And you would have used up all that extra fuel dragging the gear around.

We have a number of pilots who flew the S76 and now fly the 139.

Quote "I would sooner retire than get back in an S76"

Time has moved on.

Similar quotes from the maintenance guys as well, although with more colourful language!!

That's what happens with the passing of time, retired 2004 with 12,000 on the 76 and must say I enjoyed most of it, save for an engine failure at CDP on a rig take off. The airlines no longer fly DC-3 on domestic, or DC-7 and Constellations on international routes, something called progress I'm told. Having said that, would love to see how a 139 goes, did a feasibility study on the machine as a fleet replacement prior to retirement, years later that's what they purchased.

S76.....Igor's bastard child :)

I just read that Pawan Hans will lease 6x S-76D‘s from aircraft leasing company Milestone.

Flew 139 for years, with tight economics they fell back out of favour and it was back to a 76 C+, C++, B. Preferred the updated avionics of the 76 to the high alt jet Honeywell in the 139. But that was for non-SAR work. 76 was aimed at the corporate market, industry used it for everything else 'cause it was cheap and survived relatively well in remote environments. Some pilots I flew with wouldn't shut down the 139 anywhere there wasn't a battery cart, the 76 didn't know what a battery cart was.
Never flew the D but it still seemed stuck on the US eastern seaboard corporate world without the utility of either the C++ or the 139.

With fairings and no gear doors flapping in the wind I don’t think your speed would be much lower.
Fixed gear also allow operators to install larger wheels and tires if desired. They would have been very useful in some Air Ambulance operations.
Just a though and now, perhaps, very much a moot point.