again. Testing was, however, able to continue in the meantime, as Platt-LePage had re-negotiated the XR-1 contract to cover a second flight-test aircraft. Built to a revised and improved version of the XR-1's design and designated XR-1A, the second aircraft had flown for the first time in May 1943. The XR-1A featured a revised cockpit covering compared to that of the XR-1, with the area of glazing being increased for improved visibility, and the pilot and observer's positions being reversed, the pilot now seated in the rear cockpit. During flight testing the XR-1A was found superior in flight performance to the XR-1; however, the controls were still proving troublesome, although the worst of the bugs did seem to have been worked out. Following a cross-country flight to Wright Field in Ohio from Platt-LePage's Pennsylvania plant, testing of the XR-1A continued until a mechanical failure in the rotor hub led to a crash landing on 26 October 1944, the company deciding to sell the wreckage for scrap. The XR-1, having been repaired in the meantime, was once again flying, and a contract had been awarded to Platt-Lepage for the construction of seven pre-production aircraft, to be built to an improved version of the XR-1A design, and designated YR-1A. Motivated by Congressional concerns about potential favouritism towards Sikorsky Aircraft, which had in the meantime been given a contract for development of an improved version of their VS-300 experimental helicopter, the contract called for delivery of the first YR-1A to the Army in January 1945. However, due to continued financial and flight-testing problems, Platt-Lepage proved incapable of meeting this schedule. Although the XR-1's problems seemed to be approaching resolution by late 1944, the protracted development of the aircraft meant that alternative, improved helicopters, such as Sikorsky's XR-4, less expensive and more maneuverable than Platt-LePage's aircraft, were becoming available. In addition, even the XR-1A's improvements had failed to cure the aircraft of all of its control and vibration problems, and the AAF's Air Materiel Command considered the company "inept" in its work, applying a "hit-or-miss method" to research and development. As a result of this assessment, the Army's contracts with the company were universally cancelled in early April 1945. Following the cancellation of the Army's contract, the XR-1 was returned to the company, Platt-LePage believing that the design had potential as a civilian aircraft. The planned civilian version, the PL-9, would have been an