Thanks for that Nick. I will be able to see a copy of the EC225 Type Certification Data Sheet next week so may be able to give you the certification number then.
I don't think you should read too much into the wording of those press releases, there are some difficulties producing such things in a 'foreign' language (English). I am no expert on these things (besides I'm only a pilot!) and have never even seen an EC225 let alone the S92 but I'm sure that you have some non compliant items, which are accepted because they provide an equivalent level of safety. This is allowed for in the regulations. For example, the electronic engine instrument system may not comply with the exact wording of the regulation since having a 'green arc' painted on the screen is hardly practical.
(A layman's explanation written in front of the TV at home with no reference to the actual documents involved) I think this is what was probably meant by "virtually" in the EC press release you quote.
From memory, if pilot action is required "within several seconds" of a system failure, such as a MGB oil pressure loss, isn't that non compliant with Part 29?
I am sure both machines are a great advance on those previously available in the offshore market and I hope that we all get to reap the benefits of improved safety. Let's wait for the facts to be published and not "rubbish" to opposition based on some poorly worded press release.
vert