I agree, Boeing Philly is not dead, yet. But their clean sheet, new platform design capabilities are gone. The Comanche was designed over 25 years ago.
Boeing’s primary contribution on FLRAA was political, not technical or financial. Boeing’s lobbyists and
PR departments probably billed more hours than their engineering.
Boeing has now lost all hope for any FLRAA content (talk about betting on the wrong horse). Meanwhile, FARA has been delayed, likely grown is size, and probably changed to twin engine. This makes FARA more of a direct competitor to the Boeing Apache, than a Kiowa replacement.
So when the final FARA RFP is released, this contract may become a three way competition between Sikorsky, Bell, and Boeing. With Boeing proposing an upgraded Apache.
Regarding Boeing acquiring Bell, or Textron. Scary thought.
I was working for Sikorsky at the time at an offsite location. I never worked this project. The work split with Bpeing was 50-50. Blades Boeing, rotors Sikorsky, transmissions Boeing., and so forth. From my limited viewpoint, all the feedback regarding Boeing engineering was good, I never heard anything negative.
This is news to me if the Army is considering going to twin engine on the FARA, this would be a total melt and repour. Politically FARA would be dead, as bean counters in DOD prefer drones over a manned reconnaissance helicopter. The delay and added cost would be fatal? If FARA is dropped and a replacement for Apache pursued instead, there could be a three way competition. As the Army has rejected the idea of adding a pusher prop to the Apache, this might be a rematch of Valor and Defiant.
It is scary, but my gut feel is the big three will become two, in whatever combination, over the next few years. More likely Boeing sells helicopters to Lockheed.