Hamilton Metalplane Projects

hesham

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
26 May 2006
Messages
32,500
Reaction score
11,589

Attachments

  • med_all_metal_chopper.jpg
    med_all_metal_chopper.jpg
    56.6 KB · Views: 441
Last edited by a moderator:
Also known as the Johnson-Hamilton Gyroplane.
 

Attachments

  • Johnson-Hamilton 1929.JPG
    Johnson-Hamilton 1929.JPG
    362.1 KB · Views: 436
It would be interesting to model the effect of the added props on the airflow around the wings.
And since there appears to be only a single engine, it would likely power either those or the front one. Then, assuming that by some magic that thing would actually leave the ground vertically, the transition should be interesting.

Anyway. The folks at Hamilton Metalplane seem to have a fertile imagination: I have the same contraption as a floatplane, sans underwing props.
The plot thickens.

(Photo & Naming Source: Dan's hard disk, from somewhere in the net, as usual)
 

Attachments

  • Hamilton H-18 Metalplane Maiden Milwaukee.jpg
    Hamilton H-18 Metalplane Maiden Milwaukee.jpg
    119.4 KB · Views: 336
Hi Dan,

it was the same aircraft but converted into a VTOL aircraft as we see.
 
Hi,

the Hamilton H-19 and H-20 were not known,so here is a small Info about them.

http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k9767475f/f584.image
 

Attachments

  • 2.png
    2.png
    582.5 KB · Views: 218
  • 3.png
    3.png
    522.4 KB · Views: 179
There are a few problems with the title of this thread. Firstly, the Johnson-Hamilton Gyroplane was not a "VTOL" design. Jesse C. Johnson never made such a claim. In his patent application, Johnson said that his key goal was to use "a pair of lifting propellers or helicopters ... to create a partial vacuum above the wings ..., and thus increase the lifting effect and aid in the rise of the plane." In other words, Johnson intended to use 'helicopters' (his term for lifting propellers) to create a STOL aircraft.

The second issue is with the name 'Maiden Milwaukee' - assigned to James S. McDonnell's original 1927 H-18 design - (N)C235 - intended to demonstrate Hamilton's steel propeller and all-metal construction (and to participate in Ford's 1927 National Reliability Air Tour). It is accurate to say that this original CTOL aircraft was "designed by Hamilton Metalplane Company". But the 'helicopter' modifications were entirely the design of Jesse C. Johnson.

Mod: Perhaps this thread should be retitled 'Hamilton Metalplane Projects' or some such?

BTW: There is footage of the Johnson-Hamilton Gyroplane - aka the 'Johnson Helicopter Aeroplane' - on the Moving Image Research Collections at the University of South Carolina's website. This 7 minute video from a Fox Movietone newsreel shows the aircraft taxiing, taking-off, and landing on 09 Nov 1929.

Johnson helicopter monoplane--outtakes
Fox Movietone News Story 4-191
Temporal Coverage
Filmed on November 9, 1929

Although the Johnson-Hamilton Gyroplane was a built conversion, there was an unbuilt project aspect as well. Johnson's patent is mainly about his conceived drive mechanism for the lifting propellers within the structure of the wings. However, he also discussed a future scheme to add propulsion to his design "so that the propellers may be adjusted with respect to the wings and used either as lifting or traction propellers, means being provided whereby the propellers maybe rotatably adjusted about the centers of their driving shafts and thus resist a tendency of the shafts to become disaligned." So, our STOL conversion was built but Johnson also envisioned a future 'convertiplane'.

... And since there appears to be only a single engine, it would likely power either those or the front one. Then, assuming that by some magic that thing would actually leave the ground vertically, the transition should be interesting...

The idea of a single engine seems to have originated with Aerofiles who said "In the helicoplane mode, power to the tractor propeller was halved and the lateral screws started." [2] Other sources state that a second, 150 hp engine (type unspecified) was installed in the former cabin area of the fuselage. In the newsreel video you can clearly see the oil cooler for that second engine protruding between the spars above the central fuselage.

Patented extension shafts drove those underwing propellers at 500 rpm. As mentioned, Johnson intended a future convertiplane type where, once off the ground, those lift propellers would rotate to the vertical to provide propulsive thrust. It is reasonable to assume that Johnson intended his future convertiplane to be single-engined. He did hold a patent for a "Toy helicopter aeroplane" - US1793368A - which showed a centrally-mounted engine driving the same three-prop layout as the full-sized Johnson-Hamilton Gyroplane. I presume that the nose propeller would provide the propulsive thrust during take-off while the erstwhile horizontally-positioned underwing props were providing the added lift.

Johnson's convertiplane concept seems related to his earlier aircraft patent - US1485269A of 1924 - which involved multiple, transverse-shaft-driven propellers to maintain airflow over wings. Johnson describes these outward-mounted props as "revoluble traction helicopters". For take-off and landing, changing the angle of these 'helicopters' would maintain airflow over the wings regardless of angle of attack.

Anyway, the built Johnson-Hamilton Gyroplane conversion was test flown at Milwaukee by Victor Allison who took off "almost vertically after a run of 35 feet at a speed of 30 miles an hour" according to a note in the 16 Nov 1929 Joplin Globe newspaper. A Mr. A. S. Eliott was also involved (as a mechanic, perhaps? A photo of Eliott with Johnson appeared in the 20 Sept 1929 edition of the Sherbrooke Daily Record).

Although not considered completely successful, the Johnson-Hamilton Gyroplane held the USAAC's attention for several years. The Air Corps' Materiel Division expressed some interest in the "Johnson Helicopter Aeroplane" as late at June 1936 - placing it among the "proven inventions of definite military value". [2]

Some sources:

-- https://patents.google.com/patent/US1713874
-- https://patents.google.com/patent/US1793368A/en
-- https://sites.google.com/site/stingrayslistofrotorcraft/hamilton-metalplane-maiden-milwaukee
-- http://members.eaavintage.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F02%2FVA-Vol-4-No-5-May-1976.pdf
-- The EAA's The Vintage Airplane, Vol 4, No. 5, May 1976, The Hamilton Metalplane, George Hardie Jr., pp 3-8

_____________________

[1] Another error in the Aerofiles listing for the H-18 include an obviously wrong 9 feet for underwing propeller diameter. (Modern Mechanix of November 1929 listed 18 feet diameter, on page 233 of the February 1930 Popular Mechanics it says 22 feet. The former is generally accepted as accurate.)

[2] This from a letter from FT Martin, Materiel Division, to Materiel Liaison Section, OCAC,12 June 1936, quoted in Army Air Corps Airplanes and Observation 1935-1941, Howard K. Butler, Historical Office, United States Army Aviation Systems Command, Saint Louis, Missouri, February 1990, pg.147.
 
From, Of Struggle and Flight,

it's first time to hear about H-44 and H-46 ?.
 

Attachments

  • 1.png
    1.png
    73.8 KB · Views: 32
first time to hear about H-44 and H-46 ?

Likewise for me with the H-46. I have the H-44 down as an unbuilt floatplane version of the H-43.

The H-45 was offered as either a landplane or a twin-float seaplane. Pure speculation but, perhaps, H-46 was an alternative designation for that H-45 floatplane?
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom