Latest update December 16th, 2024 9:00 AM
Sep 07, 2014 News
Guyana is steaming ahead with a major expansion of the runway at the Cheddi Jagan International Airport, despite the many questions.
The reason for the US$150M spending as argued by the previous administration, and backed by the present one, is that the current terminal facility is too cramped and the runway too short to accommodate the larger, more modern, wide body planes.
Under the expansion project, the main runway at the Cheddi Jagan International Airport (CJIA) is to be extended by another 3,500 feet or 1,066 meters.
But the reasons given for the runway extension, which will cost Guyana in excess of US$58M for the runway and taxiway expansion, may have not been so solid after-all.
The Princess Juliana International Airport (PJIA) in St. Maarten, a Dutch island in the Eastern Caribbean area, has its current main runway at 7,546 feet. CJIA’s runway is 7,447, or about 99 feet shorter than that of St. Maarten.
The problem with the justification used by Government of Guyana is that the larger, wide-body 747-400 planes that have been landing comfortably in St. Maarten at that airport with no major incidents reported for decades, cannot land easily at CJIA.
As a matter of fact, the airport in that Dutch island has made it in the ‘Ripley’s Believe It Or Not’ for the planes’ spectacular landing. One end of the runway is almost in the ocean while planes taking off have to take into account a number of hills in their path.
St. Maarten is a major hub in the Eastern Caribbean area with planes coming from the many islands around it, from Europe and North America.
The island has spent millions to upgrade its terminal.
The US$150M CJIA project will not include a parallel taxiway in this project at this time. Navigation facilities such as lighting are to be installed. A service vehicle lane is to be provided as well as emergency facilities such as fire fighting systems.
The Opposition has been questioning the expansion which is being built by China Harbour Engineering Company (CHEC), a Chinese company since it was announced in the last days of the Bharrat Jagdeo presidency three years ago.
This year, the Opposition voted against the allocations for the project, some $6.5B (or about US$32M) saying that they wanted more answers on how the monies were to be spent.
The contract itself with CHEC had been under fire after Guyana learnt about the project through Jamaican newspapers.
Government here later said that the announcement in Jamaica by CHEC’s regional office was premature.
There have also been questions about the cost of certain expenses contained in the bills of quantities for the expansions, including that of toilet fixtures.
CJIA officials have themselves complained that the current terminal facilities are too small to accommodate the crowds at peak season times, with limited booths available for Customs and check-ins. There are also issues with the sewage, air conditioning and electrical systems. After the US$200M Skeldon modernization project to build a factory and expand cultivation, the CJIA is the country’s second biggest infrastructural project. With its location at the northern tip of South American, Government said it is banking on increased travel from Africa and Asia. There has indeed been an increase in the number of Chinese landing in Guyana, though not for tourism purposes.
Dec 16, 2024
As Petra’s Fifth Annual Goodwill Int’l Series gets underway Kaieteur Sports- It was a kaleidoscope of colours at the Queen’s College ground on Sunday as the Petra Organisation kicked off its...Exporters are beIng left to fend for themselves Peeping Tom… Kaieteur News- Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo has a new... more
By Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News – The government of Nicolás Maduro in Venezuela has steadfast support from many... more
Freedom of speech is our core value at Kaieteur News. If the letter/e-mail you sent was not published, and you believe that its contents were not libellous, let us know, please contact us by phone or email.
Feel free to send us your comments and/or criticisms.
Contact: 624-6456; 225-8452; 225-8458; 225-8463; 225-8465; 225-8473 or 225-8491.
Or by Email: [email protected] / [email protected]