I once took a 76 A++ on a ferry flight after a long period of deep maintenance following its delivery to the UK from the USA by ship. During the final stages of its reconstruction it was interesting to observe that no AVAD or radalt was fitted, nor a cyclic stick guard. Initial requests were turned down due to costs. It was pointed out that the contractural requirements might require an AVAD, so that sorted that one (made a mess of the new paintwork, fitting the radalt !), and the engineers fitted the stick guard anyway, without telling anyone! I'm sure that wouldn't happen now, I hope.
I fully agree with the sentiments about TAWS systems, but would hesitate to push the AVAD system too enthusiastically; if you actually look at the CFIT accidents offshore, involving AVAD equiped a/c, it is clear it did little to stop the descents (Fulmer 76, Cormorant 332, KLM 76, Australian BHL 332 etc.) The correct way to go forward has to be the EGPWS; it really is an impressive prompt!
I also agree with the sentiments about discipline; I think that in general the Fixed Wing world are ahead of us in that regard. They have a far more rigid system of SOPs and standardisation. Finally, it doesn't matter how you word the arguments or aportion blame, at the end of the day, if you spend a few moments scanning your flight instruments, every few minutes or so, you will avoid inadvertent descent.
We often say to the lay public that, as pilots, the flying isn't the job: it's the mission that we get paid to do, whether it's military, offshore, corporate, ems or whatever, and the flying is a second nature that allows us to achieve the mision.
That's true to a large extent, but first and foremost YOU STILL HAVE TO FLY!!!