US Navy XHP (Experimental Helicopter - Patrol) competition

May be right, for now, I removed "McDonnel" from the title, as this may lead to more
confusion. As long, as we don't have much stuff about any of those contenders, a thread
about the whole program may be ok, I think.
Few things are as persistent, as a wrong identification !

@ allysonca : Some more photos would be great ! ;)
 
Jemiba said:
At least we can rule out with a good certainty the McDonnel entry for this competition:
Click to expand...

Great addition to the topic, Jemiba!
And I now understand, where I previously seen similar model' interior - in McDonnell 73.
 
My dear Jemiba,

from the book : US Military Aircraft Designations and Serials 1909-1979;

if it was for McDonnel,should be XHPH,and for Sikorsky was XHPS,the suffix "H"
was always given to McDonnell,not for Sikorsky.
 
As I think, that we can regard Jim Keeshens "Secret US Proposals of the Cold War" as a reliable source, we have an evidence on page 161 of that book. Not sure, that it is the same model, it's without its main rotor, too, but still has its two-bladed tail rotor. Designation is given as Sikorsky XHSPA-1.

Silencer1 said:
P.S. What's orange model represents?
Click to expand...

Shown on the other page, it's the DS 160
 

Attachments

  • XHSPA-1_01.jpg
    XHSPA-1_01.jpg
    31.8 KB · Views: 366
  • XHSPA-1_02.jpg
    XHSPA-1_02.jpg
    62.7 KB · Views: 287
Last edited by a moderator:
Thank you, Jemiba!

Jemiba said:
Designation is given as Sikorsky XHSPA-1.
Click to expand...

The inscription on the model "XHPS-A". Perhaps, there is a typo in the book's text?
IMHO the "A" suffix could mark, that this have been one of the Sikorsky proposals for the competition and "B", "C" etc. versions have been also presented.

Silencer1 said:
Shown on the other page, it's the DS 160
Click to expand...

Please, are there any other details? Manufacturer, helicopter's role?
 
The XHPS-A / XHPS-B / XHPS-C designations are confirmed by the Spangenberg Index and 100% certainly Sikorsky. 3 different configurations proposed.
 
Same timeframe : https://www.sikorskyarchives.com/S+56%20HR2S-1H-37.php
 

Attachments

  • S56-2.jpg
    S56-2.jpg
    65.9 KB · Views: 248
  • S56-3.jpg
    S56-3.jpg
    57.1 KB · Views: 222
Looks, like there were no "S"-index has been allocated to Patrol Helicopter - as the list in Sikorsky' archives doesn't contain any mentions about this proposal.
Of course, it's possible, that some project just didn't reach the stage, when company "S"-index used in their designation.
Or, perhaps, this project started long line of S-56?

Questions and questions :cool:
 
Jemiba said:
As I think, that we can regard Jim Keeshens "Secret US Proposals of the Cold War" as a reliable
source, we have an evidence on page 161 of that book. Not sure, that it is the same model, it's
without its main rotor, too, but still has its two-bladed tail rotor. Designation is given as Sikorsky XHSPA-1.

Silencer1 said:
P.S. What's orange model represents?
Click to expand...

Shown on the other page, it's the DS 160
Click to expand...

My dear Jemiba,

I have this book,but it's not a reliable source,the Spangenberg Index is certainly a proof,
and in the Model they wrote XHPS-A,and the caption is wrong.
 
I would agree with Sikorsky.
I know that its no reliable indication and relies on gut feeling but design has elements that look fitting for Sikorsky.
The lack of an S- number might be a little puzzling though if this proposal was serious enough for small scale presentation models.
 
ModelClassRoleProgramDate
Piasecki PD-22BHPASWXHP 04 1950
Piasecki PH-26/A ConvertaplaneHPASWXHP 04 1950
Piasecki PD-22BHPASWXHP 04 1950
Curtiss-Wright P-592HPASWXHP 04 1950
United Helicopters HillerHPASWXHP nd
Kellett KH-9HPASWXHP 04 1950
Sikorsky XHPS/-A/-B/-C HPASWXHP 04 1950
Hughes 212 / HAC 212HPASWXHP 04 1950
Gyrodyne 9 HelidyneHPASWXHPnd
McDonnell Model 73A/B/C HPASWXHP04 1950
Bell D-104/A (XHPL)HPASWXHPnd

These are all taken from the Spangenberg Index and definitely contenders to XHP. The Sikorsky identification is definitive! The model has XHPS-A written on it - we know XHPS-A was Sikorsky - we also know XHPS has to be Sikorsky according to the US Navy designation system. Lastly, it looks a lot like a larger Sikorsky helicopter of the same era.

With regard to the question of number of blades - it seems likely that -A was a conventional helicopter, with -B and -C being more exotic.
 
hesham said:
from the book : US Military Aircraft Designations and Serials 1909-1979;

if it was for McDonnel,should be XHPH,and for Sikorsky was XHPS,the suffix "H"
was always given to McDonnell,not for Sikorsky.
Click to expand...

That's right my dear Paul,

and as I explained before,the McDonnell was taken suffix "H",and the suffix "S" was
given to Sikorsky.
 
Sorry to have missed all of the fun and thanks for having relabeled the topic. I was offline for over a couple of weeks on business. The model is, in fact, Keeshans via McLaughlin and it has a Sikorsky stand BUT that to me is not an indicator as these things have a way of being switched, but as I had suggested I was not sure on the maker. Remembering that I've been collecting for well over 50 years there are those mysteries that do pop up.

I am still wondering on the blade config and wish we had pictures.....
 
So - the brochure is at NARA, so anyone who lives nearby can in theory register to go visit and copy the brochure.

"Proposal" Files for Airplanes, Helicopters and Missiles 1934-1961
RG 72 (Bureau/Dept of Aeronautics)
UD 1048
ID 163451
Sec Class: C
NAII 631 74/63/04 to 75/9/07
1 to 676 Containers
ACC NN3-72-86-4

Box 122 Sikorsky XHPS/-A/-B/-c HP ASW XHP 04 1950
Box 123 Sikorsky XHPS/-A/-B/-C HP ASW XHP 04 1950
 
allysonca said:
Sorry to have missed all of the fun and thanks for having relabeled the topic. I was offline for over a couple of weeks on business. The model is, in fact, Keeshans via McLaughlin and it has a Sikorsky stand BUT that to me is not an indicator as these things have a way of being switched, but as I had suggested I was not sure on the maker. Remembering that I've been collecting for well over 50 years there are those mysteries that do pop up.

I am still wondering on the blade config and wish we had pictures.....
Click to expand...

Hi Allysonca,

I think a three blades is very suitable.
 
If I missed something which is obvious to you guys I ask forgiveness beforehand, but …

I find it very puzzling that – with the exception of the two Piasecki designations – nothing regarding the above mentioned helos can be found anywhere in the internet (that is: anywhere but here in the forum and in the Spangenberg index).

Gyrodyne 9 Helidyne leads at least to the Gyrodyne GCA-2 Helidyne, but that’s it. No Gyrodyne 9 Helidyne in any of those hits.

Isn’t it strange that there is nothing, not even the occasional crumbs?

Any thoughts?
 
Armin Derer said:
If I missed something which is obvious to you guys I ask forgiveness beforehand, but …

I find it very puzzling that – with the exception of the two Piasecki designations – nothing regarding the above mentioned helos can be found anywhere in the internet (that is: anywhere but here in the forum and in the Spangenberg index).

Gyrodyne 9 Helidyne leads at least to the Gyrodyne GCA-2 Helidyne, but that’s it. No Gyrodyne 9 Helidyne in any of those hits.

Isn’t it strange that there is nothing, not even the occasional crumbs?

Any thoughts?
Click to expand...
Not really that strange. None of the designs were accepted into production, so the program ended and they didn't lead anywhere. In 1950, they were probably secret and not published. By the time they weren't secret, why would anyone care about them to publish them? We're still awaiting "US Helicopter Projects".
 
Armin Derer said:
overscan (PaulMM) said:
By the time they weren't secret, why would anyone care about them to publish them?
Click to expand...
In a way I get that point. Then again: why would anyone publish anything about anything that was thought of but never existed?
Click to expand...
Before "Secret Projects" books became popular such unsuccessful proposals were mostly discussed in passing in books or articles about the actual winners of said competitions. So Rockwell's F-15 was published in a book about the McDonnell-Douglas F-15 for example. With a competition where nobody won, this wouldn't happen.
 
This competition blurs into this one which seems to have many overlapping entries:


Bell D-104/A is the same as Model 61. So actually there was a winner of XHP!

I checked Tommy Thomason's book on the HSL (Naval Fighters 70 - The Forgotten Bell HSL) but there's nothing additional on the other contenders for the first or second competition.
 
Last edited:
Maybe not the perfect location to post these but since the McDonnell Model 73 was a development of the XHJD-1, I'll put them here for now. From the Great St. Louis Air and Space Museum archives....

Enjoy the Day! Mark
 

Attachments

  • McDonnell Aircraft - Brief History of the XHJD-1 Project.pdf
    5 MB · Views: 43
  • McDonnell XHJD-1 SAC Sep-30-48.pdf
    2.4 MB · Views: 32

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom