Story ID: 4ADP119AWSuitAIN1114
AgustaWestland Sues over Airbus Army Trainer Plan
By: Mark Huber
Caption: The Italian manufacturer is challenging the legality of the service’s plan to sole-source the contract to replace its fleet of Bell TH-67 trainers.
Word Count: 583
The U.S. Army’s plan to acquire up to 110 Airbus UH-72A Lakotas, the military variant of the EC145, as primary helicopter trainers has met with a legal challenge from AgustaWestland (AW). AW alleges, “The army has acted unlawfully and unreasonably by restricting competition to only EC145 helicopters and by not opening the competition for its requirements to other helicopter manufacturers.”

AW filed a complaint on September 19 contesting the legality of the Army’s plan to sole-source the contract to replace its fleet of Bell TH-67 trainers. AW is seeking a federal temporary restraining order to block the acquisition and wants to offer its AW119Kx single or AW109 light twin as alternatives. AW’s move is seen as largely political since the Army has yet to determine how it will formally go about contracting for the new training helicopters. That decision is expected in January.

The controversial trainer replacement plan first surfaced in the Army’s FY2015 budget request. The plan calls for 102 Airbus UH-72A Lakota twins, the military derivative of the EC145, to be transferred to the Army’s helicopter school at Fort Rucker, Ala., and operated there as primary flight trainers. Those helicopters are currently used in a variety of active-duty missions such as VIP transport and security and support work. The 192 UH-72As currently assigned to National Guard units would not be affected. The Army then plans to add more new-production UH-72As to its training fleet: 55 in FY2015 and 45 and 2016.

The plan has drawn sharp criticism from both AW and Bell.

In an attachment to the September 19 complaint, AW North America CEO Robert LaBelle asserted, “Some of the basic flight characteristics of the UH-72A/EC145 raise doubt about the aircraft’s suitability as a primary flight trainer. Among other things, the UH-72A/EC145 helicopter has a restricted flight maneuver envelope and other features that are likely to impede its training utility.”

Earlier this year, a Bell spokesman noted, “Fielding the Lakota to support initial entry training will cost hundreds of millions of dollars in transition costs that can be avoided by retaining the TH-67. Add to that a cost difference of $1,000 to $1,500 per flying hour more for the UH-72 and you have to wonder if the move to a glass cockpit and twin engines is worth the higher cost.” The UH-72A has a fly-away cost of $5.5 million per aircraft.

The Army is seeking to consolidate the number of helicopter models it operates by grounding all of its single-engine helicopters, including the TH-67 and the scout/attack OH-58.

Meanwhile, a spokesman for AW said the company plans to continue to pursue a contract for new primary training helicopters with the U.S. Navy, offering a variant of its $3.25 million AW119Kx single with Garmin G1000H avionics and fitted with student, instructor and observer seats to replace the Navy’s fleet of 115 TH-57 Sea Rangers, that service’s training variant of the Bell 206. In November last year the Navy issued a request for information. “We’ve invested in the project and there are a number of activities that we are bringing the 119 to over the next month,” said an AW spokesman. That schedule included the annual fleet fly-in at NAS Whiting Field in Florida at the end of October. AW has also launched a microsite that explains the benefits of using the 119 for training: www.advanced helicoptertrainer.com.