TM, with the L2 and now these 2 ditchings, I suppose the workforces's feeling that you mention are not surprising. However I don't think the 225 is an intrinsically unsafe (or less safe) heli and if I did, I would be the first to not want to fly it. The trouble is that a generally well designed heli is only as good as its weakest bit, so if 99.99% is really good, there can still be a rogue bit that can cause a big problem.
I do agree that a brand new type may be less safe from an airworthiness point of view, than a well established type. However the current N Sea "new generation" aircraft are now 7 or so years old, so hardly spring chickens.
It is perhaps more relevant to consider what will be the next fatal accident. Yes, we all hope that there won't be one, but with 30yrs + of N Sea life left, that is quite a hope.
The sophisticated autopilots of the new types, coupled with good operating procedures and a proliferation of simulator training does make a "pilot error" type accident much less likely these days. That puts the focus onto airworthiness accidents, even if they are no more likely, and hopefully less likely, than before, they may again become the predominant factor in the accident statistics.
However, if I was a gambling man I would put money on the next accident NOT being related to a Super Puma family gearbox issue. By the time we resume flying it will surely have had more scrutiny than just about anything else! Something unrelated will come out of the woodwork on that or another type.
I am not sure if that is reassuring, but it is realistic! But for those of your colleagues unfortunate enough to suffer an untimely death, it will almost certainly not be due to a helicopter accident. Heli flying is really very safe.
Last edited by HeliComparator; 23rd Nov 2012 at 22:42.