They did. The army said there wasn't a key defining reason why it chose the V280 instead of the Defiant X

thank you very much for the comment

Let's look at the pros and cons shall we this is being unbiased. V-280 Pros Substantially longer range. Considerably faster. Greater reliability. Greater troop capacity. Less maintenance. Greater payload. built on an open architecture system. Built on lessons learned and thus a mature technology that has proven safer than conventional helicopters. Cons. Only a little bit larger than a UH-60, making a landing in smaller areas a bit more troublesome. SB-1 Defiant and its associated variants. Pros Smaller than 280 but not by much. Design is easily scaled up or down. Greater maneuverability. Cons. Larger than a UH-60. Slower than a tilt-rotor, faster than a helicopter. Has constant reliability issues thus resulting in fewer flight hours. Substantially lower range. Lower troop capacity, 2/3 of the aircraft is engine and drive shafts. Higher maintenance and RnD costs. No room for further advancement. Further, the ability to auto-rotate isn't a con nor a pro and doesn't make the helicopter safer since it has only been used twice in the seventy-plus years of military service with countless sorties. Those two times weren't even combat-related.

That's another program. This one is for a reconnaissance/ attack helicopter

@@Predator42ID Also unlike the internet myths out there a tilt rotor aircraft can auto rotate and glide but like you said it isn't even a major consideration.

@@Predator42ID stupid question what if they used a jet engine on the back instead of a prop?

@@theofficialmbc Aside from a speed improvement, it would result in a reduced range.