This is great news here. I live about a mile from where these will be built, and the last few years have seen a lot of jobs leaving the area.

Boeing MH-139 to Replace U.S. Air Force UH-1N Huey Fleet

PHILADELPHIA, Pa., Sept. 24, 2018 — Boeing will provide its MH-139 helicopter and related support to the U.S. Air Force to replace the more than 40-year-old UH-1N “Huey” helicopters used to protect America’s intercontinental ballistic missile bases.

The program awarded today is valued at $2.4 billion for up to 84 helicopters, training devices, and associated support equipment.

“We’re grateful for the Air Force’s confidence in our MH-139 team,” said David Koopersmith, vice president and general manager, Boeing Vertical Lift. “The MH-139 exceeds mission requirements, it’s also ideal for VIP transport, and it offers the Air Force up to $1 billion in acquisition and lifecycle cost savings.”

The MH-139 derives from the Leonardo AW139, which is used by more than 270 governments, militaries, and companies worldwide. Leonardo will assemble the helicopters at its northeast Philadelphia plant, with Boeing integrating military-specific components at its facility south of that city.

The contract also includes operations, maintenance, training systems, and support equipment for the MH-139 aircraft.

“We’re proud to provide the U.S. Air Force with solutions across the entire services ecosystem,” said Ed Dolanski, president of U.S. Government Services, Boeing Global Services. “With the AW139 platform’s more than 2 million flight hours and established supply chain, we look forward to applying our expertise to drive cost savings while supporting mission readiness.”

For more information on Defense, Space & Security and Global Services, visit http://www.boeing.com.


Marc

Great win for Boeing.

When I read an article about this it made me chuckle and wonder how far manufacturers can go to have a product look like its completely a US product in order to appear "politically correct".

The MH-139 is basically a Leonardo AW-139 fitted in the U.S. with US-made military equipment.
But to call it a Boeing product is a joke IMHO.

Don´t want to question the aircraft itself nor the fact that it was chosen but just how it´s presented to the public ...
I understand sometimes one needs to be creative to circumvent Restrictions (only "made in U.S.A." permitted) but it seems a bit far fetched in this case, isn´t it?

Just had to vent my thoughts regarding political correctness ...
No offense intended.

Btw.: It´s great Leonardo was able to get the contract together with Boeing which shows the AW-139 is a good platform.

It is not a joke. Boeing put the deal together with an already American made helicopter and they are branding it a Boeing. It just the same as with a myriad of other military products

rlwynn wrote:

It is not a joke. Boeing put the deal together with an already American made helicopter and they are branding it a Boeing. It just the same as with a myriad of other military products

Just to remind you Leonardo is an Italian company and in this particular case they´re manufactured in Philadelphia.
I understand it´s the same approach as Airbus having a production line in the US now ...

But it´s still more a European "brain child" adapted to US needs.
I´m fine with that and I know it happens in many other fields too but I´m still scratching my head why societies in general fool themself by somehow pretending it´s "home made" ...

MHG wrote:

I´m fine with that and I know it happens in many other fields too but I´m still scratching my head why societies in general fool themselves by somehow pretending it´s "home made" ...

Afaics this is mostly limited to one nation. ( examples from elsewhere? )
How do you hold your worldview "all down hill around us" together without that kind of self-deception?

WIederling wrote:

MHG wrote:

I´m fine with that and I know it happens in many other fields too but I´m still scratching my head why societies in general fool themselves by somehow pretending it´s "home made" ...

Afaics this is mostly limited to one nation. ( examples from elsewhere? )
How do you hold your worldview "all down hill around us" together without that kind of self-deception?

That´s exactly my extended line of thinking.
Makes me wonder how long this kind of cover up can/will work (my guess: for a pretty long time unfortunately as long as media are willing to buy into that)

WIederling wrote:

Afaics this is mostly limited to one nation. ( examples from elsewhere? )
How do you hold your worldview "all down hill around us" together without that kind of self-deception?

You would be clearly wrong in your assessment. While the US has a requirement to have at least 50% locally manufactured content that is common practice for many nations for contracts below a certain size and for large contracts they use offsets to compensate for lack of industry or skills. A large number of US military equipment already has either foreign content or is manufactured under license from foreign designs.

I'm not sure why Boeing using a Leonardo design is big news.The more interesting question is how much money Boeing will actually make on the contract given Leonardo is the manufacturer and it appears that Boeing's component is minor military modification of the airframe. Leonardo would also be primed to win future support contracts given their OEM status.

From the different news articles it appears Boeing also went in very cheap and there is an expectation that the other vendors, LM and Sierra Nevada may protest (heck LM already protested before contract award...).

Ozair wrote:

WIederling wrote:

Afaics this is mostly limited to one nation. ( examples from elsewhere? )
How do you hold your worldview "all down hill around us" together without that kind of self-deception?

You would be clearly wrong in your assessment.

We were not talking about using foreign produce/design.
We were talking about presenting foreign produce/design as your own superior work.

WIederling wrote:

Ozair wrote:

WIederling wrote:

Afaics this is mostly limited to one nation. ( examples from elsewhere? )
How do you hold your worldview "all down hill around us" together without that kind of self-deception?

You would be clearly wrong in your assessment.

We were not talking about using foreign produce/design.
We were talking about presenting foreign produce/design as your own superior work.

Exactly following my line of thinking.
Why don´t they market this not even as Boeing-Leonardo ?
It´s just hiding the fact that it is not made purely by a U.S. company

MHG wrote:

WIederling wrote:

Ozair wrote:

You would be clearly wrong in your assessment.

We were not talking about using foreign produce/design.
We were talking about presenting foreign produce/design as your own superior work.

Exactly following my line of thinking.
Why don´t they market this not even as Boeing-Leonardo ?
It´s just hiding the fact that it is not made purely by a U.S. company

It is standard practise around the world to rename foreign products with your own designation. Additionally, Boeing is the prime on the product so that is why it is represented as such.

From Boeing own press release on the tender bid

Boeing submitted its bid for the U.S. Air Force to buy up to 84 MH-139 helicopters to replace its Huey fleet. The Boeing proposal for its MH-139 helicopter could save more than $1 billion in acquisition costs and lifecycle expenses.

MH-139 is a militarized version of the Leonardo Helicopters commercial AW139. Outside, it has a rear intake engine that can ward off heat seeking missiles, flare dispensers and large windows. Inside, there's increased carrying capacity, a glass cockpit with advanced avionics, and a four-axis digital autopilot with auto-hover.

The MH-139 offering is for the Air Force’s UH-1N Replacement program. Hueys currently protect intercontinental ballistic missile sites and transport U.S. government and security forces.

https://www.boeing.com/features/2017/09 ... -0917.page

They clearly represent the MH-139 as a militarized version of the AW-139. WIederling's absurd anti-west statements aside, what more do you want them to do?

Just look up Chevy Spark and see that this kind of re-branding is happening all over the world . . .

Ozair wrote:

I'm not sure why Boeing using a Leonardo design is big news.The more interesting question is how much money Boeing will actually make on the contract given Leonardo is the manufacturer and it appears that Boeing's component is minor military modification of the air-frame. Leonardo would also be primed to win future support contracts given their OEM status.

They will probably make only a little money with the militarization of the helicopter. They will probably make more money with the training and maintenance contract. And even if they do not make much from this contract, it is Boeing's interest to win these types of contract, as helicopter is one of their core competency.

The allegiance with Leonardo may be more strategic as the off-sets world is more complex. Who know? Maybe Italy may buy some P-8A now

As for support contract, I would suspect the US Air Force would stay with Boeing as prime thru habit and familiarity and Leonardo would be happy to provide the expertise.

And what's in it for Leonardo? Maybe a whole bunch of lucrative commercial contracts

bt

Why not call it the Boeing Netflix? Seeing a show first commissioned by and broadcast several years ago, for example Peaky Blinders on the BBC, called a 'Netflix Original' when that platform is in this case, just distributing it worldwide.

Boeing have some form here, the Boeing 717, really a MD design, what's more the '717' was the original Boeing designation for the KC-135.

None of the above should be taken seriously, as others have said, this is not unusual.

If an adapted Sikorsky UH-60, built by Westlands and powered by RTM332's, had succeeded in being sold to the RAF in the 1980's, it would have been the WS-70.
When the Japanese build a foreign, usually US design, they just stick a 'J' on the designation.

If a more economical, good quality commercial helo wins the contract we all should be happy. How many disaster programs have circled around the pentagon - too many to count, but a glaring example was the original Marine One helo. Before it died and was reconfigured the unit cost was more than a commercial 787, well north of $100M each. I wonder how much of the $1 B saved here is in the acquisition cost.

http://fortune.com/2018/09/25/boeing-ai ... -contract/
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-boein ... r-force-id
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/boeing ... 2018-09-25

A quick search in addition to the Boeing press release yields zero evidence that the company is trying to hide its partnership with Leonardo or somehow trick the DoD or American taxpayer into thinking that this is a 100% US-sourced offer. Where do you guys come up with this shit? Nothing is being hidden, no one is being tricked, the public acknowledgement of Leonardo's role and participation are all very much transparent to anyone with the slightest desire or ability to read.

WIederling wrote:

MHG wrote:

I´m fine with that and I know it happens in many other fields too but I´m still scratching my head why societies in general fool themselves by somehow pretending it´s "home made" ...

Afaics this is mostly limited to one nation. ( examples from elsewhere? )
How do you hold your worldview "all down hill around us" together without that kind of self-deception?

Germany has built a ton of its helicopters this way. The CH-53G is a German variant for example. As was the UH-1 that was built in Germany.

The UK has done this with the AH-64 and often makes little tweaks to foreign sourced items and then builds the “improved” version itself.

Japan has done this extensively with many aircraft and many helicopters over the years.

But that is just off the top of my head in response to your usual bigoted nonsense. I am sure if I spent 10 minutes looking I could find many more instances of the same thing on all levels of defense procurement.

28 mil per unit, isn't it pricey for an utility helo? even if it includes support and spares and training.

I like how they point out that it's great for "VIP transport"...angling for another run at the Marine One fleet perhaps?

AviationAddict wrote:

I like how they point out that it's great for "VIP transport"...angling for another run at the Marine One fleet perhaps?

The current huey's are used for helos of VIP in both normal and crisis movements. About half of the buy is for that use.

MHG wrote:

I understand sometimes one needs to be creative to circumvent Restrictions (only "made in U.S.A." permitted) but it seems a bit far fetched in this case, isn´t it?

A common misconception, but false. There is no requirement to specifically buy only made in the US aircraft, parts, etc.

Will it be called MH-139 in USAF service or will the Air Force assign its own designation?
On a side note, Leonardo (former AgustaWestland) developed a military derivative of its highly successful AW139 in the form of the AW149, which is a bit bigger. From this they developed the civilian AW189. But then they also developed militarized versions of the AW139. The Italian Air Force has bought it as SAR platforms, called HH-139, to similarly replace the AB-212 (basically UH-1).
Further on the AW139, it started as AB139, a joint program with Bell in the 90s when the two Companies developed this helicopter and the civil tiltrotor BA609 (now AW609).
Anyway, I´m glad to see Leonardo succeed in the tough US market. I hope for them it won´t turn out as another C-27J or VH-71.

In the DOD's frigate competition there are 5 firms doing a design development contract - two of the proposals use the Wisconsin yard owned by the Italians (that yard is currently building one of the two designs of the LCS). There is a British, Italian, and Spanish parent design. I would assume engines and gearboxes are not changing from the parent designs.

Airbus was going to build the tankers, but that 'went away'!

bigjku wrote:

Germany has built a ton of its helicopters this way. The CH-53G is a German variant for example. As was the UH-1 that was built in Germany.
.

Still it is presented as a Sikorsky CH-53 license built in Germany.
Not as a MBB XY-53 or even a Bo 153 ...

Then, do you actually know what bigoted means?

steman wrote:

Will it be called MH-139 in USAF service or will the Air Force assign its own designation?

Maybe...


quote="steman"]Anyway, I´m glad to see Leonardo succeed in the tough US market. I hope for them it won´t turn out as another C-27J or VH-71.[/quote]
Shouldn't be anything like the VH-71. The MH-139 will be off the shelf with some small customisations and a fixed price contract. VH-71 was anything but that...

checksixx wrote:

There is no requirement to specifically buy only made in the US aircraft, parts, etc.

There is a law that require US military vehicles that use certain fabric materials for upholstery must procure the fabric from a US factory. This law is a pain but it does exist.

bt

Ozair wrote:

Shouldn't be anything like the VH-71. The MH-139 will be off the shelf with some small customisations and a fixed price contract. VH-71 was anything but that...

Concur. This project will most likely be managed through Boeing Philly operation. We rarely hear any issues with any Chinook projects.

bt

bikerthai wrote:

checksixx wrote:

There is no requirement to specifically buy only made in the US aircraft, parts, etc.

There is a law that require US military vehicles that use certain fabric materials for upholstery must procure the fabric from a US factory. This law is a pain but it does exist.

bt

Fabrics? LoL...I guess I'd believe that if they meant ballistic rated fabrics such as Kevlar or Dyneema....

WIederling wrote:

bigjku wrote:

Germany has built a ton of its helicopters this way. The CH-53G is a German variant for example. As was the UH-1 that was built in Germany

Still it is presented as a Sikorsky CH-53 license built in Germany.
Not as a MBB XY-53 or even a Bo 153 ... .

Instead of complaining on a.net, perhaps spend your time working with your government and use this opportunity to get even by announcing the Airbus A130M transports you just ordered.

WIederling wrote:

Then, do you actually know what bigoted means?

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/bigot gives us "a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion".

Revelation wrote:

WIederling wrote:

Then, do you actually know what bigoted means?

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/bigot gives us "a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion".

Haha, I like how you're being subtle in your referencing with that emoticon.

checksixx wrote:

Fabrics? LoL...I guess I'd believe that if they meant ballistic rated fabrics such as Kevlar or Dyneema....

Surprisingly no. The law was an archaic rule created by powerful senator to help protect the textile industry of certain part of the U.S. It did not help the industry as most of it has moved off shore. But the law is still on the books and we still have to follow it. Strange thing is that it only prohibit the use of the material in upholstery etc. You are fine to use the fabric for other uses and sell it to the government.

bt

MHG wrote:

rlwynn wrote:

It is not a joke. Boeing put the deal together with an already American made helicopter and they are branding it a Boeing. It just the same as with a myriad of other military products

Just to remind you Leonardo is an Italian company and in this particular case they´re manufactured in Philadelphia.
I understand it´s the same approach as Airbus having a production line in the US now ...

But it´s still more a European "brain child" adapted to US needs.
I´m fine with that and I know it happens in many other fields too but I´m still scratching my head why societies in general fool themself by somehow pretending it´s "home made" ...

You are aware, are you not, that the AW139 was originally the Bell-Agusta 139, correct? Guess who did most of the design?

So the competitors have decided to not protest. LM also has been noted they are not protesting the T-X either.

https://www.defensenews.com/air/2018/10 ... t-victory/

The Philadelphia site does CH/MH-47 Chinook, MV/CV-22 Osprey, Future Combat Systems, Logistics Support Systems, Advanced Rotorcraft.

https://www.google.nl/maps/@39.864241,-75.3212782,1747m/data=!3m1!1e3




For a long time I'm trying to get support for a dedicated helicopter platform on airliners.net. A topic like this could florish there instead of getting lost quickly. Please take a few second to post a few words of support for this dedicated forum. Thnx! https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=20823963#p20823963

First MH-139 is in production.

http://www.airforcemag.com/Features/Pag ... ction.aspx

It's kind of crazy how long those Hueys have been around for, had the privilege of riding around in one outside of F.E. Warren and experiencing some fun flight maneuvers.

DigitalSea wrote:

It's kind of crazy how long those Hueys have been around for, had the privilege of riding around in one outside of F.E. Warren and experiencing some fun flight maneuvers.

When I first joined I remember all the rappel towers still had Huey skids and mock fuselages were common. I even remember doing a training mission for a MEDEVAC using a Huey as recently as 2007. They have indeed last a long time, especially for the Air Force.

Today will be an announcement as to the name for the MH-139, this is the first time a AW-139 enters the DOD fleet.

The first article has been delivered for the start of acceptance testing.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/3 ... aser-tweet

It's official per the AFGSC twitter machine: MH-139A Grey Wolf

https://twitter.com/AFGlobalStrike

aumaverick wrote:

It's official per the AFGSC twitter machine: MH-139A Grey Wolf

https://twitter.com/AFGlobalStrike

I like it

Reddevil556 wrote:

aumaverick wrote:

It's official per the AFGSC twitter machine: MH-139A Grey Wolf

https://twitter.com/AFGlobalStrike

I like it

I do too. Much better than Striker.

aumaverick wrote:

It's official per the AFGSC twitter machine: MH-139A Grey Wolf

https://twitter.com/AFGlobalStrike

It's an interesting name choice. First, the "English" spelling, and second, what happened to the tradition of naming helicopters after Indian (sorry, Native American) tribes? Is that just an Army thing?

TangoandCash wrote:

aumaverick wrote:

It's official per the AFGSC twitter machine: MH-139A Grey Wolf

https://twitter.com/AFGlobalStrike

It's an interesting name choice. First, the "English" spelling, and second, what happened to the tradition of naming helicopters after Indian (sorry, Native American) tribes? Is that just an Army thing?

Yep! The Army, with permission from the tribes, are the ones who designate all of their helos with tribal names. The Air Force has historically taken the name with the helicopter, or in some cases, adapted their own version of the name (i.e. PAVEHawk). This is the first helicopter procurement independent of any other branch.

TangoandCash wrote:

aumaverick wrote:

It's official per the AFGSC twitter machine: MH-139A Grey Wolf

https://twitter.com/AFGlobalStrike

It's an interesting name choice. First, the "English" spelling, and second, what happened to the tradition of naming helicopters after Indian (sorry, Native American) tribes? Is that just an Army thing?

Grey is probably the more proper/formal name for the species. Plus, let's face it, it's a European design/aircraft...

TangoandCash wrote:

aumaverick wrote:

It's official per the AFGSC twitter machine: MH-139A Grey Wolf

https://twitter.com/AFGlobalStrike

It's an interesting name choice. First, the "English" spelling, and second, what happened to the tradition of naming helicopters after Indian (sorry, Native American) tribes? Is that just an Army thing?

It’s not a native US design, and calling it “The Don chopper” probably does not sound military enough.

texl1649 wrote:

Plus, let's face it, it's a European design/aircraft...

But "Lupo grigio" would not sound right either. Sound to much like gigolo.

bt

No, it's because many of us here are tired of the political grand standing. We just want to discuss the technical merit of these machines.

Necessary or not, it would be nice to have a program comes in on time and on budget.

bt

bikerthai wrote:

No, it's because many of us here are tired of the political grand standing. We just want to discuss the technical merit of these machines.

Necessary or not, it would be nice to have a program comes in on time and on budget.

bt

On time and on budget, amazing in that it is so rare for a program.

Granted, the AW-139 is a fine machine with over 1,000 delivered and very popular in the market. I sense that there will be a lot of add on MH-139's to the contract as it has an attractive operational cost.

N328KF wrote:

You are aware, are you not, that the AW139 was originally the Bell-Agusta 139, correct? Guess who did most of the design?

Agusta. The Bell-Agusta joint venture was setup with Augsta developing BA/AW139 and Bell developing the BA/AW609.

JayinKitsap wrote:

Granted, the AW-139 is a fine machine with over 1,000 delivered and very popular in the market.

You can see the parallels with the 737 & P-8A. If you take the politics out of it, something good may come of it. Introduce politics, and you get the KC-46.

bt

Not really, It does not have to do anything that it not already does. And it does that better than I would say. all.