Snarlie,
I was around during the times the Chinook was coming on line with Brand X, and I recall reading plenty of news articles about them and why they were being considered unsuitable.
I do not disagree with the basic underlying economics of the decision....and the Old Man as usual was proven right. They are very expensive...and by sheer size dictate limited ways of utilization in order to be successful.
This is an article that was done by FI on the 25th Anniversiary of Bristow....and now slightly over 25 years later since the article was written....it makes for an interesting bit of reading. Some of the issues he discusses have come to pass and others he was flat wrong on.
The one thing he was right on....Bristow did not have a fleet of Chinooks to get rid of when the need for them went away...and the competitors did.
As I recall even the Tiger had performance issues....something about pulling too much pitch and wearing out main transmissions at a heck of a rate until the cruise power settings were reduced. That kind of problem is not limited to the Chinook. How long is the Chinook destined to be in service with the RAF and US Army....till 2050 is it? Where are all the Pumas?
Columbia has made a fortune operating them so we cannot say they are unsafe nor economically viable machines.
http://209.196.171.35/article_flight25.htm