Thanks to those who have responded. Most are aware of the changes made to recent aircraft derivatives or new models, but my interest lies with procedures/profiles that have not changed.
The accurate representation of AW 169 performance below shows that adherence to the profile puts (or is likely to put) the aircraft in conflict with the 4.5% obstacle limitation surface (OLS). This is due to limiting the first segment climb to 200 ft.
However, the aircraft is capable of climbing to 1000 ft by the pilot continuing the climb on the 2.5-minute power setting as shown:
So, to repeat my question, what in the RFM prevents the pilot from flying the profile in the second figure?