What is AgustaWestland Chopper Scam?

 What is AgustaWestland?

AgustaWestland(AW) was formed in 2000 as a merger of Agusta(Finmeccanica's subsidiary) & Westland Helicoptors(GKN's subsidiary). Agusta specialised in making commercial choppers while Westland was the only company manufacturing UK's military choppers. The two companies help merger talks while developing EH-101(aka AW-101), a military cum civil chopper, amidst the consolidation phase of Europe's aerospace and defense industry. The rationale of the merger was not exploiting synergies or cost-cutting but producing newer products used for both civil and military purposes as well as leveraging each other's geographical influence. GKN bought out its share in 2004 leaving Agusta as the sole owner

Why were the choppers needed? What's the background?

It was perceived that Mil Mi-8s, the existing choppers in until 2000, would become obsolete due to major operational constraints such as inability to operate efficiently during night time and adverse weather conditions. Also, after the 1999 Kargil war, it was required that choppers be procured which could operate at a height of 6000 meters(Siachen Glacier) and could also be used for transporting VVIPS since Mi-8s weren't that comfortable

.

What was the criteria to select the choppers? Why were AW-101 selected over its competition?

A Request For Proposal(RFP) with the above requirements was floated to 12 vendors out of which 4 responded and the IAF's technical evaluation committee shortlisted 3 including EH-101 of AW. But since EH-101 was not yet certified to fly at 6000 m, it didn't participate in the further flight evaluation round. The Russian helicopter Mi-172 could not comply with 7 mandatory Operational Requirements (ORs). That left only Eurocopter's EC-225 as the default choice and IAF's report was sent to PMO in the latter part of 2003. Then Brajesh Mishra, NSA to then PM Atal Bihari Vajpayee, asked the SPG, responsible for VVIPs protection, for its comments. The SPG apparently said the EC-225 was unsuitable because its cabin height was too short (at 1.39 metres) and that neither the VVIPs nor the SPG personnel would be able to stand upright inside such a cabin. Mishra then asked the then Air Chief Marshal to broaden the competition and consider SPG's concerns. The new specifications being considered suggested the helicopters must be able to fly at an altitude of 4500 meters(same as Mi-8s) since the PM & President rarely traveled at bigger heights and that its cabin must be at least 1.80 m in height. But, in January 2004, the Air Force insisted on keeping height at 6ooo m as anything less would cut off VVIP helicopters from traveling from Leh valley to Srinagar which involves crossing Zoji La Pass as well as the Siachen glacier. This view changed when Air Field Marshal SP Tyagi became the chief and agreed to the reduced height norm. Also, the quantity of helicopters proposed for procurement was revised from 8 to 12 helicopters by adding 4 helicopters in non-VIP configuration for security reasons. It was not until 2006 that a fresh RFP, with the same specifications, was issued under UPA-1 to six vendors. Three companies -- the makers of Mi-172, Sikorsky which made the S-92 helicopters and AW-101 -- responded to the RFP. Meanwhile, the defense ministry put in place a new concept -- the Defense Procurement Procedure. Under this, all companies that bid for contracts above Rs 1 billion have to sign an integrity pact that binds the companies to give an undertaking that no bribes would be paid or that agents would be used in the contracts. The Russian company that manufacturers the Mi-172 withdrew from the competition at an early stage refusing to sign the integrity contract. That left AW and Sikorsky in the race. According to IAF sources, the S-92 was found to be non-compliant on four counts:

1. It could not reach 15,000 feet without maximum power.
2. Its 'hover out off ground effect' was insufficient.
3. Its drift down altitude did not meet the requirement.
4. Its missile airborne warning system was not up to the mark.

AW, with its three engines, was a bonus, according to IAF test pilots since one engine failure still meant it had two engines to fall back upon. Sometime in 2009, Air HQ sent its recommendation to the defense ministry and after going through stringent financial and technical requirements, a contract was signed in February 2010.

How do the various choppers compare? Which one should have been selected ideally?

HOGE - The height at which the helicopter can fly in open air. HOGE = Hover Out of Ground Effect. As altitude increases, the air becomes thinner and at a point the machine will no longer be able to produce enough lift to support its weight.

HIGE - Maximum height (measured in feet) at which the helicopter can fly over a surface. Flying near the ground requires less power to lift the machine.

A HIGE altitude ceiling of 12,000 feet and a HOGE altitude ceiling of 10,000 feet means that a skilled pilot could fly over a 12,000 foot peak while keeping the helicopter close to the ground.

Range - This is the distance that the helicopter is able to travel on a single tank of fuel.

As you could see, AW-101, although expensive to procure and run, trumps other choppers on most of the counts. But that doesn't make it the right buy. We required VVIP choppers for high altitude areas(~6000m) and AW-101 doesn't do that job howsoever superior it might be performance-wise.
One thing to note here is - IAF, in its evaluation report said that S-92's HOGE was insufficient. But data shows that it's(6500 ft) much better than AW-101's(3500 ft). Higher HIGE & HOGE are desired if the intended purpose of the chopper is to operate in high altitude areas. On these counts, S-92 would have been a better buy.