To answer your "trickier" question about always wanting to drive down cost by wedging helicopter operators, we have already introduced max pax loads of 16 with unused seats removed in 225s and 92s. The initiative was led by our aviation department (and supported by our workforce),not the helicopter operator. We do not fly the 332L because we do not believe in flying passengers in 32 year old (cheap) helicopters and they wouldn't fly in them anyway. However, helicopter companies like to try to tempt us with cheap 332 deals believing that only money talks.
Oh yes the oil companies always want the best and most modern equipment with good emergency egress, crashworthy fuel tanks, and comfortable cabins coupled with 'twin engine reliability'
That'll be why in Nigeria, Chevron (ranked no 6 in the world) is still using single engine Bell 206 and Bell 407s offshore, despite the NCAA ruling more than 20 years ago that only twin engined helicopters would be acceptable for offshore CAT
. That'll be why Chevron operates the ultra-modern Bell 412 in Nigeria and is rumoured to be asking for tenders to replace it with the ultra-modern S76 with it's excellent cabin, crash-worthy seats and huge emergency exit windows (and don't even get me started on the marginally larger windows on the later models of the S76D
. That'll be why Exxon Mobil, ranked number 2 in the world is looking to replace it's ancient Bell 412's and S76s with ultra-modern S76Ds
. Yeah, the oil companies lead the way in ensuring that only safe, modern, crashworthy machines operate for them. They're the ones who decide which types they're going to operate when putting out invitations to tender. Oil companies leaders in safety - you're having an egg yoke aren't you
