SASless,
The EC145 is a BK117 (and the only one for which I have data);
My introduction of the Cat A Helipad procedure (which is the most limiting) at 7000ft and 15C was to show that it was not gasping for performance (at HEMS operating masses) at sea level in Wellington.
The 'rider' in the text applies to any PC1 procedure - the site must have been 'surveyed' before it be flown because obstacle clearance has to be assured. How else could it be done?
If you check the figures in the table in the attachment, you will see that it has quite a lot to capacity to spare in Wellington; that can be taken in extra HEMS payload (HEMS equipment, the three crew members and casualty are included - as is 45mins fuel and reserves). The payload coming off Wellington is that shown; take-off for Wellington can be plus the fuel burn. I can't imagine that the payload off Wellington will include the casualty (another 98kg)! (Cat A landing masses can be greater than landing masses - I am not sure if this is correct for the BK117/EC145.)
For alouette's benefit; JARs would permit the HEMS aircraft to operate in PC2 if the hospital site was a particularly difficult one with respect to local obstacles, by permitting the Public Interest Site alleviation.
It would appear from a perusal of the NZ CARs that, apart from this one restriction, there are no performance requirements - only the necessity to apply the Rules of The Air (ICAO Annex 2); in that respect there is no correlation with JARs and it therefore falls short of ICAO Annex 6 compliance.
Jim