Yup...I was trying to show that Kalashnikov's axiom was poor. Complex things have their uses; GPS is not exactly 'simple'. It's probably fair to say that the simplest solution to a problem will be the best...at least long-term but there is nothing to replace a rotary-wing aircraft for certain applications, at this time.
As with all complex pieces of kit, reliability will be lower than with simple kit. There are more devices, all required to work within specification at the same time and each device has its own failure rate. It is an engineering certainty that with comparable standards of quality in design and manufacture, the simpler machine will be more reliable.
Our issue is whether the reliability is acceptable for the job it does. i.e. risk/benefit. Surely there is no doubt that modern helicopters crewed by professionals are the salvation in many emergency situations? Medevac and SAR are the most immediately obvious however an effective umbrella of police cover serves to deter as well as intervene.
So the police operations might on paper not look as attractive as the other two but without that presence criminals would undoubtedly exploit the freedom to commit more crime. Much of it very harmful to life and limb of innocent people.
Surely the discussions here are not about whether or not we have police helicopters but whether they can be made safer. A reasonable discussion in the light of the Glasgow tragedy though dare I say a bit pointless until we know what actually caused it. Understandably pointless, though. People need to talk and debate these things; it is just human nature and harmless in itself as long as decisions are not made as a knee-jerk to an incident of unknown cause.