Just for interest I went back and read the summary of the report as printed by CNN. here it is.
In a 2006 report on the crashes, the NTSB found that 29 of those 55 accidents could have been prevented.
The NTSB identified four recurring safety issues:
• Less stringent requirements for EMS operations conducted without patients on board.
• A lack of aviation flight-risk evaluation programs for EMS operations.
• A lack of consistent, comprehensive flight-dispatch procedures for EMS operations.
• No requirements to use technologies such as terrain awareness and warning systems to enhance EMS flight safety.
Apart from that the CNN article is quite weighted with discussion on NVG's. There is nothing about engines, one or two, so talking about them is a waste of time.
There is probably nothing there that is incurable. It is still the nut behid the wheel and the big wheel behind the nuts when they promote their company's capability when they vie for these contracts.
Let the buyer beware they say, but how can the (buyers) the hospital administrations be aware of safety matters and legislation of aviation, when they see magic carpets portrayed as the ultimate cure for the 'golden hours' etc by slick salemen.
The simple rhetorical might be, what controls pilots? Well it's supposed to be chief pilots.
The chain of responsibilty (COP) legislation which is starting to bight in this country would lead you to the Ops manual and the two contollers of that. The CP and the Federal Administration.
That is what is supposed to control safety, why isn't it?
(COP) If I load a truck with cattle and note the driver is tired or don't note, either accidently or intentionally on my part, that he has driven over his rest periods, but don't stop him I can be held jointly accountable when he crashes and kills several people.
That COP legislation would lead one also to the directors, managers and owners of the aviation companies. Perhaps that may be the elixer that is needed to put in place adequate controls?