SASless
Interesting reply; and if what you say is representative, a real concern. Surely pilots should not really be doing anything they think is a significant risk at the time? I assume that pilots when operating within limitations of equipment, training and skills do not generally think they are taking significant risks flying helos? Even if the perception of the risk is exaggerated, decision making will usually be impaired because of the consequent stress.
Taking your examples.
The snow storm; presumably the concern was the fact that you were unaware for some time that you had entered and were flying in it. Did the temperature/forecast suggest this was a risk? Could more frequent switching on of the landing light have provided earlier warning for you to turn back? Was it a drama when you did turn back? You obviously acted early enough to avoid a potential accident, but would alternative pilot action have reduced the risk to a level that it was acceptable?
Fog building up. Nasty one, that, as it tends to get worse. Was it forecast? Was it even possible for you to have got a good forecast? Was base far away? Was that clear? What were your outs? Presumably trying to find somewhere to put it down safely that was not yet significantly foggy. How could that risk have been avoided/minimised to acceptable levels?
Night flight to St Mary's. If you violated the rules and you then felt the mission risky, who pressured you into the flight?
I'm not trying to be clever here, just trying to identify why these flights were perceived as risky and what could have been done to avoid that.
I must say I not too keen flying VFR singles at night. IFR capability at least gives you the kit not to be stressed flying without visual reference, particularly assuming you have an autopilot. And the second engine largely eliminates that nagging background thought of "where am I going to go if stops". It also makes it a lot safer taking your time carefully checking out the site from 100ft with no airspeed with the landing lights. So I'd vote for IFR twins; agreed.
Not enough experience with NVGs to have a valid view on use, I'm afraid.