc (AWI) 129 helicopter is built for both military and civilian usages and will be delivered with airworthiness certificates and the technical documen- tation available to obtain certification from the T&T Civil Aviation Authority. In the interim, Bristow Caribbean Ltd, an AWI sub-contractor, will hold the required certification until the TTAG is so certified. This certification must be maintained at the required standard.
The contractual arrangement for certification will guarantee that the TTAG would operate and maintain the helicopters within the civil authority and also that all maintenance by AWI would comply with civil authority to ensure worldwide parts availability within their supply system and transitional training and maintenance would be undertaken for such purposes. As you can well imagine with sophisticated machinery such as this, training alone is not sufficient to develop the necessary skills to fly safely. Following completion of training, the pilots and crew would be required to undergo several hours of additional simulation flying.
Further, AWI would perform all the maintenance at the beginning, along with experienced technicians at the TTAG to enable the technology transfer. Ultimately, the support package would ensure a smooth and efficiently run maintenance organisation within which the helicopters would have high availability and dispatch reliability rates.
In terms of procurement of these items, and to ensure that the money was well spent, the Government engaged the services of a consultant, a former serviceman with the US Coast Guard, who worked along with the TTAG and other technical personnel to develop the terms of reference and determine the suppliers within the international helicopter production industry who could provide the air frames with modifications and equipment and training and maintenance support packages. Under the guidance of a Ministerial Committee chaired by Senator Dr Lenny Saith and utilising best practices in procurement and in evaluation methodologies, the Government agreed that AWI should be the supplier of the helicopters and the associated training and maintenance packages. While we understand that there will be concerns whenever a large purchase is made on the part of the State, the reality is that high-level security equipment is never inexpensive, and may become even more as time progresses.
Government believes it has secured the right combination of superior equipment and, even more important, maintenance and training support to meet the demands of our security forces at this time particularly in maintaining the integrity of our sea borders in the fight against drug trafficking which is responsible for much of the current crime.
Editor’s Note: We welcome all responses to our editorials but think it necessary to correct obvious errors made by correspondents, especially when those correspondents are ministers of government whose releases are often treated as being factual.
Error 1
Minister Browne asserts that AgustaWestland is a US-based company that is not a wholly-owned subsidiary of Finmeccanica.
Fact: Geoff Russell, at AgustaWestland’s UK corporate communications office, stated yesterday: “AgustaWestland is wholly owned by Finmeccanica, an Italian company. AgustaWestland has its main operations in Italy, UK and USA. In the USA we have AgustaWestland North America which is owned by AgustaWestland.” Russell also stated that there is an AgustaWestland Inc but this is ultimately owned by Finmeccanica.
Conclusion: Browne’s assertion that AgustaWestland is not a wholly owned subsidiary of Finmeccanica is simply incorrect.
Error 2:
The Minister asserts that export credit from the US Ex-Im Bank is not available to wholly owned foreign subsidiaries.
Fact: The Ex-Im bank’s charter at Sec. 2(b)(1)(G) states: “Participation in or access to long-, medium, and short-term financing, guarantees, and insurance provided by the Bank shall not be denied solely because the entity seeking participation or access is not a bank or is not a United States person.”
Further, Christine Wood at the Ex-Im Bank’s project financing department said yesterday: “If the goods or services are made in the US, it does not matter who owns the company.” She cited as an example the following: “Kumatsu Trucks made in the US are eligible for US Ex-IM Bank coverage, but Caterpillar trucks made outside the US are not.”
Conclusion: It would be correct to say that the US Ex-Im Bank supports the export of US goods and services even when the companies involved are wholly-owned subsidiaries of non-US companies, something most investment bankers would know.
Error 3:
Mr Browne asserts that the cost of the helicopters is being financed by the US Ex-Im Bank and Bank Paribas.
Fact: This is incomplete information. The US Ex-Im Bank’s press release on its coverage of the transaction makes clear at paragraph four: “Ex-Im Bank is co-financing the transaction with Italy’s export-credit agency SACE, which is providing a guarantee for a portion of the financing covering foreign content. The majority of the export is the US content, which consists of manufacturing activities, assembly, customisation, avionic and instrumentation.”
Error 4:
In his fifth paragraph, Minister Browne refers to the helicopters as AWI 129. All other releases on this issue make it clear that the helicopters being purchased are the AW139.
Apart from the errors, Minister Browne’s release is very helpful in many ways. We learn from his release, for example, that the Government proposes to spend US$125.77 million providing training to 136 pilots and crewmen as well as technicians.
For nearly $800 million, it is quite likely to be much, much cheaper for the State to establish a helicopter training facility in T&T and import the flight simulators and the training expertise.
That aside, and assuming that ten pilots per helicopter would be a sufficient helicopter rotation for public servants entitled to eight-hour shifts, casual leave, bereavement leave, paternity leave and set periods of annual vacation, the number of pilots needed to man the four helicopters would be 40.
The cost of helicopter pilot training is between US$30,000 and US$50,000 and the pilots require refresher training at a cost of US$10,000 every six months. This means that the cost of the foreign training for each pilot would be, at most, US$150,000 over the five-year period. The cost of training these pilots over a five year period, therefore, should not be more than US$6 million.
If we assume, but do not accept, that the cost of training a pilot is more than the cost of training a mechanic or a crewman, it means that the maximum cost for training 136 people to operate these helicopters would be US$20.4 million. This means that the Government, through Minister Browne perhaps, still needs to account for the expenditure of taxpayers’ money amounting to US$105.3 million. We invite the Minister, or someone else designated to respond, to do so and are delighted to offer him (her or them) a firm commitment that his (her or their) response will be published verbatim.
Well done both of you! It's
Well done both of you!
It's good to see ministers seeking to clarify reports. It's even better to see editors willing to challenge the ministers' errors. And both sides doing so in a respectful manner. Keep this up, please. Encourage reporters to do on the spot challenging - e.g. when a Minister of Sports claims that the weather and traffic delayed delivery of football tickets in the future, let your reporter be confident enough to say: "Please, Mr. Minister, if this is reported in tomorrow's paper as your sole excuse, the nation would never accept it and their trust in you would be severly damaged. What really happened?"
40 pilots are way under
40 pilots are way under estimated, the ministers have a lot
of family who want to be pilots.
"trust we, we are the government"
I am in shock, the Editor
I am in shock, the Editor saying that almost everything the Minister say is not true and providing facts to back it up, well no wonder the PM say that the media against his government. Careful somebody end up like Kelvin Baldeosingh.
It's very creditable of the
It's very creditable of the Guardian to be so gentle with the minister...
Jumbie's Watch
Well done Guardian. i hope
Well done Guardian. i hope this level of reporting will now become the norm. I am sure, like with the NY Times, the editorial board of the Guardian sits apart from the regular day-to-day staff but one can only hope that today's editorial is mandatory reading for all Guardian reporters. Don S. NY
Great journalism. Keep it
Great journalism. Keep it up. We need a lot more of this. Fantastic.
The Guardian has restored a
The Guardian has restored a bit of my faith with this well investigated response and balanced bit of reporting. Something i felt was lacking throughout the media in recent years. What ever the Guardian is doing differently now, please keep it up.
Until proven otherwise
Until proven otherwise
I too also agree with views on the reporting/Editor's comments vis-a-vis Minister Browne's statement.
I have one 'minor' question though, re the calculations of the training for the pilots:
The cost of helicopter pilot training is between US$30,000 and US$50,000 and the pilots require refresher training at a cost of US$10,000 every six months. This means that the cost of the foreign training for each pilot would be, at most, US$150,000 over the five-year period.
According to the brain in my florescent pink laptop (Microsoft Excel to be exact), if we take US$50,000 as the top training price (assuming this is military training and not general helicopter pilot training), and 2 x refresher training a year for five years (10 refresher courses) then that makes, $150,000 for the 'training'. However, I do not think that training would take place in Trinbago (would be nice but... not realistic).
What about the cost of accomodation (x11 - initial plus refresher) for the duration of the training course and the refreshers and a few days either side; living allowance; laundry/uniform starch allowance; salary whilst in training; clothing allowance; books & materials/training allowance; any other 'allowances'; phone calls allowance; airfares and 'excess' luggage allowance; depending on the seniority of the 'pilot', use of a car; etc etc etc etc. So you see, the cost of training is likely to be alot higher.
[Edit: Minister Browne mentions a training package upto 2015? The Guardian's editor mentions five years of training. My 'brains' calculation is based on the five years but even at 15 years, still a huge amount in 'training'. Or the helicopters going to be receiving refresher technology/instruments, as the technology advances? Not the same as maintenance...]
Where I am still scratching my brain however - the one between my ears and not the one on the laptop is... 136 pilots? Or, is that 136 'supposed' to include pilots, support staff etc etc? ('Ah not goin' down de road' of family and friends of certain people suddenly wanting to be pilots since in the days of their forefathers!)
What may be useful to know is, how many crew per helicopter per shift.
Oh, and does the cost 'allocated' to the helicopter expedition include petrol for keeping them in the air?
As for buying simulators and having the training in Trinbago... I would like to think not even I am that naive! (See epsomsalts et al, I am learning (^_~).) If the Brian Lara Stadium is anything to go by, those helicopters would have to be mothballed and the simulators would become large scale luxury nests for the local fauna.
I almost forgot to ask...
US Ex-Im Bank and Bank Paribas
Are the fees for the bankers included in the costs mentioned or are they ON TOP? Are the fees a fixed fee or based on the amount of work they do? How many 'senior' bankers make up the team; how many juniors and secretaries - just for an idea of how top heavy the team may be? On top of that, how many trips have the team of bankers made to Trinbago? Bankers have a reputation of visiting their clients on a regular basis (in our case possibly flying Business/First class) and their costs being picked up/billed back to the clients.
La Diva
La Diva, girl, with that
La Diva, girl, with that amount of money, we could build a brand new hospital in Central for all the population? These 'copters are for a great escape plan out of TT after they totally mess it up with crimes, debt, toxic industries, stolen all the land from the people, destroyed the mangroves, turn every bit of land into steel complexes... and made a right ole cajhjoo out of TT. and where is the opposition party asking questions?, We, the public are the opposition party and thanks to the Guardian for speaking up and for this site.
By this absolutely brilliant
By this absolutely brilliant piece of investigative reporting the Trinidad (and Tobago) Guardian has absolutely reaffirmed my faith in the ability of the T&T press to do its job and do it well without favouritism or fear. If this continues I will by most happy to retire my description of the Trini press as doing nothing but 'gathering news maccoiously and reporting it in a bacchanalian way'. Politicians must no longer be able to simple spout drivel and have it reported as facts unchallenged.
I wonder if Minister Browne is being 'groomed' as the next Minister of National Security as I have noticed he has made other comments related to that arena.
While I have been a frequent critic of Martin Joseph I shudder to think that Minister Browne could be his replacement as he, in my opinion, has been highly dis-ingeniousness in his statements about this helicopter deal and that to me is far more dangerous to national security than the 'occasional appearance' of Martin Joseph who drops in every now and then from his parallel universe to make surreal statements.
You have done as excellent job finding the huge holes in Minister Browne's statements and have driven tracker trailers sideways through those holes. The issues surrounding the training of the 100 plus pilots and the costs associated with them I find of particular interest so I eagerly await the minster's response.
While one instance does not a trend make I still say 'well done Guardian'. Present the news, ask the questions, challenge drivel and let the people decide.
OMG First
OMG
First of all, AgustaWestland is a US-based company and not a wholly owned subsidiary of Finmeccanica.
Minister Browne, whoever did the research behind your statement needs to go back to grad school PDQ. (Worse yet, if the staff have not done their due diligence to ascertain who it is the Trinbago government is buying their equipment from. It could be me (!!) and all the helicopters would be painted in pink with "genuine fake" crocodile leather heels for wheels!)
Even without the Guardian speaking to the Communications office in the UK, a simple visit to the website of AgustaWestland would have revealed...
- on the Home page, top middle/right hand corner it clearly says/has a link saying "A Finmeccanica Company";
- Visit the Profile page and it says "AgustaWestland, the Anglo-Italian helicopter company owned by Italy’s Finmeccanica..."
- The press release on AgustaWestland's website says:
http://www.agustawestland.com/news/trinidad-and-tobago-orders-four-aw139...
Trinidad and Tobago Orders Four AW139 Helicopters
AgustaWestland, a Finmeccanica company, is pleased to announce that the government of Trinidad and Tobago has signed a contract to purchase four AW139 medium twin turbine helicopters.
(In case anyone is interested, there is a photo of what appears to be the type of helicopter in the press release.)
- If that is not enough, a visit to Finmeccanica's website reveals a corporate structure chart in the profile page, which shows AgustaWestland on it.
http://www.finmeccanica.com/Holding/EN/Corporate/Profilo/Struttura/index...
- If that is also not proof enough, also in AugustaWestland's profile it says:
http://www.agustawestland.com/content/our-heritage-0
...Finmeccanica S.p.A. of Italy and GKN plc of the UK signed the agreement for the formation of a 50 : 50 joint venture company named AgustaWestland in 2001. In December, 2004 Finmeccanica acquired GKN’s 50 per cent stake in AgustaWestland.
So... we have a Minister who does not know the difference between breaking a deposit and simply withdrawing their deposit... and now we have a Minister whose staff (assuming he did not write it himself) who do not know who the Trinbago government is buying the helicopters from?!
Sadly, the only thing that would appear to be correct with that initial statement is that it is a US based company... everything else I disagree with and hopefully have provided enough supporting evidence.
La Diva
The citizens of this FORMER
The citizens of this FORMER paradise need more and more reporting like this . Take on the government it is your right , our right . This member of the ruling government is being dis-honest , to say the least . Keep up the great work .
Re the overall cost and
Re the overall cost and training
The four helicopters cost US$93.56 million ... training and maintenance packages at US$125.77 million ... US$129.74 million
Please Sir, may I have some more information. (Why do I feel like Oliver in Oliver Twist!) According to the official press release on AgustaWestland's website, it says:
The contract, comprising the aircraft and support package, is valued at US$348 million.
I have never headed up a bank, but I did pass my CXC equivalent in Maths. How does US$93.56 million + US$125.77 million + US$129.74 million = US$349.07 but the press release values the package at US$348 million? What is the extra US$1.07 million for please?
In connection with these huge training costs... are the staff going to be legally bound to stay with the TTAG for a certain period of time? What is to stop them taking up positions with other governments (or companies) overseas and that investment in their training walking with them?
As I understand it, the Trinbago government has a difficult enough time to get some of our scholarship winners to return and work in Trinbago either in the public or private sector and the value of 'our investment' is not as significant as that which is being talked about here.
Respectfully
La Diva
Well done Guardian, well
Well done Guardian, well done Mr. Browne... this is progress. Let's keep the momentum.
136 PILOTS, we invading
136 PILOTS, we invading gasparee?
Being currently deployed with the USAF in Iraq, I would like to know exactly why does TnT need 136 pilots. Are we going to run these HELOS 24/7 for 365 days of non stop air time, excluding maintenance. I would really like to know who came up with these flight operations work schedule. Then there is the cost of fuel into the equation along with various support services. Yes we do need air operations for security and to monitor the coastline which is so vulnerable from what I have seen, these assets will not put a dent into countering illegal coastal activity. These Logistics costs are totally questionable. The cost of HELOS are high but is high enough to be cost effective against the coastline war. In the last few years, TnT has invested in radars that didnt work, blimps that are lame and various other anti criminal devices. When are we going to realize we just need effective and deciplined workers to get at the heart of crime. So sad.
I think you've
I think you've misinterpreted the comments about the pilots, It's a bit misleading but.... That figure of 136 INCLUDES pilots, crew, and other maintenance technicians.
marcopolo
marcopolo
Isn't the English language a wonderful one? We are all talking/writing the same language yet getting different stories from it. Trinimantired is not the only one who misinterpreted the comments about the "136".
However, there still more questions than answers and I, like a lot of other readers, look forward to any followup statements and clarifications.
La Diva
Glad to see that the
Glad to see that the Guardian has been able to get its info from the primary sources. Seems the Minister's brief needs some reviewing, unless it's part of the public education programme.
According to the Wikipedia website, the unit cost of an AW139 is US$21 million, so 4 should cost US$84million, whereas the GOTT is paying an extra US$9.56million (US93.56million for the 4). There might be some explanation for the price differential, but in the midst of a global recession and with other helicopter manufacturers looking for clientele, I'm sure there was room for negotiations when buying 4 helicopters, although I would not have thought we needed 4 helicopters as a budgetary priority at this point in our dwindling resources.
According to Wikipedia, the crew per helicopter is one but prudence might dictate an assistant in case of some emergency. But 136 pilots and crewmen for 4 helicopters? Will some of these serve as stewards and hostesses when these craft are on VIP duty? I suspect that's why 4 of these are needed with such long-range capability to transport the Executive & entourage.
Be careful of believing
Be careful of believing everything on Wikipedia. The content on Wikipedia is editable by anyone and wrong information has been found there. Anything found on Wikipedia should be backed up by alternative, more trustworthy sources.
That aside, the cost of anything doesn't have to stay at the same value over time. There is nothing preventing AW from selling their vehicles at different prices to different buyers at different times. I'm guessing the GOTT negotiators didn't look at Wikipedia to get baseline prices for the AW139. I agree with you on the other points you raised, in particular (1) the need for clearer justification for the purchase itself, and (2) the seemingly high crew estimates.
WOW! Guardian did some
WOW! Guardian did some research! I'm impressed! I guess they got internet connections back up..
I love the Footnote!!: "Editor’s Note: We welcome all responses to our editorials but think it necessary to correct obvious errors made by correspondents, especially when those correspondents are ministers of government whose releases are often treated as being factual." i.e. Look, we know you feel like a dunce cause you talking off the top of your head, but yuh still doing it.
Why does Brown constantly try to force the purchase of these helicopters down our throats. Stop trying to constantly justify another useless endeavor.
What is the point of Blatantly LYING to the public about the origins of these helicopters?? What do you care of the public's opinion on the matter- would you cancel the order if we tell you we think this purchase is useless and the money can be used for something better?
Like- Hint, Hint.
http://guardian.co.tt/news/general/2009/08/20/three-days-wait-beds
No you won't. So just ssshhh.. Whether we like it our not you and your government will do whatever you want without the flutter of an eyelash.
POLITICAL SPIN or
POLITICAL SPIN or INCOMPETENCE:
Brownie, you made your appearance a few days ago and provided some of the same 'facts' to substantiate your purchase. 'Big toys for big boys.' You were challenged then, but you did not pay heed to your critics. You must have this belief that you are Perfect, and double checking facts are for the average man, not you. Mr. Browne, you have boldly and bravely presented another episode, quoting the same facts, unchanged mind you, in the form of this Commentary in the Guardian.
I commend The Editor of the Guardian for taking the responsibility to check all the facts presented by Mr. Browne and lay out their findings for the readers to make their own judgement. Minister Browne's facts were researched and 4 (four) errors were found and the findings presented following his letter.
OUR media has been criticised severely by this gov't who claims that they are anti-gov't, and that they 'do not educate the people'. Mr. Manning clims that to 'educate' the people he had to go on a tour of the country to 'educate' the people himself, staring from Woodford Square. Is this not EDUCATION FROM THE MEDIA Mr. Manning, and those who criticise? The Guardian was professional in providing the facts, and not letting opinions enter into their research.
As an average citizen, I am concerned about what's going on in my country, and always welcome new programmes and technology for our improvement. But I still question the need to make this purchase, as a quick fix. It is costing us huge amounts of money that could be used better elsewhere for essential services for ALL citizens, not just the uppercrust or chosen.
Some are now questioning the true intentions of Mr. Mariano Browne. I have questioned his political professionalism for some time now, as I find him to be a bit lacking in his dealings with the people of this country. It makes me uncomfortable to see how he responds to our people as though we are a hinderance in his way, preventing him from carrying out his agenda. I would love to hear from Mr. Manning and Mr. Browne, uncensored answers to some of of the following questions:- How and why was he selected and appointed to our Cabinet? What is his real purpose? What are his intentions? Does he have the interest of the people of this country as his first priority, secondary, or are we of no consequence?
I recommend this Commentary in the Guardian today, and ask readers to read it carefully and make their own judgement. Thanks Editor.
136 Pilots This is what I
136 Pilots
This is what I read, so its either a misprint or inaccurate reporting, so is not a problem, but the bigger problem is, shouldn't the Gov't use this same money and invest in a brand new Hospital instead of that eye sore known as POSGH. It is so sad to see that we have better HELOS flying in the air than Hospitals to help the needy, isn't this like a form of wickedness, but then again we have had the same POSGH for over a million years now. Personally the health institutions need this money more than these inappropriate toys, but apparently it's benefiting an entity that we may never now.
Helicopter Training
Helicopter Training Costs
The estimated helicopter training costs posted by the Editor are grossly underestimated and most likely refer to basic civilian helicopter training. The average cost to train a US Army Blackhawk (UH-60)helicopter pilot is $265,236 (USD) using the Army's Flight school XXI program.
Training can run anywhere from 34 to 42 weeks and comprises:
"Students begin by attending two weeks of “ground school” in which they are taught subjects in aero-medical factors, aircraft systems and Army doctrine. During the next 18 weeks, students learn how to fly a helicopter and the art of navigation by aircraft instruments only. After successful completion of the instrument phase, students are taught to navigate using a surface map and a compass during low level flight (10 to 50 feet above the trees).
Students fly their designated advanced aircraft during the “combat skills” phase."
Although, we are purchasing a smaller aircraft, its role and configuration options are similar to the Blackhawk. So based on the total number of personnel (136) to be trained (pilots and support staff) on the helicopters and the duration of training support (until 2015), the pricing quoted by the minister seems plausible.
http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/ARCHIVE/2006/JUNE/Pages/ArmyAviat...
Great Investigative
Great Investigative Reporting: Guardian hats off to you. I write often that the media do not investigate nor educate the public in topics of the day. Something good is going on in your boardroom, your strategy is great. Its time we stand up to the spin amd show that we cannot fool the people as we can find out the truth, Thank you Guardian, you are my hero and when Dengue returns lets smash the spin also. I know you cannot do the smelter as its in the courts, but one day.
Anthony Wilson Guardian
Anthony Wilson
Guardian editor-in-chief
I am gratified and have taken note of the surprisingly large number of favourable comments made on this blog and thank all those who have congratulated the investigative reporting that the newspaper's editor (in which role I am also functioning) performed in uncovering Minister Browne's errors.
I have taken note as well of the comments from those who suggest that the Guardian should maintain this kind of journalism and will reinforce that message in our newsroom.
I would like to respond to the comments made by Guardian9999 which, interestingly enough, were the only ones that were mildly negative.
Even if ALL 136 of those associated with the programme are pilots (and we know from the minister's previous statements that they are not, but include mechanics and crewmen) and even if the cost of the training is US$265,236, the total cost of the initial training would be US$36,072,096.
However, if one assumes a complement of 40 pilots, the training cost is US$10,609,440.
If one assumes that the refresher training (once every six months) is 25 per cent of the initial training, that would be US$2,652,360. And if there are 10 periods of refresher training in five years that's equal to US$26,523,600.
If we add the initial training to the refresher training assumptions, it would be equal to US$62,595,696, which is about half of the training contract sum.
Is Guardian9999 suggesting that the training cost of 96 helicopter mechanics and crewmen as well as the travel costs and per diem for the pilots would amount to US$63,174,304?
Who knew training a crewman or a mechanic was so expensive?
Maybe the crewmen and mechanics will also need to have foreign refresher training in Italy, the UK and the US once every six months because obviously the technology on the AW136 will need to be upgraded twice a year!!!!!
The second point is that while those who are being trained to fly the US Army Blackhawk (UH-60), can be called into combat in Iraq, Afghanistan or Somalia (recalling the name of the book and movie) at any time, one seriously doubts that the members of the local Air Guard will need to be trained to maneuver their aircraft against incoming Surface-to-Air missiles from some fierce Taliban warriors.
But who knows? Stranger things have happened.
Maybe there is an expectation that T&T will need to declare war on some neighbouring country some time soon. (Chavez better look out, yuh hear)
The blog of Guardian9999 raises other serious issues, which I will address if he/she or they respond.
Thanks again to all those who took the time to comment on this important issue of public expenditure and keep the comments coming. They may turn up in the newspaper in some form or the other.
To The Editor Stop trying to
To The Editor
Stop trying to get me to do your work for you. Examine similar 'military' contracts from other nations to gather a point of reference...
Be professional and thorough. Make the Guardian proud.
By military contracts, do
By military contracts, do you mean the AgustaWestland contract to manufacture 70 Lynx helicopters for the Ministry of Defence in England which the Daily Telegraph of April 3, 2007 reported "appears to have doubled to £2 billion in under a year."
Or maybe by military contracts you are referencing the decision by the Obama administration, reported in the New York Times of May 15, to cancel the Marine One contract for 28 helicopters awarded to Lockheed Martin and AgustaWestland in 2005 because the projected costs doubled to nearly US$13 billion.
Are those the kinds of military contracts you mean?
If that is AgustaWestland's track record for military contracts, what hope does a relatively unsophisticated country (at least compared with the UK and the US) have of avoiding similar, or greater, cost overruns?
Is that the "point of reference" you were referring to or was there something else? Do tell.
And I certainly would not want to try to get you to do any work for me. I am capable of doing my work for myself as I think has been demonstrated recently.
Thanks for caring and contributing, though.
PS: I always try to make the Guardian proud.
Anthony Wilson
Guardian editor-in-chief
To The Editor It is
To The Editor
It is commendable that you have challenged the Minister and identified errors in his submission, but you know your piece is incomplete.
Information on the first Three (3) errors could be obtained in Five (5) minutes searching the internet.
The information that is of substance to all Trinbagoians is the Two (2) Billion Dollar cost.
Neither yourself nor the Minister have provided any evidence to support the numbers being deliberated.
Much like the first Three (3) errors identified, good journalistic practice dictates that some supporting evidence must be presented by you to refute the Minister's claims. Otherwise your counter-claims are meaningless.
Where is the evidence to support your claim of what the costs should be?
It is not my intention to
It is not my intention to refute the Minister's claims.
The Minister has the contract. I do not.
I made it clear in the editor's note that what I was providing were reasonable estimates. If my estimates are wrong, the Minister has an obligation to issue a third public statement on this matter, making full disclosure as soon as the contracts are completed (but before they are signed).
If not, the population will form its own judgment (as reflected in this blog).
My intention is to provoke the Minister to provide the country with the information on the training and maintenance aspects of the contract so that the population can judge whether the US$125.77 million proposed expenditure on training and the US$129.74 million proposed expenditure on maintenance is an appropriate amount to pay on a contract for four helicopters.
I am sure T&T has experts who have worked in this field who would be willing and able to say.
Or maybe the losing competitor or the disqualified company might have an opinion. What do you think?
Anthony Wilson
Guardian editor-in-chief
Mr Editor You are missing
Mr Editor
You are missing the point.
You make the statement "I made it clear in the editor's note that what I was providing were reasonable estimates."
But what constitutes a reasonable estimate?
What are your numbers based on?
Without any supporting evidence your numbers are hollow and do not afford the general population the opportunity to make an informed judgement.
Your role as a journalist is to investigate a story and present facts to the population. If the Minister's figures are grossly overstated then present facts that show just that.
If there are experts in T&T who can dispute the Minister's numbers then it is your job to interview these people, obtain the correct numbers and present a compelling case to the general public.
Far too often we have people in this contry making statements without any support.
It is even worse when the media, the institution the general population turns to for information, chooses to take short-cuts and rushes a story instead doing thorough good old fashioned research.
Had this been an assignment given to journalism students i'm sure more facts would be forthcoming.
Anyone viewing a news broadcast or reading a newspaper report out of the US can appreciate the depths to which stories are investigated, facts obtained and irrefutable evidence presented.
In the end, while you hold the post of 'Editor-in-Chief' you still have some work to do.
Five (5) minutes investigation of a story does not constitute good journalism.
Should the 'Guardian' seek to elevate itself to rival any Pulitzer Prize winning news organization in journalistic prowess, then the level of professionalism needs to be raised starting in the Editor's office.
Send forth the investigative staff, bring back numbers that people can hold on to. When you do that the Minister will have no where to hide.
Judging from history our
Judging from history our police force is really a farce: criminals roam the streets while law abiding people lock themselves up behind barricades of steel. What makes Minister Browne think that this new crime fighting/deterrent unit will be different from our police force?
Rik Hansel
Hey Editor welcome. I am
Hey Editor welcome. I am glad you joined us, we are a good bunch of people who care. thank you, Happy to know you bytes-wise. Appreciate your clarifications, I know you are right, as you would not have challenged the status quo without the true facts. Des
Note to the Editor: I have
Note to the Editor:
I have read with interest your exposé on Senator Mariano Browne’s ministerial statement to this media house published on August 21, captioned “Facts about purchase of helicopters.” And while I am tempted to join the commentary on this important national issue; I must admit it is a bit challenging even for the undersigned to posit any new perspectives on this particular matter given the obvious errors that have been unmasked by your journalistic prowess and the insightful comments of your very discerning readers. Nonetheless, I am indeed intrigued by this very extensive but by no means exhaustive conversation. I admire your tenacity in the pursuit of truth and accuracy. Your attention to detail is also refreshing. Clearly, this piece is avant-garde and a credit to your profession as it truly underscores the meaning of the timeless maxim “fair and balanced.”
Keep up the good work as I anxiously look forward to the Minister’s response.
Peter Permell
Minority Shareholders Rights Advocate
To the editor, Mr.Wilson, I
To the editor, Mr.Wilson, I am keying in on one part of your comments: "I have taken note as well of the comments from those who suggest that the Guardian should maintain this kind of journalism and will reinforce that message in our newsroom." i am looking forward to more accurate, clear, concise and investigative reporting from your colleagues. Encourage them to leave their desk and hit the field and get the news and bring it to their readers. Ask questions, challenge answers. Thank you for joining the forum and its encouraging to know that our comments on here are being read by staff (wishfully the ministers as well). I wonder if we can't have a give and take forum with the Commissioner of Police. We all sure have much to say. But i digress. Don S. NY
Dear Editor
Dear Editor
Just for the sheer giddying fun of it, any chance we could have an article inviting comments along the lines of:
"What would you do, if you had US$129.74 million to spend on anything you wanted, so long as it was for the overall benefit of Trinbago"
please. I do not remember the cost of the naval ships, else I would have added that amount to the 'blank cheque' also.
Perhaps there could be a prize of lunch with yourself and other members of the Guardian newsroom for the best creative but 'workable' suggestions. I promise blackberries, of the fruity variety will not be on my list. (Well, actually they might, for their health benefits!)
Someone (Desmond?) has already suggested a hospital in Central.
Yours sincerely
La Diva
Mr. Wilson, Quote: "I have
Mr. Wilson,
Quote: "I have taken note as well of the comments from those who suggest that the Guardian should maintain this kind of journalism and will reinforce that message in our newsroom."
I hope by that you are NOT referring to:
http://guardian.co.tt/news/crime/2009/08/22/fugitive-snatched-trinidad
Just thought I'd throw that out there...
But that aside, any chance we will be seeing more articles like this providing factual information to the public on what is really going on, rather than the theories and assumptions of your reporters?? Perhaps those who brought out this article could work with the other reporters? That would really be swell, seeing as another paper hinted where Mr. Warner's money really came from..