Sikorsky wins $1.28B U.S. Air Force helicopter contract


The Pentagon awards a $1.28B contract to United Technologies' (UTX) Sikorsky division for combat rescue helicopters to replace an aging fleet; it is Sikorsky’s second major chopper contract from the military in less than two months.

The agreement could be worth up to $7.9B if all options are exercised for as many as 112 new helicopters based on the UH-60M Black Hawk made by Sikorsky in partnership with Lockheed Martin (LMT), which is building the onboard mission systems.

The program's future still rests on the outcome of congressional wrangling over the latest defense budget and efforts to prevent the retirement of the A-10 jet.

From other sites
Comments (14)
  • airtaz
    , contributor
    Comments (2) | Send Message
     
    please do NOT RETIRE the A10
    thou yes to update it is a possibility
    as the warthog is the best close air support aircraft in the inventory and tanks FEAR it as well

     

    airtaz
    26 Jun 2014, 08:39 PM Reply Like
  • LikeUntoGod
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
     
    The Air Farce came up with the A-10 because the Army was trying to find a attack Helicopter to do is own close air support. The "threat" to the Air Farce was the Cheyenne which was ahead of it's time and was replaced by the Cobra.

     

    And now they want to dump it for a $150M plane that cannot fly low or slow or see to hit anything.

     

    Getting rid of the A-10 will cost American lives in battle. Period.
    26 Jun 2014, 09:29 PM Reply Like
  • Derek1966
    , contributor
    Comments (3) | Send Message
     
    Your right about the Cheyenne and the Cobra. Your also right the A-10 is a fine aircraft. I flew them. Where your wrong is thinking they are dropping them. Boeing and South Korea were granted a $1.1 Billion Dollar contract all the way back in 2007 to replace 233 A-10 airfoils and strut supports (The wings and Engine mounts)... There is also a FLIR and GFR (Ground Following Radar) upgrade taking pace on all 233 aircraft. They are receiving a lass cockpit upgrade to lighten the pilot load along with a better flight management system. I flew the planes from 1987 through 1995. They are a handful when your reading a map on your thigh, fling the jet, performing your mission task and making mid-air re-fuel deadlines. So that's what's up with all the new gear. Your also wrong about the F-35. It is a shame the way the media is hammering that aircraft. But I point to the tangible facts. There are several manufacturers of FINE tactical combat support aircraft who have airplanes on the market. The UK, South Korea, Japan, Thailand, Australia and The Philippines all bought the F-35. Not The Dassault Rafael... Not the Saab JAS 39 Gripen... Not the Eurofighter Typhoon... Not the Russian Yak-130 or Sukhoi Su-25 or Sukhoi Su-27... Or the MIG 35 (Venezuela bought some of the MIG 35's, but who knows how they plan to pay for them?).. Not the Chinese Chengdu J-10..Now Russia does have a plane on the boards, the Sukhoi T-50. We'll have to see when and if it is realized if it is what they claim.. Until then..???.....Nations who want the best... Will Buy from the West. They buy F-16's, F-18's, F-15's, F-35's and some day... If they hold their mouths just right... We may even sell a neutered F-22... But don't hold your breath for AT LEAST 10 years.
    So... Calm yourselves... The A-10 is here for 20+ years. And the F-35 once it has sorted out the bugs will be the preeminent fighter in the world, save the F-22. Write it down in Ink...
    27 Jun 2014, 06:18 AM Reply Like
  • Rogue Scholar
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
     
    Obviously you never heard of the A/OV1 Mohawk. From 2963 until 1965 the U.S. Army was developing an attack version of the Mohawk. They were based at Fort Rucker, AL but flew their gunnery missions out of NAS Jacksonville.
    But the Air Farce got peeved and cried to Congress. As a result the Army had to stay out of attack airplanes ..... and the Air Farce was forced to develop a close support aircraft.
    The Army was also looking into jump-jets like the Ryan XV-5 Vertifan and the Lockheed XV-4 Hummingbird. http://bit.ly/1m5QBnO
    27 Jun 2014, 05:15 PM Reply Like
  • USAF E7
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
     
    Leave it to the idiots wearing stars at the Pentagon to want to squash the A-10, which is probably the best close air support and tank killer to come along in many years. With its' titanium tub to protect the pilot and the engines up high, it is pretty hard to shoot down.
    26 Jun 2014, 10:45 PM Reply Like
  • Derek1966
    , contributor
    Comments (3) | Send Message
     
    You must not be following the A-10 program very well. 233 A-10 wings nearing the end of their structural and economic service life are being replaced along with their two support kits, at Hill AFB. Come on man. An E7 should know this. I flew these aircraft along with F-16D & E's and a few ather rides for 26 years. Anytime people start talking budget, particularly with as many contracts up in the air (no pun) as there are.... the best way to manipulate a vote is threaten a loved and needed program. The USAF has ZERO thoughts of completely phasing out the A-10. The VERY capable F-35 (which is being relentlessly attacked by media) is capable of close air support, but doesn't fit the same peg in the same hole as the A-10. If the SR-71, F-117 or B-2 projects would had not been black bagged, or had been built in this social media environment, they would have been hammered in this 24-7-365 in the social media world also. Those two jets (The F-117 and B-2) were nothing but one problem after another during development. The only difference between them and the F-35...? No one had a clue either existed until they had already been in service for 8 years that they even existed.
    27 Jun 2014, 07:43 AM Reply Like
  • adirondackboy
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
     
    Using a B-1 Bomber for close air support works just fine. Oh Wait......5 brave Americans were just killed like that because the A-10 should of been used!
    27 Jun 2014, 12:19 AM Reply Like
  • GRIFFONRET
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
     
    A10 needs some updates true but it is no where close to the cost what there wasting on new crap!
    27 Jun 2014, 12:19 AM Reply Like
  • Derek1966
    , contributor
    Comments (3) | Send Message
     
    Everyone just needs to calm down... The A-10 Wing Replacement Program is planned to replace 233 A-10 wings that are nearing the end of their structural and economic service life. In 2007, Boeing was awarded a $1.1 billion contract to build replacement wings at its Macon, Ga., plant. Boeing has also contracted with Korean Aerospace Industries to build the outer wing sections. The wing sections and support kits, are being installed at Hill AFB. It's a done deal, the contracts were already awarded. There will be at LEAST 233 A-10 aircraft in our military for 20 more years. BTW... I flew the aircraft, along with the F-16D. What you are hearing is typical political noise. There are contracts up in the air (no pun) for at LEAST 75 aircraft projects ranging from system upgrades to entirely new designs. When someone wants their way, they threaten to can a loved product. And another thing... I read the comment about the F-35. Don't buy into the negative media surrounding that aircraft either. There is a damned good reason that EVERYONE is buying the aircraft and not the Euro-fighter or some Russian dog. Saab, The French, China, Russia have ALL tried selling their designs to the UK, South Korea, Japan, Australia, Thailand and The Philippines. The all bought the American jets. The F-35 is just like every new system ever created, only it is happening under the bright lights of Social Media and 24-7-365 News cycles. Coupled with an ongoing Liberal attack of the program they have hated from day one. The U-2, SR-71, F-117 and B-2 spirit were al built without the public having a CLUE they were being designed and constructed. F-117's were flying for 8 years and there were 4 squadrons of them before anyone even knew they existed. TRUST ME.... Those projects cost the lives of several men . They failed, they were fixed. They had issues, they worked through them. THAT is what it takes to build a modern military jet. The F-35 is just in plain view, with a bunch of people giving uneducated opinion that social media provides for. The FACTS speak for themselves and the MEDIA RARELY uses the facts these days.... People buy the best weapons they can afford. The F-35 is a fine aircraft.
    So relax... The A-10 will be around a LONG TIME (20+ years) and the f-35 is a fine fighter and will outclass anything it encounters except for the F-22 Raptor. A plane that has capabilities beyond what you THINK you know.
    27 Jun 2014, 07:43 AM Reply Like
  • JRTENN
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
     
    Those that live in or near DMAFB Tucson, and serve where the marvelous A-10 has saved their lives, and the lives of countless other Americans...will tell you how short-sighted, dangerous and naive the "kill off the A-10" movement truly is. If we can not replace the A-10 with the same effectiveness and power...then smart people say leave the A-10 alone...and operational.
    27 Jun 2014, 07:44 AM Reply Like
  • bambiklr1
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
     
    This is an article about the new CSAR helo and you guys are commenting on the virtues of the A-10 CAS aircraft. BTW the AC-130 is the best CAS EVER!
    27 Jun 2014, 11:43 AM Reply Like
  • Bill-khe_sahn
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
     
    The best solution would be to take the A10 gun and mount it in a V-22 Osprey giving the Marines a close air support gunship capable of taking out almost any beachhead defenses. The gun could be adapted to point detonate explosive shells. Just a thought from an old infantry marine.
    27 Jun 2014, 05:14 PM Reply Like
  • tommy shaw
    , contributor
    Comments (2) | Send Message
     
    osprey is stupid weapon platform fly to slow,way to noisey,easy to bring down,one chip off the rotor makes them unbalance and it coming down and can be heard 23 miles at 10 thousands feet.
    27 Jun 2014, 09:36 PM Reply Like
  • tommy shaw
    , contributor
    Comments (2) | Send Message
     
    I sure hope we don't have war conflict continuing for the next 20 years,if so those who sign off on such agreements need to explain where,why and who this shi? aint fun,no future and we known how the big boys want to play..nasty
    27 Jun 2014, 09:37 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Hub
ETF Screener: Search and filter by asset class, strategy, theme, performance, yield, and much more
ETF Performance: View ETF performance across key asset classes and investing themes
ETF Investing Guide: Learn how to build and manage a well-diversified, low cost ETF portfolio
ETF Selector: An explanation of how to select and use ETFs