"I have advocated for the new softer OEI interpretations of JAR Ops (in spite of having poised the S-92 to meet it!) because it is actually correct, and less onerous on the operator"
It's a pity that we can go on holiday in a twin jet that can climb on one engine at a phenomenal rate (well over 1000 ft/min), but because it might be onerous on the operators, we try to modify the rotary regulations that started with such good intentions. The OEI requirements as they stand are not exactly startling; 100 ft a minute barely registers on the gauge and it doesn't take much turbulence and overcontrolling to turn it into a descent.
To now say that "actually it's okay to have periods of up to 9 seconds within which it's anyones guess what will happen if an engine fails" is a shame, to say the least.
Oil companies aren't bothered by fuel consumption in the same way an airline is. Do you think 1200 lbs an hour versus 950 is going to hurt them? If it eats the range, add bigger tanks (preferably on the outside so as the meet the latest certification standards!)
We're flying helicopters for commercial air transport that cost the same as business jets , or even small airliners if you look at S-92/225/101, and yet using performance standards that you'd associate with a light piston twin costing a couple of hundred thousand dollars.