Wouldn't it be more cost-effective to convert UH 60-A into UH 60 L or M.

Or maybe just mothball the A models for the next time we have a need or lots of money to spend ? ?

Taliban, and highlight the biggest debacle of cut and run since the fall of Saigon. Saigon wasn't near as bad though.

Taliban, and highlight the biggest debacle of cut and run since the fall of Saigon. Saigon wasn't near as bad though.

I'm betting you were never there, pucknutz- you speak in absolute ignorance.

like you were? as if.

Wait, wait. You are actually positing that the government and DOD in particular should make decision based on cost effectiveness???  Bwahhhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhaaaaaa

not be what decisions are based on

Yeah,I mean chosing the vendor that can meet the mission requirements cost effectively is silly. The award decision should be based on how many historically disadvantaged employees they have and how well they reward these employees and how well the benefit plans support transgender surgery and mental health support for gener disphoria and such.

There is a saying: you get what you pay for.

It really is not cost effective to upgrade the high time airframes. Plus, putting them into long term storage at the AMARG, costs money. Many of the "A" and "L" models are provided as DoS gifts to other nations. Later, the nation that received the gift realizes how expensive it is operate and sustain the gift! The GSA auctions are at least a bit of a return on an old airframe.