F. Hills and Son Bi-mono

[Michel Van]

in end of 1930 the British aircraft manufacturer Hillson
came up with exotic Aircraft concept
to increase take off performance of monoplane, by making them temporal biplane !
the concept was called "Bi-mono"
Noel Pemberton Billing, (inventor, pilot and politician) proposed a wing with own engine that return to base
W. R. Chow (director at "F. Hills and Son“) make suggestion of a disposable wing
Chow proposed the Air Ministry a small light fighter that used this exotic concept
so it can operate from streets or fields

although the Air Ministry refuse the proposal and go with Noel Pemberton Billing "Supermarines"
F. Hills and Son went on with project on equity financing.
after 72 day r&d and build, they had prototype ready !
on 16. Juli 1941 the Prototype made it first flight and drop test with out problem
the Aircraft was transfer to RAF who made more test
also was a Hawker Hurricane modified to a Hillson FH.40 for wing drop test
around 1943 the concept of "Bi-mono" was abandoned, because high production cost of disposable wings

Data Hillson Bi-Mono

length: 5,95 m
wingspan: 6,10 m (in some test the upper wing had bigger wingspan)
height: 2,14 m biplane, 1,95 m monoplane
weight: 881 kg biplane, 840 kg monoplane
Engine: de Havilland Gipsy Six with 147 kW (200 HP)
one Pilot.


source in German
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillson_Bi-mono
Picture
http://crimso.msk.ru/Site/Crafts/Craft21923.htm

 

[hesham]

From Aeroplane monthly 1990.

 

[Schneiderman]

Pemberton-Billing, as usual, made exaggerated claims regarding his role, influence, and capabilities as an aircraft designer.
The proposal to have a heavily loaded aircraft aided in take-off by attaching a second aircraft with low wing loading was patented in Britain by John North and Boulton Paul in 1933 (GB429948) as an alternative to the Mayo Composite Aircraft system. The concept of a disposable auxiliary upper wing for the same purpose was then patented by Helmut Stieger (formerly of GAL and soon to join Blackburn) in 1936 (GB469904). Both concepts were evaluated by the Air Ministry.
Pemberton-Billings' PB37, although part-completed by Hills, was not the same aircraft as subsequently built and tested by them and as described in the article posted by Hesham.