Hi Arcal,
Sounds like you're having some issues with your 139's. One might look at how your company fitted out your aircraft and how much lead in trainging your maintenance staff received, perhaps that could be a major contributor to your "issues".
Personally I've seen great dispatch rates for the 139 in the offshore market, between 90-95% on time departures for one offshore company that I have numbers for.
Maintenance is a breeze compared to the 76. No tail rotor cables to replace access is easy to most components once you know the easy way to get to them. Ever changed a park brake valve on a 76???
As to cost, a non FIPS offshore 139 is closer to the cost of an offshore configured S76 than you would think, as Agusta give some pretty good discounts for bulk contract signings. Hourly Direct Operating Costs are very close to a 76C++. Very close. If the 139 didn't gulp fuel like it does, it would probably be cheaper to run per hour, but then, fuel is the cheapest part of flying!
FIPS is VERY heavy and expensive. I'm not sure how some operators can justify the weight and expense. How often would you guys actually fly in icing conditions.
The 76 is indeed built strong., did you hear about the 76 in Nigeria that kicked off the AC Gen because the RRPM got so low?? Blades coned so much that the dampers pulled out of the main rotor blade mounts!
The fuel tanks might not have ruptured in the incident you speak of, but try taxiing over rough ground. Personally I've seen three 76's where the mainwheel has caught in a rut and pulled the gear off the forward bulkhead, which creates a nice big puddle of fuel.
There are good things about the 76 and good things about the 139, however I think we can all agree that Sikorsky missed the boat when they came up with the 76D.
A clean sheet design would have been the way to go and it isn't too late, look at Bell, they're only just starting out on the 525 to try and catch up to the 139 and EC175. They obviously believe there is enough room in the market for another model in this weight range.
The proof is in the number of orders they (don't) have and in the number of orders that AW and EC have for their medium-heavy twins.
I liked working on the S76. Job for life! But I enjoy working on the AW139 more. Mechanically it is about the simplest beastie I've worked on in the past 22 odd years, except maybe for the Bell 47!!
Hopefully your experience will improve as your operation gains experience with what is to you guys, a new generation aircraft.