Talk:Sikorsky S-61R

message: Bill, I can't find USAF fact sheet on the CH-3B/E and HH-3E versions.  I would leave off the Sikorsky & Agusta section labels since the AS-61R already lists built under license by Agusta.  -Fnlayson 17:27, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, thanks for looking. I may be able to find some specs in a old book. We might also check for HH-3F Pelican specs on a USCG or Italian site, since the overall dimensions and weights will be similar to the USAF versions. I'll remove the section labels. I hate transcribing text from books as I'm a very-slow sight typist, so it may be awhile before I get to the text. - BillCJ 17:33, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

text: * Found some web sites on the S-71R/CH-3/HH-3. I added them to the External links section. -Fnlayson 18:47, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

text: It's quite possible Evergreen uses up-rated engines, tho 2300 shp seems a bit high for a T58/CT58 engine. I'll ask Alan if he has any thoughts on this, since he workes on turboshafts (PT6Ts on the 412, IIRC). - BillCJ 19:34, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

text: * I guess I'm assuming the 2300 hp is per engine not total.  The Evergreen page doesn't specify.  -Fnlayson 19:39, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I have a source listing the CT58-110-1 as installed in the KV0107-II at 1250 shp, the same model listed by Evergreen for its S-61R. Evergreen's site lists the following: Installed Horsepower - 2,300 hp; Takeoff Power - 2,500 hp; Max. Continuous Power - 2,100 hp. Since 1250 x 2 = 2500, I'd say the figures are either for both engines or the transmission output. The airframe and rotor dimensions should be roughly the same for both the HH-3E/F and the civil S-61R version, but we should probably pick one source for the power ratings, and list that model in the top Specs line. - BillCJ 20:25, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Specs

message: When the article is ready, I am just going to move it to the new namespace so we can keep the history. Given the various names for the S-61R is military service, I'm leaning toward just using Sikorsky S-61R for the aritcle name. Any thoughts? - BillCJ 03:51, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Dang, there are still question marks in the Specs.  I'll look through Frawley and some other books to try and resolve them. -Fnlayson (talk) 00:37, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Article namespace

message: *Russian site about Jolly Green Giant (in English)
*Photos of the Italian Agusta HH-3F (AS-61R) on Aviation.net site
Regards, Piotr Mikołajski 06:37, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Russian.ee page is in the External links.  Thanks. -Fnlayson 22:05, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Some sources

message: I'm too familar with Sikorsky's internal model numbers.  Does the S-61R number only apply to the CH-3C or was it used for all the variants listed in the article (CH-3C/E, HH-3E, MH-3E, ...)?  Thanks. -Fnlayson 22:14, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have several references that list all those variants under S-61R. To my knowledge, all the -61s with the CH-53-type fuselage were known to the company as S-61Rs. The Agusta-built version of the HH-3F was called the AS-61R. Is there a place in the article that is not clear on this? - BillCJ 23:31, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

text: * Thanks, I was leaning that way.  In the Variants section under S-61R only the USAF CH-3C is listed. -Fnlayson 23:44, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I've reformatted it a little with use of doubled ;; and :: - look on article. Piotr Mikołajski 07:53, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

text: * I was trying not to indent the text that much but that works.. -Fnlayson 13:43, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  S-61R number 

message: I expanded the 1st paragraph and reworded the other 2 in the Development section based on the russian.ee page.  I cut the improved HH-3 part short.  A couple more sentences on that would be good. -Fnlayson 22:45, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Development section 

message: I'd suggest some fixes; there never was an official designation of VH3E or MH3E.  The last USAF engine version was the T58-100, which did not advertise higher SHP, but did have higher T5 and Ng limits--gave us much more usable torque at high alt/temp combo's.  The engine was rated 1500 SHP.  The actual designations of the CH-3B was the six loaned NAVY SH-3s, so I would not call them S61Rs.
:If you have verifiable sources for that information,  list them here, and I'd be happy to try to find the sources, and add the cited info to the article. I don't know the original source of the text lists, but I do recall having seen the VH-3E and MH3E designations in print before. I'm not claiming they were official tho, and that can be easily noted if the designations were unofficially used. As to the CH-3B, I don't see it listed anywehre in the article at all, so I'm not sure of your point here, unless you're refering to its use on the SH-3 Sea King page. I did the split of this page off ofthat page, and others helped with the rewrite, but I specifically left the CH-3B on that page because I knew it wasn't an S-61R. 
:Thanks for your comments, and I hope we can add more history in time, especially of the Jolly Greens. There really wasn't anything in the original SH-3 page on these varaints beyond the variants list itself. I had to find the pics myself, plus write the text (along with some other editors). Nothing on Wikipedia is ever finished, so if you have some other thoughts, or some good reliable sources, I'd be happy to have them. - BillCJ 22:01, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fixes

message: How did the nickname "Jolly Green Giant" originate? Maikel (talk) 07:52, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Whence the nick?

message: I think it would be great to name the different films featuring the H-3 helicopter, like RE : Apocalypse or The increduble hulk, often being used as MH-53 look-alikes.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.87.25.216 (talk) 09:04, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Popular Culture

message: The number built is different in different parts of the article, the Development says eight built and the variant say 10. Baugher has 14 serial numbers 66-13278 to 66-13290 (13) and 68-8282 (1). All the rest were conversions from the CH-3Es. http://www.jollygreen.org/ is not really clear it has 286, 287, 288 as CH-3Es, 289 as a CH-3E conv to HH-3 and 290 as a HH-3E. Baugher has the batch from 66-13291 has being built as CH-3Es some later conversion. http://www.uswarplanes.net/seaking.html has 14 as Baugher with 26 x CH-3C and 37 x CH-3E converted. Anybody any clearer how many were built as HH-3Es 8, 10 14 or a random number! MilborneOne (talk) 10:40, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: HH-3E

message: User:FOX 52 where in MOS does it say that the photo should be on the left? Mztourist (talk) 02:41, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: see MOS:SANDWICHING regarding staggered images - FOX 52 (talk) 02:50, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: OK I read it, but the text wasn't sandwiched and the MOS states "Most images should be right justified on pages, which is the default placement." So please advise why you moved it back to the left. Mztourist (talk) 02:58, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: As it's states "left can be used as these are only guidelines, I think it flows better staggered (IMO) - FOX 52 (talk) 03:08, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree, I think it makes it harder to read, I propose that I move the photo down and to the right. Mztourist (talk) 03:27, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo location