Droopystop - thanks for that - I wasn't ignoring your post, I just didn't see it as it coincided with my return from the Falklands and I wasn't ppruning.
It is still interesting that they have chosen to specify SLDs in addition to freezing rain as it is not something that would be included on a met forecast and impossible to measure from the cockpit. Therefore it becomes completely subjective and almost meaningless. If however, they mean you should vacate icing conditions when you have clear ice accreting, why don't they just say that and, as Sven suggests, put a limit on Tq/vibration.
As I understand it, RIPS is protection purely for the rotors (implied in its name I guess
) and does not provide any additional anti-icing for the rest of the airframe. Since most of the horror stories I have heard regarding ice accretion have been related to the accumulation of ice on the airframe rather than problems with assymmetric shedding from the rotor, it still doesn't seem that RIPS is such a big step forward in capability.
Yes the icing flight envelope is much better than the Sea King but a. It should be as a 21st century helicopter and b. There was never a requirement to test the SK beyond its current limit since the RN didn't need/want it (same as the 30 deg AoB limit).