Both 225s and 92s work to Class 1 and on any given day the 225 always has a better payload available on the NS. The 92 is also more expensive and has a poor serviceability record with parts supply very poor compared to AH. People seem to have a short memory and up to the point of this tragic accident the S92 was all but reduntent on the NS. Most new contracts have either been for 225s or a mixture of 225s and 92s with the ratio being in favour of 255s, the reason......cost, serviceability and endurance.
I also hear complaints of back pains and hearing issues from 92 pilots and passengers complain about vibration and having to sit side by side feeling cramped where as on the Puma the slightly offset seating and better leg room being an advantage although still tight.
For all who say the Super Puma should be retired, then what's your plans should a S92 have an accident in the next few years? Personally I hope that it's not the end of the 225 but emotions are running high. This is the first fatal accident with the 225 on the NS. The ditchings were controlled landings with warnings, drills, floats and rescue all working flawlessly. The issue was found and resolved.
The offshore world is dangerous by its very nature and although huge amount of money is spent to mitigate risks as much as is possible it is pie it the sky thinking to expect a completely risk free environment. That includes the transport system. Hence the workforce are rewarded in part for the higher risks in well above average wages.
I would fly the Super Puma again but as time goes on I expect to be on a conversion course over the next few months as the industry reacts to the situation. What ever the cause of the crash I just hope it won't take too long to find and divulge.