I have to agree with NL here. I work on the maintenance side of the house and we see the same thing these days. Every one wants a get out of jail free letter from the manufacturer for doing simple maintenance actions. I could write you a letter that says it is ok to fly upside down in bad weather single engine but it doesn't mean you'll live through it. It just means I will be liable when your widow sues. Just like pilots blindly following what is written in the RFM. They cannot be written to cover every possible event and situation so you still have to make a concious decision to save your own arse. If a manufacturer is going to write anything they are going to make sure they reduce their liability. This is why the books might say land imediately...not because it wont make it but because they don't want to be the one who told you it would, when it wouldn't! I like using the tactics as Nick has in the S76 RFM leaving room for the pilot to do what is right for the situation and not mandating that he will be wrong if he doesn't follow the rule book to the letter. In the case here of the S92 MGB I would gather that it will probably run ok without oil for the 30 minutes advertised for the simple reason that Sikorsky wouldn't have said so unless they were pretty darn sure it would to reduce or eliminate their liability. My hat is off to 212man for making a decision that allowed him to have a beer at the end of the day! I wasn't there but from my vantage point in front of the TV next to my sunday morning cup of coffee I can say I would have done the same thing.
Moral of the story is "beware the written word" it is there to cover somebody's backside and most likely it is the authors not only yours!
Max