Mmmmm ....
As usual .... the opposition trying to make political points .... if and when can ...
The 139 has issues that new aircraft usually have ... no arguement there ....
'Tis a pity that there is no mention of the 412 problems that plagued it when it was first introduced into service .... such as the severe vibrations due to the rotor head design ... tailboom skin delaminations, tailboom pylon spar cracking etc .... tail rotor blade cracking ADs etc .... all of which at the time would have been cause to moan and groan ....
I would think that the problem with the pontoons
may be due the approvals required (though I admit I don't know the intimate detail of the pontoons in question weight & stability limitations) rather than anything else .... certainly in terms of dimension the 139 is slightly smaller than the 412 even if its max mass is higher.
Interestingly ..... the same stretchers that fit in the 412 will fit in the 139 ... perhaps the aeromedical 'fit out' is the problem .... and that would be down to the QES and their role in the extra's fitted to the aircraft .... same as being able to carry Neonate cribs or not!
Politics!!!!!
