I pick up what you're putting down, but I still think the -S was and is shortsighted. I get it, the S was a short fuse acquisition to replace the Phrog in a quick and low risk fashion. It had what was available at the time. It was not forward thinking in any fashion, save for a unique and now obsolete glass cockpit.
Mission sets? What we train for but hopefully never need. ASU/SOF/PR. I'm not some tactics sycophant, but bringing those capes to the fleet is important. Any bubba can do SAR/LOG/VERTREP. It takes time and the ever illusive "Give a Damn" to be proficient in the other arenas. So we don't to it daily? Neither does the "experts", the AF Pararescue bubbas. Their doing medevacs in AFG just to keep relevant. It's a skill that's rarely called upon but nonetheless needed. You could say the same for BFM amongst the VFA dudes. When's the last time a US jet downed another jet in anger? 99? We've had PR events since then, so your argument would stand equally to the Jet dudes practicing BFM.
What do we need? A real replacement for the H, not just a truck that we bolt shit onto and hope for the best. Ability to go over land and succeed, relevant over water, and can fill the SAR/LOG/VR role. The other modern militaries get this (AW101, Super Cougar, etc). Saying that nothing existed at the time to fulfill that need is just excusing our acquisition system again for giving us what they had, and not what we need.
You still fail to give specifics how the AW101 and the Super Cougar would fill capabilities that the MH-60S lacks. Range? Speed? Cargo Room? What do you need these for? Were they specified in the 60S requirements document and the airframe then didn't meet it? As before, the two examples you've mentioned don't have forward firing weapons capability so there goes that mission set. The AW101 that the UK uses has two versions: their ASW shipboard helo and their Commando Helo. Which version do you want? Again, both of these helos are significantly larger than the MH-60 airframe and are much more akin to the size of a 53D/J. What do you need the added room for to conduct the missions that are currently required for the MH-60? The Navy doesn't need a troop transport, we're not in that business. Also, with the increased size, you lose the ability to operate from all the ships in the fleet. Not very useful for a Naval helicopter. You wouldn't be able to take that airframe and throw it on a USNS a la the Expeditionary Sea Combat det.
Again, what does the 60S fail to do that the 60H did? It's ASU capabilities are beyond the 60H with the addition of the M197 and the LAU. At the time that the 60S was acquired, the 60L, as used by SOAR, was the pre-eminent SpecOps helo. So, at the time of the initial acquisition it sure seems like it would make a lot of sense to acquire a navalized version of the 60L to fulfill the 60H replacement requirement.
You guys are approaching the problem like HSC fleet LTs and not Navy-wide helicopter program managers. Navy helos currently perform ASW/ASU, SUW, Sea Combat, Fleet defense/AMCM/SAR/LOG/NSW/PR missions. I'd wager a bet that NSW and PR are at the bottom of the Navy's fleet helo priorities. I'd be willing to guess that ASU, ASW, and AMCM are top concerns. Big Navy has HSC-84/85 for it's NSW specific needs. Big SOCOM has SOAR for it's NSW needs. In a joint environment, the AF has better PR resources. Does the fleet need an organic ability to do NSW and PR? Honestly, I don't know.
What was the bullshit with adding the wings to the 60S? Is your issue with how it was done? If so, who care? The fleet now has the capability to utilize the weapons that OPNAV has determined that are a best fit. The 60S can mount a minigun, no one has decided to pay for it or the NCEA and T&R costs that would come with it. Same with in-flight refueling. The plumbing is there, the need isn't.
What else did USN miss out on from the 60L that it needed? The 60S has the capability to use a moving map, the Navy decided not to pay for it. Since they have all the other missions to fund, you can see how a moving map would be towards the bottom of the priority list.
The Navy has elected to spend RW money on other things that the communities and the OPNAV ROs have determined are most needed. GPS approach capability. Improved gearboxes. Datalinks. Sonar and radar improvements for the 60R. AMCM improvements. All of these aren't necessarily what y'all want, but it's what Big Navy needs. If you guys want oodles of money for overland missions, you need to go fly for SOAR or 84/85.
