Happend a couple of weeks ago, but didn't see a thread on it...


Bell ARH program ordered canceled

Fort Worth Star Telegram
Oct 17, 2008


The Pentagon’s top weapons buyer surprised the Army and Bell Helicopter on Thursday by ordering cancellation of the troubled armed reconnaissance helicopter program.

In a move that seems likely to shock many at Bell and perhaps others in the defense industry, John Young, undersecretary of defense for weapons acquisition, ordered the Army to cancel its contract with Bell because of soaring costs for what was supposed to be a low-priced helicopter.

It was not immediately clear whether the Army would hold a new competition for a helicopter to replace Bell’s aging Kiowa Warriors. Army officials will hold a conference call with news media early today.

"I have decided that the best course of action is to provide the Army with an opportunity to define a coherent, disciplined Kiowa Warrior helicopter replacement program, and to obtain more rigorous contract terms for its development," Young said in a statement.

Bell said, "We are extremely disappointed by this decision and still believe that the ARH-70A is the best replacement for the Kiowa Warrior."

The company noted that the test aircraft have "already accumulated over 1,400 flight hours and have accomplished several important program milestones."

"The ARH has proven to be a great performing aircraft, and we are in the process of evaluating the impact of this decision and our next steps," Joseph LaMarca Jr., senior vice president of communications for Bell, said in the statement.

In July, the Army notified the Pentagon and Congress that its estimates showed the program’s cost rising by more than 25 percent over original estimates, which mandated a formal review by Young’s office. Bell officials have repeatedly said they did not understand the Army’s cost estimates.

Army officials said last week that they expected Young to allow the ARH program to continue with a revised schedule and budget. The Army maintained that it badly needs the aircraft, and its officials said they were optimistic that Bell could control costs.

Richard Aboulafia, aerospace industry analyst with the Teal Group, said Young may have believed that he could afford to take drastic action because of the much lower intensity of combat operations in Iraq, where the Army has heavily used its OH-58Ds.

"Now they can rethink the requirement [for the helicopters] and decide whether to hold a new competition," Aboulafia said.

Almost from the moment Bell won the contract in July 2005, it struggled to meet performance and cost goals for the ARH-70.

The original contract called for Bell to develop and test the aircraft for $359 million and to deliver production helicopters at an average cost of $8.56 million each.

The Pentagon said it now estimates that development will cost $942 million and that the average unit cost will be $14.48 million. Delivery of helicopters to the Army was originally scheduled to take place by 2009, but the Pentagon said the projection is now 2013.

Bell and the Army had already renegotiated the contract terms once, in May 2007, after Army officials overseeing the program threatened to cancel. The Army was essentially ordered to renegotiate at that time after intervention by Army Secretary Pete Geren of Fort Worth and Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas.

"The cost and schedule that were the focus of the decision to award the contract to Bell Helicopter are no longer valid," Geren said in a statement issued by the Army and Pentagon, along with Young’s decision.

"We have a duty to the Army and the taxpayer to move ahead with an alternative course of action to meet this critical capability for our soldiers at the best price and as soon as possible."

The ARH was supposed to be a relatively simple, easy-to-pro- duce helicopter based on Bell’s commercial 407 single-engine helicopter.

Bell won the contract in a competition with Boeing on the basis of a proposal that called for a more powerful engine and Army-specified communications, navigation and weapons systems.

The company originally planned to build the helicopters at its plant in Mirabel, Quebec, but later decided to move production to a new facility it built at Fort Worth Alliance Airport.

About 280 Bell employees in Fort Worth and Mirabel were working on the ARH.

The long-range plan called for Bell to develop an improved version using a new rotor to allow increased speed and weight. But that aircraft, which was to evolve into a commercial version known as the Bell 417, was killed off last year after Bell determined that even with a new rotor and engine there would be little performance gain and a significantly higher cost.

The problems with the ARH were one reason Bell’s parent company, Textron Inc., fired Chief Executive Michael Redenbaugh in January 2007 and replaced him with Richard Millman.

Army Seeks Ideas for ARH Successor


Sources Sought for Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter (ARH)

(Source: Federal Business Opportunities website; issued Nov. 7, 2008)

Agency: Department of the Army
Office: U. S. Army Materiel Command

On October 16, 2008, the U.S. Army announced the termination of the Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter (ARH) contract with Bell Helicopter. As a result, the Army is reassessing the ARH performance requirements.

Specifically, the Army may procure up to 512 new Armed Reconnaissance Helicopters with the capability to perform a Hover out of Ground Effect (HOGE) at 6,000 ft/95 degrees Fahrenheit and operate in an Armed Reconnaissance configuration with required range and endurance.

The ARH will conduct armed reconnaissance to fight for actionable combat information to enable joint/combined air-ground maneuver execution of mobile strike, close combat and vertical maneuver operations across the full-spectrum of military operations.

The Product Manager, Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter (PM ARH) seeks your comments and suggestions on how to accomplish the requirements for this new program. Specific information that should be included in your response is in Appendix A. It is requested that you provide your comments and input to the address below no later than 1:00 P.M CST, 5 December, 2008. Information may include hard copies of material along with CDs and DVDs as appropriate. There is no restriction on the types or quantities of material to be submitted. All information will be handled by PM ARH as Procurement Sensitive.

This notice is not a request for proposal. The government will not award a contract on the basis of this notice, or otherwise pay for information solicited by it. Proprietary information should be clearly marked. The requested information is for planning and market research purposes only and will not be publicly released.

-ends-

Schlapp,

As always, thank you for keeping us abreast of the big view.

On the ARH...how many TENS of BILLIONS and years has the Army spent on a recon helo. It CAN'T be that hard to get the guys a replacement.

Better or not, nice to see someone in DOD rein the industry side in. Now how bout that replacement?

All I want is a newer airframe with more power and better fuel economy. I don't need more armor, more ammo, more anything else, lest I be placed in an Apache. I certainly don't need Rockwell Collins' CAAS! Just give me something that can be as flexible and capable in ensuring mission accomplishment as I am. Apparently, that may be too hard to ask. And, dear Lord, please keep the Acquisition Good Idea Fairies away from the next program incarnation!!

Icarian its so nice to know you care. Too bad we couldn't bring you guys a long. We have tagged most the FOB with Alaska beer signs and stickers. Saw the paper about you guys. Good stuff. Can we have the hanger now? I mean you did try to burn it down.

Crazy, good to see you back on here.

And back to the post at hand. If we get three and then scrap them all do we win a prize? Or do we just get replaced by something else? Oh well its not a big deal. I will continue to do with what I have just like everyone else in Army aviation. I mean common the chinooks are like 100 years old, and blackhawks still have A models. Apaches well I mean there stuff hasn't been updated in like 6 months, thats rough on those guys. Heck Crazyhorse flew a model that I had never seen until I got to see their beat up aircraft.

PSU,

Your avatar reminded me of when I was an Aeroscout Observer (AO, MOS 93B) back in the Guard (way back).

We had an OH-58A/C crewchief who swore that being an AO wasn't anything special, "...because," he said, "they can even teach a monkey to fly!" To spite him, every AO in the company would pick up a banana with their lunch and then start eating it and making monkey noises anytime he came near!

Ha its been plastered several places in and around the FOB. We are actually no longer able to sticker anything. I think its good stuff. As soon as I get the troop video done you'll see it on the internet a little more.

You moving any time soon? I heard the new setup is gonna be nice for you guys. If your interested AK will have slots open for you, if your one of those die hard NY guys who wants to try the "real" cold. Cause I heard Fort Drum is the coldest place on earth and we actually get sent there to get trained.

quote:

Originally posted by PSU18:
Icarian its so nice to know you care. Too bad we couldn't bring you guys a long. We have tagged most the FOB with Alaska beer signs and stickers. Saw the paper about you guys. Good stuff. Can we have the hanger now? I mean you did try to burn it down.

LEAVE that hangar alone when you get back, ya jackass. We burnt the first one down fair and square. Of course be on the lookout for a SHORT, blond ****ed off 60 MTP that deployed with you all. He was the guy that tried burning down the new hangar using a blackhawk as his lighter...yes, he deployed with Delta/you guys Actually, nice guy...but he IS short and generally ****ed off...should fit right in.

Nice to hear on the tagging...makes one think of home.

No, AK is my brother's thing (Coastie AMT and loves Kodiak). I think I'm gonna try this new location out, even though how things run here is kinda guh-hay!! Well, not kinda. More like REALLY.

NY was boring flying anyways and I never got snow-qualified. That possibly has something to do with being deployed or recovering from deployment for three out of five winters that I was stationed there. But we did manage to take snow with us both times (first time in 10 years for snow in Mosul [2004] and first time in 80 years for Baghdad [2007-08]).

If you guys aren't partial to sharing stickers, since you can't tag anything anymore, you can send all of your excess down here and I can give it to a group of young poop-throwers who will be happy to see how far they can get away with it.

I can't believe the no snow-qual. Little different here, it may have something to do with October through May being winter here. I hope the move went well. Doubt your gonna see the much snow now.

quote:

Originally posted by Sgt_Schlappy:
Army Seeks Ideas for ARH Successor


Sources Sought for Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter (ARH)

(Source: Federal Business Opportunities website; issued Nov. 7, 2008)

Agency: Department of the Army
Office: U. S. Army Materiel Command

On October 16, 2008, the U.S. Army announced the termination of the Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter (ARH) contract with Bell Helicopter. As a result, the Army is reassessing the ARH performance requirements.

Specifically, the Army may procure up to 512 new Armed Reconnaissance Helicopters ..//..

The ARH will conduct armed reconnaissance to fight for actionable combat information to enable joint/combined air-ground maneuver execution of mobile strike, close combat and vertical maneuver operations across the full-spectrum of military operations.

..//..

...[related]...


EADS Proposes New Scout Helicopter Offer for US Army

Army-Technology .com
18 June 2009

An EADS North America and Lockheed Martin team have begun work on developing a new AS645 scout helicopter for the US Army, with the aim of fulfilling a previously stated requirement for replacing the OH-58D.

The AS645 helicopter will have a latent ability to hover at 35°C (95°F) at 6,000ft with a payload of 1,045kg. In addition, it will be able to perform in harsh territories such as Afghanistan, EADS officials said at the Paris Air Show according to a report by flightglobal.com.

The new armed helicopter will replace the army's aging fleet of OH-58D Kiowa Warriors. The AS645 team may offer the new helicopter in the third quarter of 2009.

LUH can't even do high/hot (6,000'PA/35°C), so how will an armed version be able to do it? Answer: It won't initially. The Army would basically have to accept an aircraft that doesn't meet its requirements in the hopes that EADS NA/Lockheed can put together upgrades that will meet the requirements after the fact. Not to mention that the EC 145/LUH-72A doesn't handle heat very well right now. And we're not even talking about altitude yet.

What a waste of effort. It will be easier and cheaper to upgrade the OH-58D Kiowa Warrior with a new sight, engine, and transmission in order to get the high/hot performance needed.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorse30:
What a waste of effort. It will be easier and cheaper to upgrade the OH-58D Kiowa Warrior with a new sight, engine, and transmission in order to get the high/hot performance needed.

We could call it the OH-58E? Cause naming a new aircraft would take to much effort and we can't afford that.

Nah, that takes an act of Congress, apparently.