Beags, BWoS did indeed propose a turbofan replacement but I don't think all the QFIs were on-side. The problem with the BWoS proposal was (I believe) that they had employed a geriatric 2* ex-QFI to advise, hence the decision on side-by-side seating. Worse than that was an attitude to performance that is best summarised as "modern engines are twice as efficient as the old ones, so we have been able to take out half the fuel and you will still get an hour out of it!"
PC-9 was a clear winner in the fly-off but then it did not have the Belfast connection, nor was there a desire to reward Switzerland for all its support during the Falklands campaign.
Build quality on the initial Tucano deliveries reflected a decision to re-employ some dockyard mateys who were checked out on building ships and therefore available for work. Apparently, if you can weld and rivet steel plates, you can do aircraft work as well. I heard from one of the engineers about wiring looms that had been closed off with insulating tape, dropped rivets painted to the fuselage floor, missing fasteners etc. The first ac was in a hangar for a long time while a CWP fixed 75+ major faults.
There was a lovely story doing the rounds at the time about the S/L project officer (Ian W*rm**d), who was apparently thrown out of a meeting by the AOC for his response to a question about what the new aircraft should be called, as 'Tucano' was a bit too Latin for some. "Sir, what about calling it the PC-9? "
