(Update) More CSAR

Published April 20, 2007 5:32pm ET



I posted an article at THE DAILY STANDARD yesterday on the CSAR-X competition, and I think it’s worth doing a little follow-up here. First off, Aviation Week has posted a video on the competition that goes a long way towards explaining why the Chinook was selected, but they don’t make any excuses for the bungled competition: “the U.S. Air Force is searching for an answer to its search and rescue embarrassment.” At the Aviation Week blog Ares, Bill Sweetman weighs in, saying he was among those who expected a win for Lockheed’s US101, adding that the Chinook has some real limitations as a CSAR platform. He also notes that despite the name–US101–the Lockheed chopper is mainly a product of Italian/British firm AugustaWestland. That the aircraft had already been selected as the next presidential helicopter, says Sweetman, meant “it would have been gutsy to choose the AgustaWestland design yet again over domestic designs.” True enough, and we’re on record here in favor of Boeing’s entry in the tanker deal if for no other reason than the French connection to rival Northrop Grumman’s bid (see When Frogs Fly). But still, buying Italian hardware would seem a far less risky proposition than buying from the French–a big no-no for the Republicans who were still eating freedom fries in the House cafeteria not too long ago. Blackfive posted a link to the story, and a few of his commenters, who are quite knowledgeable on such issues, also saw the Chinook as a logical, low-risk choice–it is already in service, the Air Force needs this contract fulfilled sooner rather than later, it’s a reliable aircraft, etc. All true. There is a case to be made for the Chinook. Stephen Trimble, who edits The DEW Line, told me he supports the decision:

The HH-47 is only the most expensive solution on paper. Both the US101 and H-92 would require a new engine to meet the air force’s requirements. That engine is still in development. Integrating a new engine into a helicopter is highly risky. I think the air force was looking for a low-risk solution. And I think the CH-47 is the least risky of the three.

Trusted reporting.Unlimited access.

Subscribe for full access to Washington Examiner coverage, expert political analysis, and subscriber-only journalism.

Get Unlimited Access

Already a member? Log in

Cancel anytime.