The statement s absolutely correct, the BERP blades on the EH-101 are 1980 technology, and produce less lift that modern blades, for the same power. This is provable, and not subject to any orders from the Crown.
Why? Because they were built in an attempt to both hover efficiently and also allow high speed cruise, and they were made to compete with the blades of the Black Hawk generation, which they do. Power-wise, the BERP is a bit more efficient then the BH blades (1972 technology.)
If one measures the power needed to produce a given lift in a hover, and corrects for disk loading, the result is called the Figure of Merit. The BERP is about 4% worse than the S-92/UH-60M blades (1995 technology) and also about 4% worse that the Carson S-61 blades or the EC-225 blades, (which are all in a pack, according to the flight manual data).
3top asks, "If there is no advantage in the BERP pieces, why stick with it?"
There is an advantage, they exist, and a new blade design costs about $100M to develop, and there is no incentive to spend that money (while there are lots of things to fix, otherwise). Remember, the EH-101 has Cathode Ray Tube cockpit with symbol generators, clearly 1985 technology, why does nobody defend them as well? because those CRT tubes don't have a press agent like BERP blades do!
BTW, I do owe dangermouse the data on how the EH-101 BERP blades provide no stall advantage over modern blades, but I cannot find my old computer file with some flight manual data (three moves in 2 years!). DM, do you have the max speed chart from the EH-101 flight manual?