GIS,
you are spot on with the training and infrastructure part - it needs to be got right from day one for NVG. But the 2 engines, SAS/autopilots, CIR and second pilots to help you nav, well I can only refer you to the flight profiles intended. In Aust, the proposal is to go to the scene at 500 ft, spend a long time doing the recce, and land. We can do that right now (albeit at 1000ft) with a nitesun, single pilot, unstabilised and with only one donk. Why does the addition of NVG suddenly require all the extra's? Why add requirements to something that is SAFER?
Hint: if you think that is unsafe, lobby against NVFR rules, dont burden the introduction of a new technology with those issues.
And yep, I think that 10 years is a long time to be operating NVG (it's 15 now in Switzerland). Seems long enough to prove a concept to me, surely. Or maybe I am the only one as you so condescendingly put it.