`   ==Need Help== I've created the page but it's clearly not exactly well presented ) If someone could clean it up i'd be very grateful (being completely new at this I don't want to screw it up completely). Also if someone could insert citations for sources because again I have no idea how to atm O Thanks for the assistance..—Preceding unsigned comment added by   •    == Bell 210 ==  Bell never submitted the 210 for this program.  They were attempting to expedite the 210 FAA certification in order to use it as their submission. Instead, they offered the Bell 412 due to its proven record and dual engine design to match the other aircraft being considered. I do not believe this [dual engine design] was the sole reason, but I remember that the FAA certification was a prime factor. At no time did they offer the 214 for this contract bid. There were only 4 submissions for the contract, although MDHI's LUH website makes a case against both the Bell 210 and the Bell 412EP. ( )  :This is some great backround on the selection process-the previous information had been based on Global Security (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/luh.htm). By all means update the article with this, as the initital listing was preliminary.    ==Merge==  As the UH-72A is really a EC145 I would suggest this article is merged with the Eurocopter EC145 article before we end up with two identical articles.  :Actually, both these aircraft are the BK-117-C. But since Eurocopter bought out Bolkow, they get to call it whatever they want, I guess. Wikipedia:merge shows you how to recommend merging articles. ( ) *Merge  On second thought, I'm going to agree with you. Other than radios and kits, there will be very little modification to the standard production EC145 to create this helicopter. ( ) *Don't Merge In time the UH-72 will be loaded with info that have no need to be on EC-145 article, such U.S. Army developments with it, aircraft accidents, etc. I especially oppse this if LUH is also going to be merged into it, as the LUH info is only tagentially relevant to the EC-145.    == Merge, Part II ==  *Merge  I recommend that the U.S. Army Light Utility Helicopter Program article be merged into this article since the significance of the program is the aircraft that is selected. ( )  :: I have reinitiated this recommendation to merge U.S. Army Light Utility Helicopter Program article into this article. The reasons: :#The articles contain duplicate information :#With the selection of the UH-72 (EC 145) as the program winner, the U.S. Army Light Utility Helicopter Program article will not grow, since the program has now become the UH-72 Lakota program.   *Don't Merge - Especially not if UH-72 is merged into EC-145, as all the information on a Army program is not highly relevant to the EC-145. If the UH-72 is not merged, then it might be reasonable depending how it is done.    == Merge, Part III ==  *Merge - The LUH page should include the UH-72A data.  The UH-72A is now the LUH.  I would recommend keeping it distinct from the EC-145 page, as it is different in some ways from the base EC-145 (BK 117C2) in the areas of avionics and specific mission kits.  *Don't Merge - LUH was a military program not a aircraft, its not in the same category. The LUH's page point of focus - the other contenders and the competition itself -don't hold the same relevancy to the helicopter article. Putting everything together will restrict each subjects growth. LUH program details will suffer, as they won't be seen as relevant to the operational and technical traits of a aircraft.    *Merge - The LUH page should be merged into the UH-72 page, as both pages are rather short at this time. The LUH program is over (as it was won by the EC145), so there will be no new developments in the program which ar