Suppose it takes 1100 kw to fly 12 pax on 200 Nm at 5000 ft with 25 C OAT. Because of financial issues what has been done so far was to install 2 engines of say 700 kw each and it has been up to the regulatory agencies, operators and crews to design, implement and follow procedures and limitations to deal with this shortage of power on one engine.
Today nobody questions the necessity or redundant hydraulic, fuel and electric systems but we all agree - intellectually too - to operate underpowered helicopters.
IMO in the case above 2 engines of 1100 EACH should be installed so that the helo could hover on ONE engine under the above conditions. This is what a real twin engine is.
On the long term run the financial impact should not be that negative since the engines would be operated almost all the time far from their limits, thus increasing their reliability. Think about the numbers of engines changes worldwide because they work close to the limits.
Above all this safety issue would be settled once and for all.
The major oil companies make tremendous profits and through their aviation advisors they seem to have the final word on selecting the type of helicopter. So I think that they should be gently forced to accept the financial constraints for safer ops.
Cheers
ATN