My point is that FAR/JAR 29 latest amendment is a worthy paper certification goal but there are other aircraft types (S-76) which while they may not fully comply, have a demonstrated safety record based on 6m flight hours.
I believe that these aircraft should not be ruled out of contracting for OGP companies based purely on a tick in a few boxes when the product certified to the latest paper standards is maybe not demonstrably safer, yet.
Right on
If you want to kick an aircraft off contract because it does not have the range or the payload, that's justified, but not allowing a 76 or 412 on a contract because it is not certified to the latest standard is absolute BS
We have all seen how these latest standard certified aircraft have tragically demonstrated they are not exempt from catastrophic failures. 6M flight hours (76) or in the case of the 212/412, 12M flight hours does mean somthing.