"Peter Kemp" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 18:15:54 -0500, "Kevin Brooks"
wrote:


"Paul Michael Brown" wrote in message
news
I woule be interested in the opinion of Mr. Curry, or any others, with
regard to the competition between the S-92 and the US-101 to serve as
the
next presidential helicopter. Lobbying, spin and politicking aside,
which
is the better *aircraft* for the mission?

Probably six of one, half a dozen of the other. The 101 has some possible
advantages over the S-92 in a tactical role, but as a VIP transport there
would not be much justification of one over the other *except* for
political
considerations. IMO the chance that we will see a non-US designed helo
selected for use by HMX-1 is slim-to-none; OTOH, the 101 stands at
*least*
an even chance of getting the USAF rescue helo contract that we can
expect
to be offered up for competition in the near term.

IMO the only significant difference between the, for the VVIP role is
that the EH101 has a hell of a lot more hours under it's elt and is
rather more proven.

The S-92 is a growth model of a proven design that is already in use by
HMX-1, and I doubt its flightworthiness is of issue.

On the other hand NIH is likely to rule the day.
I agree however that for the CSAR role the extra lift and range of teh
-101 is likely to be decisive unless the Osprey hurries up.

I said it *at least* it stands an even chance, nothing about "decisive". It
does offer some advantages in range, payload, etc.--but nothing truly
outstanding, from what I have seen, in comparison to the S-92. OTOH, the
S-92 offers greater commonality with the Blackhawk family that is in
widespread service. I just read where the Aussies have scrubbed the EH-101
from their list of competitors for a new support helo, while the UH-60M
remains in the hunt--that might tell you something about the EH-101 being
such a decidedly better platform than the S-92.

Brooks


---
Peter Kemp

Life is short - drink faster