User:Born2flie/Bell ARH-70

__NOINDEX__

The Bell ARH-70 is a four-bladed, single-engine, light military helicopter designed for the United States Army's Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter (ARH) program. With a crew of two and optimized for urban combat, the ARH-70 was slated to replace the Army's aging OH-58D Kiowa Warrior. Excessive delays and growth in program costs forced its cancellation on 16 October 2008, when the Department of Defense failed to certify the program to Congress. The ARH-70 was touted as having been built with off-the-shelf technology; the airframe was based on Bell's commercially successful Bell 407. An Army press release and other media reports occasionally referred to the ARH-70 by the name Arapaho, but the Army never announced it as an official popular name.

Development
On February 23, 2004, the U.S. Army announced their decision to cancel the RAH-66 Comanche helicopter program. The program had cost US$6.9 billion dollars and 20 years of development without fielding a production aircraft. The cancellation was a result of a six-month Army study directed by the Chief of Staff. The study recommended that the Army could save US$14 billion dollars by cancelling the program before the Comanche reached production, and that the savings could then be used to update and replace the aging airframes of the current fleet.

The study targeted the OH-58D Kiowa Warrior for replacement based on the age of the airframe, recent losses, and the lack of replacement airframes. In response, the Army developed an armed reconnaissance helicopter concept that would use commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) technology, with a goal of an operational unit of 30 helicopters and eight trainers ready by September 2008. On 9 December 2004, Army officials issued a request for proposals (RFP) for the ARH; two companies submitted bids:


 * Boeing proposed the MH-6M Mission Enhanced Little Bird (MELB), an upgraded version of the MH-6 Little Bird. Because the aircraft was already in service with the 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment, it became the predictive favorite despite doubts that MD Helicopters Inc. (MDHI) could ramp up production to meet the contract's demands. To alleviate this concern, Boeing purchased the production rights for the design and served as the prime contractor.


 * Bell Helicopter proposed an update of the OH-58D concept in a militarized version of the Bell 407, using a more powerful Honeywell HTS900 turboshaft engine, an all-composite main rotor based on the Bell 430's rotor, and the Bell 427 tail assembly.

On 29 July 2005, the Army announced Bell as the winner of a contract for 368 helicopters. There was some confusion as Bell figures placed the contract value at US$2.2 billion while Army estimates were over US$3 billion, compared to its earlier estimate of US$2.36 billion. The contract called for two prototypes for development and two pre-production aircraft to be delivered to the Army for the Limited User Test (LUT), with the first unit equipped by the end of September 2008. The plan changed to require four pre-production aircraft to be delivered to the Army for the LUT.

Flight test program
Bell's ARH demonstrator, a modified Bell 407 (s/n 53343/N91796), first flew on 3 June 2005. In February 2006, the ARH demonstrator flew with a limited avionics and Mission Equipment Package (MEP), and in April, Bell fitted and mounted the Honeywell HTS900-2 engine to the demonstrator airframe, followed by a series of ground runs. The Honeywell engine was then mounted in the first ARH-70 prototype (s/n 53903/N44515) with additional ground runs.

The first flight of the ARH-70 was on 20 July 2006, at Bell's XworX facility in Arlington, Texas, by prototype #2 (s/n 53904/N44548). The flight had been delayed, first in March and then in May, to allow Bell to configure the prototypes as preproduction aircraft. The Army's program manager had stated there was no room for delays, but Bell and the Army both eventually agreed that this delay would be essential for maintaining the compressed timeline for development.

On 21 February 2007, during its maiden flight, prototype #4 (s/n 53906/N445HR) suffered a loss of engine power, due to fuel starvation, and made an autorotational landing at a nearby golf course. The aircraft was totaled when it rolled over during the landing, but the test pilots survived unhurt.

Program cost problems
Bell canceled the concurrent development of their civilian model 417 on 11 March 2007, citing a lack of market impact for the program. 11 days later, the ARH Program Office issued a stop-work notice as a result of significant development cost growth and disagreement over the increased price of low-rate initial production aircraft. Reports say that the Army planned to cancel the contract outright, (based on article by Bob Cox, Fort Worth Star-Telegram behind paywall) but instead gave Bell thirty days to come up with a plan to get the ARH program back on track. Previous estimates for the System Development Demonstration portion of the program had grown from $210 million to over $300 million, and Textron, Bell's parent company, had notified investors that they could lose $2-4 million on each aircraft under the contract. Bell appealed and received permission to continue development using company funds until the notice was resolved. On 18 May 2007, the Army approved a continuation of the ARH program.

On 25 July 2007, the House Appropriations Committee’s Defense panel drafted a bill for the 2008 Defense Budget which zeroed out funding for ARH-70 production, citing Bell's inability to enter production, but continued funding for research and development. However, in January 2008, government officials began working on an export policy to allow international sales of the ARH-70. Including the U.S. Army's expected total of 512 helicopters, orders were anticipated to total over 1000. Unexpectedly, the Army filed a Nunn-McCurdy cost and schedule breach on July 9, 2008, when new cost estimates showed a 40% cost increase above initial estimates. In August 2008, the Army requested that Bell cease hiring workers for the ARH-70 program pending the outcome of the Nunn-McCurdy review.

Cancellation
On 16 October 2008, the Army's Acquisition Executive Office for Aviation directed that the ARH contract be terminated completely for the convenience of the government. The cancellation was the result of the United States Department of Defense (DOD) not certifying the US$6.2 billion ARH-70 program to Congress. John Young, the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, cited the reason as excessive costs of the program which had increased over 70 percent with an estimated per-unit cost of US$14.5 million, up from US$8.5 million.