-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Maryland State Police will fly AW139s
- Thread starter Heloanjin
- Start date
The European aircraft manufacturers are not unlike American manufacturers. They get by largely on government funding. I agree with you that an American made helo to fill the role would be nice. I suppose they could fly the S-70? I'm sure it's more than capable of fulfilling the role of medevac chopper. Whether it can be had for the same price as the AW. . .I really don't know.
Like what? The advanced Bells that aren't just another Jet Ranger are collaborations with Asian and European companies. And they build them in Canada. Sirkorsky? Their stuff is probably overkill for this.
I got a chance to check out my local medavac bird (EC145), and that was a seriously nice setup. I'm all for buying American, but we seem to be lagging a bit in civilian helo design compared to the Europeans.
Overkill? Maybe, but the Army buys a new UH-60 for half the price of what they're buying these AWs for. Granted, after outfitting it for the SAR/MEDEVAC mission...it could raise the cost. But still, just a thought.
I'd imagine the Army gets some sort of preferential pricing...It may just be that the AW was the most capable aircraft for the mission (able to land in tight places, go faster, farther and all with less crew??) as compared to the civilian S-70 or other helos on the market.
Right. I suppose my point was that there is an American bird on the market that is just as capable.
S-70 would be overkill if only from the point that it doesn't fit into a lot of spots that a smaller helo could. Plus, the cost to operate would be ungodly.
Since I've got some experience in Part 135 HELO medevac operations, riddle me this:
Why is this gold-plated 'public' program funded by dwindling tax dollars ... ??? When you COULD contract out to private operator and make the service 'pay' for itself ??? Like real people have to ... ???
PLUS ... back @ 25 years ago when we were making similar decisions -- Agusta (funny ... I thought it used to be spelled: Augusta?) was one of the more expensive options on the table ... not sure about today, of course --BUT HEY: if you can just charge the taxpayer for any cost -- what's the diff' ... right ???
Why is this gold-plated 'public' program funded by dwindling tax dollars ... ??? When you COULD contract out to private operator and make the service 'pay' for itself ??? Like real people have to ... ???
PLUS ... back @ 25 years ago when we were making similar decisions -- Agusta (funny ... I thought it used to be spelled: Augusta?) was one of the more expensive options on the table ... not sure about today, of course --BUT HEY: if you can just charge the taxpayer for any cost -- what's the diff' ... right ???
Because the trauma care system in the Maryland is one of the big prides of the state, it is where trauma care was started, and the politicians and taxpayers have been willing to publicly fund one of the key components, helicopters and their aircrew. There is no certainty switching to a private contractor would save any money, it hasn't in some of my experience with them, and service might suffer if profit was the main objective, as it has again in my experience in some cases.
In the end the voters in Maryland have had the final say and they have yet to kick out the citizen-legislators who have voted to continue funding the trauma system. After all, it is really up to them, isn't it?
Yeah -- I can buy all of that in the context of the 'easy way out'; except I KNOW -- and can state w/ first hand CERTAINTY -- that it can be done cheaper and just as safe. And what's safe?? The FAA determines flight safety -- not Maryland politicians & 'voters'.
We did it cheaper, yet still safely in Texas and so did some of our competitors -- you don't really think such a hi-viz program could operate any way other than 'safely', do you?? Which is why the hospitals/government agencies went w/ private contractors down in the Republic. We DID have detailed contracts w/ extensive rules/regs/requirements in them ... and $$$ performance standards -- it wasn't a WAG nor an 'open purse' like taxpayer funded operations usually become. We had a great reputation with the hospitals and their personnel and worked closely w/ 'em ... which is why we got the business.
But then ... when Maryland is easily in the top 1/3 (or bottom 1/3, depending on your half-full/half-empty point of view??) of states that are operating in the 'red'. It would be problematical for any fiscal-oriented person to justify a new gold-plated, taxpayer-funded MEDEVAC operation at this point in time.
But then, 'MOM' and Maryland has never shied away from spending public tax dollars even when another option might be better.
If the quoted figure is the fully capable, fly-away price I'd say it is a very good one even before you consider any O&M support, and the S-70 probably can't touch that price even before you look at operating costs. Using $6M as the fly-away cost for a -60M is a little deceptive unless you understand what is GFE (government furnished equipment) to the program and what is not.
As a side note, while I am not as familiar with SAC's S-70 side, I'd expect that capacity issues would have made for a longer timeline.
Having said that, I doubt that this decision was made on fiscal principles, or they would have contracted it out.
As a side note, while I am not as familiar with SAC's S-70 side, I'd expect that capacity issues would have made for a longer timeline.
Having said that, I doubt that this decision was made on fiscal principles, or they would have contracted it out.
The big difference is that Maryland's trauma system is a single, integrated one unlike any other state. Having a single operator of the helicopters instead of several competitors is the system that makes the most sense. Having a single contractor operate the system would be the most viable private contracting option but if there was a change in contractors or cost issues it could have an adverse impact on the entire operation of the trauma system. I have seen such turmoil when a contract is sometimes switched between contractors or up for competition and service suffers, sometimes greatly. And with the rise in MEDEVAC helo crashes the past few years not all private companies have not had a good safety record like yours may have had. Because it is a state-run system the state-run helo operation makes the most sense to most involved, even Republican Governor Ehrlich didn't change it.
Well, that would make a difference as the last time I checked, Maryland was slightly smaller than the Republic of Texas ... so mebbe MD can get away w/ a 'single' service.
Safety record?? We had a perfect safety record -- until 3 of our guys died in a training accident while testing a 'new' HELO. One day a flawless record and a 'model' of the industry in Texas ... but the next day ?? Three Vietnam combat vets dead and the company on life support. That's aviation, for better or for worse.
I wonder what WOULD happen w/ competition vs. a state-run monopoly. I don't have a Maryland crystal ball, and I'm not from Missouri ... but if the state monopoly is cheaper than the marketplace in real costs -- I'd like to see it. I don't think I've ever seen it in practice. It's tough -- and requires political courage -- to get rid of state sponsored sacred cows (or HELOs) for 'face' and other political reasons.
Slight 'jack', but the principle is the same: WA is poised to get rid of the state run liquor monopoly. When that happens -- a corrupt, confused, inefficient government agency (w/ all the dead weight that works for it) will disappear. The result will be more competition -- and a decrease in liquor prices w/ greater availability statewide.
Apples & oranges in the specific -- but the principle is the same in the general.
Competition works -- if it's truly 'free' ...