헬리콥터 Re: FLRAA 프로그램 사업자 선정에 대한 시코르스키의 항의가 기각

[위종민]

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/sikorskys-protest-of-bells-v-280-win-over-its-sb1-shot-down

Sikorsky's Protest Of Bell's V-280 Win Over Its SB>1 Shot Down

FLRAA 사업자 선정 결과에 대해 시코르스키가 이의를 제기한 게 기각됐네요. 이게 받아들여졌으면 사업일정이 상당히 지연됐을 텐데요. 

Sikorsky’s Protest Of Bell’s V-280 Win Over Its SB>1 Shot Down

With the stakes so high, the formal protest was Sikorsky-Boeing’s last clear shot at being selected for the Army’s Black Hawk replacement.

BYTYLER ROGOWAY|PUBLISHED APR 6, 2023 8:06 PM EDT

THE WAR ZONE

DEFIANT X helicopter. Honeywell

SHARE

TYLER ROGOWAYView Tyler Rogoway's Articles

Aviation_Intel

Bell's V-280 Valor-based win for the Future Long-Range Assault Aircraft — a high-speed replacement for many U.S. Army Black Hawks and possibly more — was a massive loss for the competing Sikorsky-Boeing team. A protest of that award was all but certain and one was indeed put forth. Now that protest has been resolved unfavorably for Sikorsky and Boeing and their SB>1 Defiant-based design.

Make sure to read our complete analysis of the Army's decision to push forward with the V-280 Valor-based design over the SB>1 Defiant-based design here.

V-280 Valor which Bell based its FLRAA bid on. (Bell)

The Government Accountability Office shed some light on why it made its decision to resolve the protest bid in favor of Bell. It also disclosed some aspects of why the Army chose Bell's concept over Sikrosky-Boeing's in the first place. Its statement reads, in part:

"Sikorsky challenged the agency’s assignment of a rating of unacceptable to its proposal under the engineering design and development eval‎uation factor, architecture subfactor, which ultimately rendered the proposal ineligible for award. Sikorsky also argued that the agency should have found Bell’s proposal to be unacceptable. Finally, Sikorsky challenged the agency’s eval‎uation under the engineering design and development factor and the product supportability factor; the cost/price eval‎uation; and the best-value tradeoff decision.

In denying the protest, GAO concluded that the Army reasonably eval‎uated Sikorsky’s proposal as technically unacceptable because Sikorsky failed to provide the level of architectural detail required by the RFP. GAO also denied Sikorsky’s various allegations about the acceptability of Bell’s proposal, including the assertion that the agency’s eval‎uation violated the terms of the solicitation or applicable procurement law or regulation. Finally, GAO dismissed Sikorsky’s additional arguments on the basis that Sikorsky was no longer an interested party to further challenge the procurement."

SB>1 Defiant next to a UH-60 Black Hawk it intended on replacing. (Sikorsky)

These comments are not flattering of Sikorsky-Boeing's protest justification or its original proposal. In response to the protest being ruled out, Sikorsky issued the following statement on behalf of it and Boeing:

“We remain confident the Lockheed Martin Sikorsky and Boeing team submitted the most capable, affordable and lowest-risk Future Long-Range Assault Aircraft solution. We will review the GAO’s decision and determine our next steps.”

The GAO said they are working to release a redacted version of their justification. Such a move would be welcome to some as the decision process related to the original award has remained somewhat opaque.

Now that the Army can move forward with Bell's FLRAA concept, not only does it threaten Sikorsky's dominance as the supplier of the backbone of the U.S. Army rotary wing fleet, but it also meant one concept, the V-280 Valor-based second-generation tilt-rotor, would be able to mature with Army backing under FLRAA.

V-280 Valor had more time in the air than the SB>1 with the prototype flying throughout its performance envelope over a number of years. (Bell)

Still, Sikorsky has another shot at getting its X-2 technology, on which the SB>1 Defiant is based, into the fleet. This comes in the form of the Raider-X, which features the same compound, counter-rotating, rigid-rotor design as the larger SB>1 that was passed over for Bell's design under FLRAA. Raider-X is competing against Bell's far more conventional design, the 360 Invictus, under the Future Armed Reconnaissance Aircraft (FARA) competition. This program aims to fill the void left by the retirement of the OH-58D Kiowa Warrior and replace a large number of AH-64 Apaches, as well.

Raider-X largely finished with construction and armed with dummy Hellfires and its chin-mounted gun. (Sikorsky)

Bell's Invictus is also seen nearly finished with construction. (Bell)

As for the SB>1 itself, its future is less clear. We have reached out to Sikorsky to see if they will continue working on the type independently and look for other opportunities relating to it, but they had nothing further to add at this time.

Still, a lot has to go right between now and 2030 when the Army wants its first Bell FLRAA aircraft operational. Cost, not just in terms of acquisition but also in terms of operations and sustainment of a fleet of high-speed tilt-rotors, remains a major concern. But for now, second-generation tilt-rotor technology is where the Army is placing its future medium vertical lift bets.

Contact the author: Tyler@thedrive.com

[마로]

애초에 SB-1이 항속거리 같은 기본 요구사항을 충족하지 못한 이상 항의가 받아들여질 가능성 자체가 매우 적었죠. GAO 말대로 사업 참여 기본 요건 충족 자체가 안돼서 사업에 대해 어떤 영향력을 행사할 자격이 없다는 뜻이니...

[위종민]

대안이 없는 사업이면 요구를 조정할 수도 있었겠지만 대안이 있으니..