HH-47 selection should be revisited, says GAO, giving hope to Lockheed, Sikorsky
After being told its award of a possible $15 billion CSAR-X combat search-and-rescue helicopter contract to Boeing was flawed, the US Air Force hopes to comply with the Government Accountability Office's (GAO) recommendation to revisit the selection process without restaging the 145-aircraft competition.
On 26 February, the GAO sustained protests by losing bidders Lockheed Martin and Sikorsky, ruling that the USAF's evaluation of the most probable life-cycle cost was inconsistent with the approach set out in its request for proposals. The Congressional watchdog recommended that the service amend the solicitation, re-open discussions with bidders and request revised proposals. If an evaluation of these determined Boeing's offer of the HH-47 Chinook was no longer the best value then its CSAR-X contract should be terminated, the GAO adds.
The USAF says it "believes it can comply with the intent of the recommendations more narrowly". US defence analyst Loren Thompson of the Lexington Institute says the service wants to avoid reopening the competition. "The air force wants to do as little as possible as fast as possible. They want to focus on the application of the cost calculation rather than extraneous issues," he says, alluding to the various aspects of Boeing's bid that have been questioned by the losing competitors.
Based on the US Army's special-operations MH-47G, the HH-47 was a surprise choice to replace the USAF's much smaller Sikorsky HH-60 Pave Hawks. Speaking last month, air force chief of staff Gen Michael Moseley said: "The HH-47 would not have been my choice, but we can make it work."
Lockheed and Sikorsky, which offered the US101 and HH-92 respectively, welcomed the GAO's rare decision. Boeing says: "We still believe the HH-47 is the most capable platform for the CSAR mission and provides the best value to the air force."
The USAF has 60 days to respond, and says it will "determine an appropriate plan of action" once it has reviewed the GAO decision.
Source: Flight International
