Next up will be FARA. The Army will pick what is best for their soldiers, as their lives depend on this equipment. This will override jobs in Connecticut concerns. The clutched pusher prop on Raider X is a potential problem. Sikorsky will be very careful, most of the parts in the clutch will be flight safety parts. Still, anything mechanical can fail, even if it only happens once. Unlike a Cessna where everyone knows to stay away from the prop, people will become careless because they think the prop will never be turning on the ground, until one time it is. This is insidious.
There is no significant reason to select the underpowered Raider X unless it is substantially faster than Invictus. Even then, it depends on whether this increased speed is considered to be much of an advantage by the Army, if Invictus meets the required speed. Simplicity improves reliability, safety and maintainability, and Invictus is simpler than Raider X.
The Army probably will not go to a twin engine melt and repour. Keeping the GE engine would give us two 3000 hp engines, or 6000 hp, compared to the Apache 4000 hp. Essentially this would give us a growth Apache, not a scout helicopter. It is unlikely the Army would pull the plug on its new engine and go back to using something like two older technology T800 engines. The new GE engine is a major improvement over previous engines.