roundwego statistically it is no more likely to be an S92 than a Puma or anything else.
However, i get your point.
If you just look at the facts;
1. Since that terrible month in 2009 when 33 oil workers died as a result of two separate MGB failures no oil worker has been killed as a result of an MGB failure on either type. (unless that turns out to be the case with the current incident).
2. One more oil worker has been killed in the oil industry on an S92 than a Puma as a result of MGB failure.
3. There have been three further serious NS incidents since 2009 all involving Pumas
+May 2012 G-REDW MGB & backup failed, ditched but no fatalities.
+August 2013 G-WNSB four dead but completely unrelated to MGB failure
+May 2016 LN-OJF 13 dead no evidence of MGB failure as primary cause so far.
So 50 dead in 7 years 5 accidents 1 S92 & 4 Pumas
33 died on Pumas 17 on S92
All 4 NS accidents involved Pumas.
Public perception in the NS though is 4 accidents in about 7 years 3 of them fatal and 33 dead. All Pumas.
It isn't rational or logical but people now have an unrealistic expectation of near total safety.
It is going to be extremely difficult to salvage the type's reputation.