That might be a struggle. Let's remember that last time, the Contract Notice estimate was £2bn to £3.1bn. Then the competive dialogue cut it down to the 'Usual Suspects', B + B + C. Then, when price was examined, CHC (an incumbent!) was rejected because they were more than 20% higher than the cheapest bid. Then Bristow were awarded at 20% below the Contract Notice estimate for a contract that had probably become more expensive as the process had evolved.
How many companies really really want SAR? Is being short of oil crew change work really enough to turn you into a SAR-God?
Is a Parent Company Guarantee worth the paper it's written on?
The MCA seems currently obsessed with the mountain of data pointing at short, quick rescue jobs involving only one or two rescued persons. I don't think that scenario is a surprise to anyone on here. So that results in the new Lot 1 spec and people start asking themselves if they need a big expensive AW189 for these little jobs and can they do this with an AW139, Dauphin, 145, secondhand Alouette? Once they are deeper into this, that may not seem so simple though.
Another aspect of possibly using a more diverse fleet for a diverse range of sizes of job is that the right aircraft will rarely be in the right place at the right time. The stats show that Inverness have been most of the way to Denmark and most of the way to Rockall in their 189s which I think is an indicator that these things do not always turn out as you expect.
So, as it currently stands, this is not same-old-same-old and there are lots of new ideas splashing around. It is going to be interesting to see what emerges once all the new ideas are thrashed out during months of interaction between the MCA and the bidders. Could still end up as same-old-same-old with the usual suspects in the frame by this time next year. Who knows?!