Variable Load
Thanks for clearing up the point about the 29.785. I am confused about FAA certification because the reversions I posted are taken from the EASA TCDS, and are a mixuture of JAR and FAR references. Dunno what that is all about!
Are you sure the 92 has 1000lbs worse disposable load than the 225 in similar config? That seems a lot. Its always very difficult to compare these things as its so dependant on equipment level.
Regarding the crashworthy pilot seats, EC are offering these with adjustable lumbar support but no rake or thigh support adjustment. I think its tricky to have variable rake with a stroking seat. Of course you would also have to go for the strengthened cockpit floor.
However, as far as I am aware (someone correct me!) the S92 doesn't have crashworthy fully adjustable seats either.
In my book, comfort comes before crashworthiness!
I think the 92's windows are smaller than the L/L2s but don't have the data right now - will check and get back to you.
Rotorpower - no, the fuel tanks are not weaker, they are just in a harsher environment if you crash - ie surrounded by shredded metal bits with tons of passengers, engines and transmissions bearing down on them. On the 92 they are outside and should break away in a crash - though not sure what happens to them after that (ie do they survive being whacked by rotor blades etc?)