Thanks for the comments.
I should mention we have some interesting constraints in our neck of the woods. As you mentioned, DC- waiving wake turbulence is a nice way to go! We do however have 5 fixed wing schools that either: a) Do not want their students waiving wake turbulence, and so during dual training they also will not waive the wake turbulence in order to prevent students from feeling they know when and how to use the waiver; and b)

<= that's the look when you mention it in passing or conversation with local pilots. It's simply not an option a lot of them are fully aware of.
I have noticed that the 139 seems to operate a tad differently than many other large helos. The loiter time is pretty high, in fact I would say it's even higher than our US Army National Guard Blackhawks that come cruising through. That being said, they do have different missions and it's probably safe to expect a faster, seemingly less apprehensive operation on the part of the military folks even though their machines are beasts! Train like you fight, as they say...
I guess the end game on the 139 is to take it one situation at a time. A wake turbulence encounter occurred the other night and it was pretty dramatic, and so I think we'll probably treat it as a unique machine relative to our other traffic. It is interesting though that the world knows that helos produce more significant wake turbulence than a fixed wing at the same weight, and yet... as per ICAO it's all the same... things that make you go "hmmmm...."