SASless,
There has never been any deception about Cat A procedures and exposure windows at rigs, the issue has been known and understood since the beginning by regulatory agencies, operators and manufacturers. Welcome to the group, Sasless! There were even modified Cat B procedures to allow zero rate of climb enroute, and add a few hundred pounds more payload, with full CAA approval.
What I am concerned with is the blind adaption of a requirement because it is "complete" or "neat" without a real justification, while ignoring the real causes of accidents (why not mandatory EGPWS?)
So, let's declare all offshore helos obsolete, toss them out and replace them! I am sure that money spent on new helicopters is just laying around out there, unspent right now and available. It will not mean any reduced operating budgets, fewer aircraft, fewer contracts. It will not make fewer jobs. Of course, all that is not true, it will cost all other parts of the industry to suck up the differrance. What can be said is that it will NOT cause any measurable rise in offshore safety. That is guaranteed.
It is in the best interest of my company to support the new operational requirements, since the S-92 is "hard" Cat A from a rig with full pax and enough gas to go about 350 NM with JAR reserve.