Dave,
Re: "However, it appears that all, or most, of the world's patent offices will not patent an invention after it is in the public domain and is perhaps already being used by others."
As a general proposition this is more right than wrong, though I would be cautious in regard to the US. In the US something publically disclosed can, under certain circumstances, still be patented.
Re: "Should this concern relate to the 'Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation' and the question that was asked in the title of this thread, I would mention that this question was based on the apparent facts that the Correspondent on the application is Carlson, Gaskey & Olds PC and this attorney represented Sikorsky on over 80 patents during the past seven years, plus at least three of the four inventors do or have worked for Sikorsky."
There is no question about the ownership of this patent application. Per the USPTO's assignment database, each of the four inventors assigned their individual ownership rights in the invention to Sikorsky in early 2008. Sikorsky's ownership of this application is public record.
My badly worded challenge cut toward the malevelent intent implied in Sikorsky's pursuit of the application. My suggestion is that they are merely exploiting ideas through a system created with the intent to treat all who do so equally.
Re: "All of the claims in the Patent Application are very general and they existed in the public domain well ahead of the paper's research."
An aggressive, conclusory assertion, though likely true to some degree.
A strategy in preparing patent claims is to present an examiner with a menu of claims varying from extremely broad to extremely narrow scope with the intention of having him select the extent of patentable right given the state of knowledge in the art. in rejecting some claims and allowing others. In the subject patent application I see the applicant pursuing such a strategy in the succession of claims 1 through 5.
I also believe that the reference you cited is material to the patentability of claims 1 and 2, and is therefore of interest to the examiner.
Since the reference is not a patent or a patent publication it will not be made part of the file if filed as a third party submission within 60 days of publication of the patent.
An alternative would be to work it into the application through the applicants' duty of disclosure. You could simply send the reference, any other references that you believe to also be material and a copy of the application with claims by registered mail to each of the four inventors and Carlson, Gaskey & Olds. Include a letter to the affect that you are concerned about the scope of the claims in view of the enclosures and have therefore forwarded same to the applicants. Politely remind the applicants of their duty of disclosure, and indicate that you look forward to seeing the references being made of the record in the above mentioned application through applicants' timely filing of an information disclosure statement, and that you will monitor the application's image file wrapper on the USPTO's PAIR system in expectation of such action.
This would do the applicants, the agent, the USPTO, and public generally a service in dealing with the questions raised in this thread.
Cheers, and take no offense...