The US Air Force is about to make a decision involving a controversial acquisition strategy affecting a domestic versus foreign aircraft competition, but it's not about the KC-X tanker contract.
This one is called the common vertical lift support platform (CVLSP), which will replace the Bell Helicopter UH-1s owned by Global Strike Command.
There are five known interested bidders: the AgustaWestland North America AW139M, the Bell Helicopter UH-1Y Super Huey, the EADS North America AS332 Super Puma and the Sikorsky UH-60M.
Here's where the controversy comes in.
Instead of running a competition, Lt Gen James Kowalski, chief of Global Strike Command, wants to award a sole-source contract to Sikorsky. (See my story from the AFA Air Warfare Symposium.) Competitive protests derailed three attempts by the USAF to award a CSAR-X contract to the Boeing HH-47 Chinook since 2005. The CSAR-X contract would have allowed the USAF to replace the UH-1s for CVLSP at the same time. After waiting six years, Kowalski doesn't want to run the risk of another protest-driven acquisition delay.
Some of Sikorsky's competitors -- in particular, AgustaWesland -- think this strategy is flawed, and argue that the air force risks paying too much of the taxpayers' money on the wrong aircraft.
So what's the right decision: A sole source contract for the UH-60 or a competitive process?
This one is called the common vertical lift support platform (CVLSP), which will replace the Bell Helicopter UH-1s owned by Global Strike Command.
There are five known interested bidders: the AgustaWestland North America AW139M, the Bell Helicopter UH-1Y Super Huey, the EADS North America AS332 Super Puma and the Sikorsky UH-60M.
Here's where the controversy comes in.
Instead of running a competition, Lt Gen James Kowalski, chief of Global Strike Command, wants to award a sole-source contract to Sikorsky. (See my story from the AFA Air Warfare Symposium.) Competitive protests derailed three attempts by the USAF to award a CSAR-X contract to the Boeing HH-47 Chinook since 2005. The CSAR-X contract would have allowed the USAF to replace the UH-1s for CVLSP at the same time. After waiting six years, Kowalski doesn't want to run the risk of another protest-driven acquisition delay.
Some of Sikorsky's competitors -- in particular, AgustaWesland -- think this strategy is flawed, and argue that the air force risks paying too much of the taxpayers' money on the wrong aircraft.
So what's the right decision: A sole source contract for the UH-60 or a competitive process?
Recent Comments