Torcher, SARBlad & Crab. I agree with all your comments. Why is it noboby ever seems to learn the lessons of previous poor military procurement programmes?
Unfortunately for government military programmes politics nearly always come it to it, as well as often changing requirements as different threats come and go during the often protracted procurement process.
It is much easier if you're buying something 'off the shelf' like the examples cited by Tourcher. I guess one of the problems now is that new military aircraft programmes are so expensive and complex they have to be funded by one or more 'launch' customers and it is a long and arduous process before you get a sufficiently 'mature' aircraft.
Wherever possible manufacturers need 'off line' developement to hopfully perfect the design as much as possible before offering it for sale. But like I said unless a government comes to these manufacturers with big wad of cash they can't afford to do this.
As for the Cyclone, I had heard (purely rumour) that Sikorsky had hoped/expected to win the previous US presidential contratct and would have used this wad of cash do to a lot of the 'militarizing' of the aircraft. Unfortunately they didn't and had to start from scratch with a 100% civil aircraft for the Canadians. Throw in there all the problems issues with the gearbox, and those that other contributors (e.g. squirrel) have mentioned, and there you have it.
BUT, if you always buy existing aircraft 'off the shelf' then the industry is never going to move forward and delevop new aircraft.