Monsieur Lappos
Flown both 76 and 365 variants. I think you miss the perfect simplicity of the plastic toy from Aerospatiale - just look at the ingenuity and beauty of the starflex as compared to that monstrous and bulbous collection of metal at the top of the 76 (shall we have a bifilar or not?) - and the engineering access to it is so much simpler - reservoirs and sight gauges that you can actually see! And boy does it fly more smoothly ....
Just look at the joy of the fenestron - lighter, fewer shafts and fewer gear boxes ... fewer tailboom cracks.
Yes, it has Peugeot door handles but the doors are less likely to whip forward and dent the airframe in winds/downwash and they don't rattle nor vibrate anywhere near so much in the cruise.
You always talk about catching up with the airlines, quite correctly, but that depends upon how much the operator is prepared to install in the fleet to permit that level of dual crew concept - so I don't buy the more provision of modes argument.
And the toggle switch automatic start of the N3 is leaps and bounds ahead of the antiquated and cumbersome dual track system of the C+ - ECLs to be used only for the emergency.
But you are right in the end .... the pax and clients prefer the 76.
Just one general moan for the offshore in particular - why oh why do we not provide a set position for a row / block of switches that need possibly to be operated in the event of a ditching (HEEL, EXIS, Floats, Emerg Lights, ELT's, ADELT's,) to save embarrassment of watching sprawling hands wandering about the cockpit trying to locate the myriad of after-thought additions! And yes, I do realise a lot depends on the customer's insistance on fitting his fifteenth ELT etc!