I heard today that the EC-145 will be designated the UH-72, not the UH-145 for the Army

Cobrahistorian wrote:

Hey dude, leave the political stuff off the forum.  Aside from the fact that one senator doesn't have the pull to make or break a contract, it just doesn't belong on a modeling forum.  Jon

My humble apologies for ruffling feathers.  I did apologies at the end of my rant also.  And yes politics should stay out of the forum.  Oh, on last thing though, if a Senator is head of the committee on military fund or anything else, yes it only takes one Senator to get the project or contract squashed.

Again sorry about the political non-sense.  I like Sikorsky aircraft and would like to see more models of their stuff.  Can see it if they don't build it.

Hey dude, leave the political stuff off the forum.  Aside from the fact that one senator doesn't have the pull to make or break a contract, it just doesn't belong on a modeling forum. 

Jon

phantom works wrote:

davros wrote: While I will admit that I don't know the full details of the procurement procedures it almost sounds like MD Helicopters would like to treat the contract as a sort of welfare project rather than one that gives the forces the craft that they regard as the best for the job. I refer to their statement that the money should be going to rebuild the industry. no kidding........sounds to me like MD helicopters would do better trying to get their house in order such that they can compete rather than whine about it.   As I understand it, if they had their house in order they could have gotten the ARH bid as well.   Wah, wah, wah.........jeez.

Since MD is owned by Beoing now, the are still busy make Chinook's and Apache's

Nope, Sikorsky's in on the UH-145 project.  Don't understand it, but they've joined up with EADS to produce the 145 in US livery. 

davros wrote:

While I will admit that I don't know the full details of the procurement procedures it almost sounds like MD Helicopters would like to treat the contract as a sort of welfare project rather than one that gives the forces the craft that they regard as the best for the job. I refer to their statement that the money should be going to rebuild the industry.

no kidding........sounds to me like MD helicopters would do better trying to get their house in order such that they can compete rather than whine about it.   As I understand it, if they had their house in order they could have gotten the ARH bid as well.   Wah, wah, wah.........jeez.   

As the Article mentions, MD helicopters has protested.  So has the other competitor.  There's a complete report in the new Rotor and Wing magazine.

On the AH-70, we've been told that the Army is considering the name "Arapaho", which will certainly lead to jokes about 'ho drivers and squadrons of 'ho's.

Dan H.

Here is the article:

COLUMBUS, Miss. - A competitor for the Army's $1.3 billion, 322-aircraft Light Utility Helicopter program has filed a protest over the awarding of the contract to American Eurocopter Corp.

MD Helicopters Inc., a Mesa, Ariz.-based producer of light helicopters, filed an official protest with the Army.

Eurocopter planned to build the EC-145 - known as the UH-72A to the military - at its Columbus plant. The contract, if formalized would mean a 184,000-square-foot, $30 million expansion and as many as 250 additional jobs.

The new plant would be built on 40 acres adjacent to the company's existing plant next to Golden Triangle Regional Airport.

Eurocopter had planned to start construction on the expansion by early September and have the plant running within a year.

The contract, which calls for 322 helicopters with an option possibly for 30 more, was awarded June 30 after more than a year of testing by the Pentagon, which plans to use the helicopters to upgrade aircrafts for domestic use by the Army and National Guard.

The UH-72A would replace the aging UH-1 and OH-58 helicopters.

MD Helicopters is protesting the deal because American Eurocopter is a subsidiary of the European Aeronautics Defense and Space Co., a French-German conglomerate.

Kimberly Henry, spokeswoman for the U.S. Army's Aviation and Missile Command in Alabama, declined to comment on the specifics of MD Helicopter's complaint, saying "we need to let this play out." She said neither of the other two losing bidders, Bell Helicopter or AgustaWestland, has filed a protest.

Under the Army's contract procedures, protests are to be decided within 35 days, during which activity on the contract is suspended.

While the new plant is being built, Eurocopter planned to manufacture the frames of the helicopters at one of its plants in Germany and ship them to Columbus where they would be reassembled and customized.

In a statement released shortly after the contract was awarded, Lynn Tilton, acting CEO of MD Helicopters, said the contract should have gone to an American company.

"The United States is struggling to stay competitive with its global neighbors, and our own taxpayer money is being poured into the coffers of foreign companies when that money could be going to rebuild this industry in our country, it is a true injustice," Tilton said in the statement.

UH-1V_CE wrote:

HUGE NEWS.......I saw that McDonell Douglas had registered a complaint with the Army on there selection.  The contract is now on hold.

Know where we can get some more info on that?

UH-1V_CE wrote:

HUGE NEWS.......I saw that McDonell Douglas had registered a complaint with the Army on there selection.  The contract is now on hold.

Hopefully there is still a chance forthe 412!!!!

Trigger wrote:

I thought that was going to be the RAH-70 Crow?

Cobrahistorian wrote:

Yeah, I figured that was coming.  Now they just need to name it and the RH-70.

I thought that was going to be the RAH-70 Crow?

Cobrahistorian wrote:

Yeah, I figured that was coming.  Now they just need to name it and the RH-70.

This should be good

Yeah, I figured that was coming.  Now they just need to name it and the RH-70.