Cyclic, I agree with almost all your posts except Baralt use - in the 139 we must use radalt. I think the baralt use is s throwback to having some over torques in the 332 when it went into "fly up" mode.
Fareastdriver - I think that the culture has changed now and the realization has come about that with a properly managed and functioning modern AFCS system the aircraft is safer flown with full use of the system - indeed its mandatory at night. The accident rate has now changed with fewer mechanical issues to a higher percentage of CFIT due to mishandling. The overall fatality rate in the UK offshore world is identical now to that of 20 years ago (CAA stats). I think the use of AFCS in bad weather or at night is a great move, but agree it brings in issues that revolve around hand flying skills. At night the final sector of the approach (for us .75nm maximum) needs to be hand flown to fly the sight picture to the deck, it is this part which i feel is still an issue that needs to be addressed - although as I've said I'm not sure how. Most offshore pilots I know would agree this is the most challenging thing we do, but also one we don't do regularly due to summer months, flights occurring often in the day in winter due to icing etc. I did about 10-15 night landings last winter, which is within the recency rules, but I'd question if that is enough for crews to be as competent as they need to be. My fear is that we will, as an industry, carry on as we are until another night time offshore fatal accident occurs, and then suddenly regulations will change. Why not try to change things before this occurs? Looking at statistics another crash will happen at some point if we continue as we are.