a) By now Bruno probably regrets sticking with right turning EC rotor instead of mimicking the left turning competition á la S300 and R22/44. Considering that many R22(44) pilots/instructors might jump aboard a G2, but only a small number of Colibri and Squirrel pilots will, that wasn't the smartes of design choices, as is increasingly becoming evident.
b) I'm by far no mechanical engineer, but I know that the S-300C, typically lacking the expensive governor option, does a nice job of adding throttle when lifting pitch. Not that precisely, that the rpms will stay in the green arc all by themselves, but the pitch to throttle coupling mechanism apparently is quite well designed, with regard to pilot workload reduction. Imagine a different mechanical setup of pedal-action to fenestron AoA translation and people/FIs would have found the tail response they've got used to over the years.
If a) and b) would have been adressed wisely the G2 would be a perfect drop-in replacement for all the R22s, and I'd bet the accident rate would have been much lower.
In the current situation the Guimbal
PR dept. has a lot of work to do to shift blame onto the pilots to avoid tainting the reputaion of an otherwise modern and safe piece of engineering. In hindsight the lack of consideration for points a) and b) at design time will lead to an unsightly, R22-like crash ratio, (albeit w/o the R22's death toll, mind you) and if things continue like they did, someone might prescribe a "SFAR-G2" supplemental training requirement. High time to "optimize" the fenestron's action instead of distributing information leaflets. The rotor's direction, however, is here to stay, sadly.