Our new friend, Michael Goldfarb, over at the The Weekly Standard has a nice piece up about the un-nice CSAR(X) competition called Nobody's First Choice.
DTI Editor in Chief Bill Sweetman has this commentary on Michael's post:
The Chinook hasn't become as widely used as it is without being basically a sound machine. On a big helicopter there are advantages to splitting the torque between two rotors - and it makes the Chinook, despite the age of the basic design, quite efficient in terms of how much it hauls for the installed power and empty weight. That said, I was predicting a US101 win - because it was bigger and more mature than the Sikorsky HH-92 -- and was surprised at the choice for CSAR of a helicopter that can be heard and identified for miles. (That's why the Brits call the CH-47 the "Wokka".) But it would have been gutsy to choose the AgustaWestland design yet again over domestic designs, right after the MarineOne replacement decision. It might have suggested that the Pentagon's decision to spend all its rotorcraft R&D money for two decades on the V-22 and the Comanche was, in retrospect, erroneous.
DefenseTech is linking Michael's story, too.
Update: This just in! We have an exclusive news video on this issue! Check it out: USAF Looks For Answers In CSAR-X Issue
--Sean Meade
Hmmm, it's an exclusive all right.
The Chinook: "a workhorse for the US Marines for decades"...
And why is that nice chap from Business & Commercial Aircraft briefing us on CSAR-X of all things?
Must try harder.
Posted by: Airpower | April 21, 2007 at 04:43 PM