"Helowriter" wrote in news:1110978868.256502.231550
@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:

Yep, that's what Assistant Secretary Young said. But what's the risk of
totally redesigning the EH101 structure to meet modern crash strength
requirements? What's the risk of setting up a Presidential
manufacturing and support mechanism offshore? If they both needed
rotor and drivetrain changes, the risk is in air vehicle development,
and I think they minimized the risk for Lockheed Martin. Take a look
at the BBC picture of the Merlin flattened after a crash from a 20 ft
hover and ask yourself where the risk is.

HW

And that demonstrates how little faith there is in Sikorsky's ability. The
Mil. has been burned enough by Sikorsky over-spends.

They're voting with their feet for a solution that they think is less risky
in the hands of a supplier they think can meet time and budget
constraints...

Time will tell if the analysis on this is correct.

The USA vs non-USA is just a distraction Sikorsky thought up to try and win
despite their project management deficiencies.

toad.