Boeing bids MH-139 for UH-1N replacement

a reply to: Zaphod58

Thank you. I did not realize it was that high of a percentage. But the swoosh of the rotor is what I tend to hear most. Being deaf in the high range, it's that deep tone that i hear best.

See my edit above on the last page about the 2 MSA's

originally posted by: JIMC5499
a reply to: Bigburgh

Heads up! Wings Over Pittsburgh is back this year. May 13th & 14th at the 911. F-22 Demonstration Team will be there.

Check your PM.🤗
Off topic:
I'm going to watch it from the Airport Fire Co. Pm me if you want to see it from there. Thunderbirds use the water tower over my shoulder as a reference point to turn back to to Airport.

I will have the main list of demonstration times.

a reply to: Bigburgh

A couple of the 911 guys belong to the same Vet's club that I do. We are going to take some guys from the VA Nursing Home in Butler down as guests of the 911.

a reply to: JIMC5499

Off topic: hate that VA..
You are doing kind things.
Please PM me so not to drift this thread.🤗

Also check your mail.😊

I always wondered why Baywatch helicopters had cowled/concealed tail rotor blades while black hawks had exposed blades. I always thought having the cowling with give additional protection from debris. Toy helicopters used to have a circular ring going around the blade tips. Always wondered what effect that would have on a real helicopter.

a reply to: stormcell

The HH-65 uses a Fenestron. It reduces tip vortex losses, and protects the tail rotor, and reduces noise. It also is what produces that distinct whine you hear when they fly over.

a reply to: stormcell

It would cause problems with the ability to change the pitch of the tail rotor.

In a surprise, Boeing and Leonardo were awarded the UH-1 replacement contract. The initial award is for four aircraft, and is valued at $375M.

The Boeing Co., Ridley Park, Pennsylvania, has been awarded a $375,550,368 firm-fixed-price contract for the non-developmental item integration of four aircraft to replace the UH-1N. This is the basic award of a contract (including options) valued at approximately $2,380,000,000, which will provide for the acquisition and sustainment of up to 84 MH-139 helicopters, training devices, and associated support equipment. The location of performance is predominantly in Ridley Park, Pennsylvania; and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. If all options are exercised, the work is expected to be completed by September 2031. This award is a result of a competitive acquisition. Fiscal 2018 research, development, test, and evaluation funds in the amount of $98,000,000 are being obligated at the time of award. Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, is the contracting activity (FA8739-18-C-5030).

dod.defense.gov...

I am a bit surprised as well to be honest. Its sized between the Lakota and the Blackhawk but why not go with a common type than adding an additional type to the fleet. Plus the Blackhawk gives you more time on station and weapons integration etc.

a reply to: FredT

Really makes me wonder if this is a consolation prize to either Boeing or Leonardo over T-X.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: FredT

Really makes me wonder if this is a consolation prize to either Boeing or Leonardo over T-X.

Not much though cause we are talking 2.5 billion vs 16+ Billion. The Boeing / SAAB entry seems to hit all of the marks and to be fair its a better looking aircraft IMHO

Oh and 345 million for the first 4 seems excessive given its already in production and the basic model runs about 12 million.

Im looking at the Boeing page for the MH-139 and the cockpit is the same. they have some sliding windows for machine guns/ So another 70 million each to integrate the IRST pod?

On a side note however, looking at the 60 minute dry run (no oil) they did on the gear box without failure........that's impressive

Edit: I forgot that this group also has an emergency role as part of the COG so perhaps some of that stuff is part of the dev costs

a reply to: FredT

No, it's not much of one, but $2B ain't nothing to sneeze at.

Probably $70-80 for systems integration, and another $15-20 for engineering changes to meet Air Force requirements. Then you add all the spare engines, tech support, parts, setting up the depot and supply chain....

a reply to: FredT

why not go with a common type than adding an additional type to the fleet

I'm guessing cost (you buy by the lb) and cost per hour were low enough to make their bid more attractive, but I'm wondering the same thing.

345 million for the first 4 seems excessive given its already in production and the basic model runs about 12 million. 

Have to get everything to MILSPEC, probably has a higher requirement for drop testing than the civil model, you need to make changes to or build new tooling on a line, hire the people to work a new line if necessary, buy up long-lead items and some more expensive unique components to the MH model so your costs don't go through the roof on the second order, probably influences first batches of spares and lots of contractor support until they can train USAF maintainers on the new type, etc Adds up quick adding new types to the fleet.