I have not had the benefit of seeing Dick's article, although I have read the French report (with limited french comprehension). Certainly Dick is an R22 proponent: he also knows a lot about them.
I am ambivalent about the R22. It enabled me to afford to become a commercial pilot, and in that respect I am truly grateful. I have 2,000+ hrs on the type, gained around 20 years ago, mainly instructing. I actually owned 2. IMO, there are far too many loss of rotor control accidents in the type. IMO, some are down to the pilot. More worryingly, some seem to be random and not due to operation at/beyond the limit of the flight envelope. I really worry about those. I don't believe they are well understood. Personally, close to the end of my professional flying career I am not prepared to take the apparently random risk of flying the type. I still have a deep love for flying: it has enriched my life immeasurably. I would like to fly for pleasure, but I won't fly the R22.
Having said all that, you have to fly the helicopter you are given (or choose). A light, small 2 blade aircraft with a teetering head will not respond well in severe turbulence.The Mistral around the Alps Maritime is not a place to be in a light helicopter (pretty much any helicopter). An R22 is not the aircraft to take into or near mountains on a very windy day.
If I understand the French report:
the investigation was unable to establish what weather reports were used in the decision to fly. It would be interesting to know what information they acquired before setting off.
I believe the accident report took the view that the accident was caused my mis-manipulation of the controls. I don't know what others think, but I am not at all sure that the best ace R22 stick-poler in the world could have coped with those conditions.
In my view, the problem was setting off into that area with the prevailing conditions, and then not getting out of there, as soon as the turbulence began to be experienced.
None of which makes it any less sad.