IFMU.in post #13, you noted: " The Boeing UTTAS entry was about 400lbs short of the lift spec requirement."
Had not heard it expressed that way. From experience during the fly-off, there were two events which indicated that the hover performance wad different by a very significant margin.
1. Ft Rucker Al Shell Field. Training of the Army pilots designated to perform the operational eval at FT Campbell. Same day-same weather. Both the Boeing and SA aircraft had cargo hooks approved for 7000 lbs.The sling load consisted of seven, 1000 lb drums, individually attached by steel cable to a collector ring, which could then be easily slipped into the hook by a ground crewman standing on one of the drums.SA went first and starting with full fuel, trained all their 10 pilots, stopping after 5 to refuel. No issues with the pilots or load. Boeing then started and could not budge the 7 drum load. Disconnected one drum and tried again. No luck with 6000 lbs. Disconnected another drum and just about lifted that 5000 lb load to a low hover, from which they carefully did a very slow takeoff.No HOGE noted.
2. FT Campbell KY. One UTTAS requirement was to sling the new Army vehicle called a Gamma Goat. Weight was 7000 lbs. The Army pilots/crew took a fully equipped SA UTTAS with full fuel picked up the Gamma Goat, flew it around and landed it without an issue. As did the Boeing UTTAS, EXCEPTwe learned later, from an Army pilot flying that day, that the Boeing UTTAS had only 400 lbs of fuel, had removed all the cabin interior and seats and all but a single UHF comm radio. Full fuel on UTTAS was about 2400 lbs as I recall. You can do the math.