Big Machines Always Beat Little Machine, especially to your bank account
I love it when the debate settles on how bad a smaller machine is when compared with a bigger one - to everybody but those who pay for them.
For the record, let's all agree, bigger checks are better than smaller ones, more bullets are better than fewer bullets, and so on.
The question is NOT "is a big cabin S-61/S-92 better than a smaller cabin 412/139?" That answer is obvious. The question is "How can I best spend the limited money I have to save the most people?" In that case, it is quite probable that more people will die if a small fleet of big helicopters is spread around a country, as opposed to a larger mixed fleet where the size of the machines are matched to the missions, but machines are more plentiful, and distributed closer to potential disasters.
As a reminder, the US has NO big cabin rescue machines, at all. We use various models of the Black Hawk/Sea Hawk to do the job, and they work just fine. In one rescue 2 years ago, an HH-60J USCG helo took 26 crewmen off a ship, just stacked then like cordwood. Word was, they didn't complain!
Regarding rescue crewmen with bad backs, that is the silliest thing I have ever heard. Typical socialist attitude, build a mulitmillion dollar helicopter with a basketball lounge in it because the crewman's union wants one. How about we warm up the sea, so those poor guys don't get hypothermia when they jump into the water? How about we make the sea denser so they can walk on it, instead of needing those uncomfortable flotation vests? Give us all a big fat break!