Us Hems
Great comments by all! Very constructive, with a minimal amount of emotionalism involved.
I agree with the regulation as a necessary evil. A timeline for compliance is the norm in the US and there is no reason that an implementation period of 10 years or so would not be effective and prudent.
Dual pilot, twin engine IFR capable aircraft is not only desirable, it is, in my opinion, desprately needed. Airframes are, or should be, updated and upgraded on a recurring basis. 30,000 hours is a bit too much to expect from a rotorcraft performing all of its flights within 3% of max gross weight. Replace them, over time, with more capable airframes. With the huge profits being realized by the operators, this should not be a deal breaker. Even if paring back some of the more densly served areas by closing a base, it can be done, especially if all of the operators must comply.
JimL, you posted: "As a matter of interest I see that the FAA is just about to publish, for comment, new OpSpecs "A021 Helicopter Emergency Medical Services (HEMS) Operations" and "A050 Helicopter Night Visions Goggle Operations (HNVGO)" which contain detailed site, qualification, dispatch and weather criteria."
The A021 proposed is a sweeping reform forcing operators to do away with the Class G operations and MVFR activities. It is proposed that the operators, except when on takeoff or landing, fly at altitudes of 1,000 feet above the highest obsticle, and avoid towers, etc., by 5 miles laterally when below that threshold. With towers at 2,100 feet AGL, that means cruise flight at 3,100 feet. Weather minimums would be 3,600 ceilings. Quite a change from the current 800 day cross country requirements. I think it will benefit the industry greatly.
Fly Safely out there. One more crash is too many.