I read this thread some time ago, but as the topic had veered so far from the subject matter, didn't feel much inclination to reply to it.
Very sorry to see this accident happen, glad that all crewmembers escaped serious injury.
Couple of points (from the top);
The Canadian Navy do operate "Sea Kings". The name Sea King was given to the original H-3's built for the US Navy right at the start of the programme (just like there are Sea Knights and Sea Hawks). The Canadian Navy refer to their aircraft as Sea Kings as you can read for yourself on their very own
website. Sea King's were built under licence or assembled by Mitsubishi, Agusta, United Aircraft of Canada (P&W) and Westland. All but 4 of the Canadian CH-124's Sea Kings were assembled entirely in Canada. Westland never had the monopoly on the name "Sea King".
Agusta did build a highly unsuccessful "short" commercial Sikorsky S61N the "AS61 Silver". Mitsubishi also assembled a couple of commercial "long" S61's. There are currently two approved modifications for shortening the commercial S61 to the same dimensions as the H-3/S-61 (A to V) series. The original was Carson Helicopters, the second Helipro.
Besides providing greater space the commercial S61L/N's were lengthened prior to production to address the serious C of G shortcomings with the aircraft in the configuration required for passengers and baggage. By lengthening the airframe, useful space and access was gained, a selling point; without the addition of ballast, not exactly a selling point. Operators of the shortened S61's later ran into the identical CG problems. Remember that the original S61's were pretty underpowered (even) compared to the latter versions, even with the limited MAUW of the day so increasing the basic airframe weight, by lengthening it, was hardly a straightforward (or popular) decision.
The CH-124
IS indeed a derivative S-61. The S61 is not limited to the commercial variants of the S61 N, L or NM but also encompasses the S61A, V and R models.
The Sikorsky Sea King, H-3 (A-H series), in it's various military guise's is the exact aircraft specified in the FAA S61A (Restricted) Type Certificate Data Sheet, by Serial Number. So a Sea King is indeed entirely an S61. The length and airframe configuration may determine the different models and the certification basis may be different, but the aircraft is none the less an S61.
The basic S61A and S61R designs were conformed and certified as Restricted Category aircraft to streamline the military procurement process (of all things). By designing and manufacturing the aircraft to a defined standard (FAA) the aircraft was able to satisfy the oversight of the (large) engineering and design departments of each branch of the military. As the aircraft was, at that time, quite revolutionary ( a twin turbine helicopter), the creation of FAA specifications and their design parallel's to the basic military flight mission ran hand in hand and simplified the entire procurement, whilst ultimately benefitting both programmes. Previous models had run into large numbers of basic design changes required to meet the engineering specifications promulgated by each specific branch of the military, increasing workload, time and cost. This was an easy solution to standardize. It also helped when selling the aircraft overseas, as it was "essentially" a commercial aircraft. Many of the foreign military models operating today are still specifically identified by their S61(-XX) build designation.
Hope I didn't bore anyone too badly?
____________________________________________
I must thank Heliport for Moderating this thread (and others I'm sure). When I saw what this topic had degenerated into I really thought that PPRuNe was going to decline to the same abyssmal level of some of the other Helicopter and Aviation sites on the 'net. I certainly appreciate that every individual here has opinions on the issues of the day, and it is not my intent to infringe upon that, but one of the great escapes in life was to come here to this forum and deal simply with helicopters and aviation.
There's a time and a place for everything if you're so inclined, but maybe we can keep this one for this helicopter stuff?