Aser,
Your statement is so very correct, but perhaps not as you had intended it!
The fact that such a disparate set of helos, with vastly different payloads, levels of safety/technology, cost to operate, performance and life cycle cost were lumped into a single "procurement" is the issue at hand.
I once was told by a prospective customer that he was considering an A-109 or an S-76B, and he asked me what could I tell him to sway him. I told him to stick to cars, the two aircraft were so widely apart (the 76 could carry a chopped up 109 as cargo) in peformance that he didn't yet know enough about what he was going to do with the machine. He would either be vastly disappointed when he couldn't carry enough, or when he was paying too much.
The poor LUH requirements are responsible for setting up a race between horses, tuna and aardvarks, frankly.
BTW, Ms. Tilton sounds like quite a woman!