Zetro Services Sdn Bhd is both puzzled and appalled over the article “Zero coverage of Malaysian Airspace”. Zetro is puzzled with the title of this article, which seems to have very little relevance, if any at all, to the subject matter in the text and also as to why Zetro is implicated. Zetro is appalled at the misleading, inaccurate and often baseless information, statements and/or accusations contained in the article thus compelling it to put into the correct perspective, these serious and baseless allegations.
The contractorisation program was initiated in 1998, with the aim to develop the local Aerospace Industry towards achieving the national aspirations of self reliance. Five local companies were identified and, based on their inherent capabilities, awarded maintenance contracts with clearly demarcated areas of responsibilities to ensure an orderly and healthy environment for growth. AIROD to maintain all RMAF aircrafts mechanical parts and Zetro to maintain all Avionics and Ground Electronic equipment. Prior to the contractorisation, Zetro had collaborated very well with AIROD. Although, Zetro pioneered the in-country overhaul of the T56 Engine it was handed to AIROD in exchange for the Avionics, inline with the demarcation. Unfortunately, Zetro did not take over the Avionics from AIROD immediately as it was not aware of the impending changeover of AIROD ownership. However, since AIROD’s ownership changed hands, the public domain has been misinformed as if Zetro had taken over the Avionics contract awarded to AIROD.
In the case of the charges for the rate of transportation, Zetro would like to state categorically that the Government has not been charged even the RM50 in almost all cases as a sign of goodwill thus; Zetro is rather puzzled as to how the figures of 150 and 200 ringgits came about! Further, Zetro is also aware that the Government will not pay any rate that is outside the scope of the contract. The statements made by TnT are very prejudicial with collateral intention, the facts of which are only known to them and one would expect TnT to verify its statements prior to making them.
Considering that currently, Zetro holds an inventory of over 4000 test equipment of all types, applicable to its scope of work, including a number of state-of-the-art Automated Test Equipment and facilities, some, the only one of its kind in this region, it could hardly be said that Zetro lacks a commitment to invest. Zetro did not procure the test equipment proposed by a particular OEM because it cost more than 240Million ringgit and the conditions of sale stipulated were unsatisfactory. It would require a100 years or more for a return of investment. Nevertheless, Zetro in the interest of the Government and as an evidence to its commitment did invest, resulting in more than doubling it’s capabilities at a relatively much reduced cost. The consequent increase in Zetro’s capability has slowly but surely reduced the nation’s dependence on OEMs and vendors for repairs, subsequently reducing the turn around time and saving millions of ringgits by getting them repaired locally at Zetro. A visit to Zetro’s Centre of Excellence in Subang will reveal the commitment and metamorphosis Zetro’s capability enhancement program has undergone since the early days of contractorisation in 1998.
No MRO contract of a similar nature to Zetro’s contract is 100% perfect including those with the OEMs, who too are penalized for late deliveries. LDs occasionally do occur due to several factors affecting the turn around time. The number of LDs incurred by Zetro is very small and represents a small percentage when viewed with the total repairs carried out and delivered on time. LDs have been imposed on Zetro and they have been settled in accordance with the requirements of the contract. As for the no ceiling issue, both of Zetro’s contracts with the Government currently do have a ceiling.
Contrary to the TnT’s statement, the program to upgrade the RMAF trainer aircraft to the PC7 Mark ll was initiated in 2007 and not in 1997, further no such contract was awarded to Zetro either. The Government, however offered Zetro the offset program and Zetro responded by sending its engineers to Switzerland for training at the OEM facility. Nevertheless, the Government finally awarded the contract to AIROD based on the demarcation of responsibilities and certainly not because of the reason stated by TnT, which is really far removed from the truth. Zetro accepted the Government’s decision in good faith. In another case, though Zetro pursued a contract for more than six years, investing in facilities and human resources. AIROD was once again offered the contract and Zetro accepted the Government’s decision with dignity and complained to none.
Zetro went on an open bidding in the open market and several parties including MINDEF expressed their interest to rent the Zetro building. Zetro’s rates being very competitive and lower than prevailing market rate resulted in MINDEF opting to rent the building.
Zetro is relatively a small company with an organic growth of over 30 years focused on developing an indigenous capability in general and in radar technology in particular. Zetro has successfully completed several modernization/upgrade programs for both Air Traffic and Air Defence Radar systems in the RMAF, competing with OEMs to provide solutions which are for the first time truly customized to the RMAF operations whilst at the same time saving millions in taxpayers’ money. Since the contractoristion program in 1998, Zetro’s commitment to the requirements of the contract, in particular to the investment and development of its capabilities and the local industry, has culminated in a number of positive bargains to the Government. Zetro has progressed to offer a viable alternative and has forced OEMs to provide competitive prices for their products thus indirectly saving the Government’s spending. Zetro currently is positioned to provide viable and cost effective alternatives, solutions and options to the Malaysian Government in a domain, thus far dependent on foreign OEMs. Zetro is focused and committed to ensuring that no single OEM assumes total responsibility and the local aerospace industry is given a greater responsibility in the management and defence of the Malaysian air space.
TnT’s final claim to have had no positive response from ZSSB is indeed very surprising. Zetro is transparent and ever willing to ensure that timely and correct information is disseminated in the interest of all concerned. It seems to Zetro that the misleading arguments and information presented are the ill intentioned work of certain parties and is disappointed that a responsible blog like TnT did not exercise greater caution to verify their authenticity and has allowed itself to be used to serve the interest of such parties.