Head Turner, I think you have made my point for me, again.
Using this as a logical base, the US101 must be 'better' than the S92.
The UH1 has far more in-service time than the EH101, so using your logic, it is therefore "better" than the EH101.
Older isn't necessarily better (nor is older necessarily worse).
I'm sure that the EH101 is a fine machine. Yes, it is a more mature program than the S92. Does that maturity mean that the EH101 is better than the S92? Of course not. Does the fact that the S92 is newer than the EH101 mean it is better than the EH101? Of course not. The EH101 may be better than the S92 (or vice versa), but maturity alone cannot be the yardstick.
Frankly, I don't know which is the better helicopter. I do not have the expertise to make that determination. Nor do I work for Sikorsky or any other company likely to benefit from this contract.
But asserting that the EH101 is better because it has been around longer is nonsense.
If you believe the EH101 is better, then show me some facts and figures. What are the expected mission profiles? What are the comparative capabilities when flying those profiles? Compare payload, range, cost (purchase and operating cost), etc. Compare the safety and combat survivability features of the two.
The presidential helicopters are frequently transported via US transport aircraft. Compare and contrast the ability to transport the EH101 and S92 on C5 and C17 aircraft. Can they both fit? What preparation/completion is required to do so?