James C. Patton's Flying War Machine Of The Confederacy- Almost

JPK Huson 1863

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Feb 14, 2012
Location
Central Pennsylvania
flying man cropa.jpg
flying man cropb.jpg

This pre-war invention was not Patton's, the basket holding ' provisions ', not bombs. Inventors leapt from cliffs, launched themselves skyward encased in canvas and filled sketchbooks with improbably soaring, iron, steam puffing monsters. That inventors would foresee an air war was inevitable but did not happen until decades post Civil War. James C Patton could have written page one, in the history of the air war - maybe?


" Flying machines ' were the stuff of dreams and dreamers, curiosities noted in newspapers but taken seriously by scientific journals. Interesting name, in connection to one in 1864?
flying wright 1864.JPG


James C. Patton of North Carolina's fame in air travel does not seem to have spread beyond his state. He seems to have been a prosperous farmer, by the looks of his will. Judging by various quips aimed at the guy in local papers he was regarded as a bit of a crackpot, albeit a patriotic crackpot. Inventors were looked at funny, especially if their inventions seemed just preposterous. Since he seems to have produced, beyond The Flying Machine Which Never Was, a both a shell and a torpedo for the Confederacy, maybe not so crazy.

Patton had some problems with funding his inventions- and would love to hear more about the misunderstanding with the Russian fellow?

flying 1861 patton announce.JPG


( If this is the wrong forum, please move? James C. Patton was not a soldier, or I cannot find him if he was but worked for the war, by himself. Cool stuff. )

flying 1863.JPG

Our archives have era issues of ' Scientific American '- which are incredible reading. My grandfather, a Civil Engineer passed on his copies to the grandchildren after reading them, in the 1960's and 70's, had no idea the publication was already 100 years old.

Here's the best snip- still looking for more information on the Rock Dumper, war flying machine. Little smitten by James C.'s persistency and well, inventiveness, although he's sure determined to wipe out Yankees.

flying war 1861 patton.JPG


A LOT here! Patton's hysterically named Rock Dropper Flying Machine, yet another- perhaps a trebuchet-like engine of war, had both been rejected- or failed. His shell, it seems was another matter. Point being, Patton knew his stuff. So what if?

flying 1869 pat fly 1.jpg

Quinby patented this, barely post war ( LoC ), but conceptions for fantabulous Flying Machines abound- will leave with something illustrative of our obsession to go up- and stay there.

From 1748, The Minerva was to be a small community committed to living ' up there '. Unsure whether or not the structures below were to be outhouses? Grgrandfather observed bombings, near Serbia, around 1914. Pilots held bombs in their laps and simply pitched them overboard, over targets. You can't help but think Patton would have been delighted to add some artillery to Minerva, described somewhere as a potential Man O War- if only he'd gotten his hands on her. Boy would Washington have been in trouble. And there IS a cannon, James, so a start.

minerva man o waar a.jpg
minerva man o waar b.jpg


Images from Public Access books, 1880, on Hathitrust, and LoC patent image
 
Last edited:
These inventors must have been taking some bad azz drugs back in the day.


Right? Guessing these off the wall inventions were not helpful when it came to convincing the general public it really was possible to fly.

Since Patton seems to have invented a few ' real ' weapons, used during the war, sounds like he knew his stuff- wish so much we could get a look at his Rock Dropper. Well, or the flinger of rocks. Trebuchets hadn't made an appearance on a battlefield for centuries?
 
flying wright 1864.JPG


Really hate getting distracted with this stuff- but cannot help it. Was hoping someone who knows this stuff would know if there's any connection or is it just the coolest coincidence ever? A ' Wright ' coming up with a flying machine in 1864? Long way from Kitty Hawk. Even with a stopover in Dallas, only a few hours by air......
 
There were a great many reports of inventions of promising flying machines from the war period. Many were based on known "balloon-technology". The main problem being in making the balloon go where you wanted it to go, rather than where the winds drove it.

On September 8, 1863, the New York Herald announced a real breakthrough in Perth Amboy, NJ:
120 miles per hour! Over a controlled course, regardless of wind! It sounds precariously too good to be true. And, just two days later (Sept. 10) the competing New York Evening Post rather gleefully reports:
11S63.jpg

But up in Boston, where the competitive spirit towards the Big Apple's sporting pretensions runs high:
14S63.jpg

[Providence Evening Press, 14 Sept. 1863]​
 
Last edited:
The other pattern for powered flight that seemed most promising at the time, was to imitate the flapping flight of birds. The main problem, of course, was finding a power source which could lift its own weight plus the weight of its fuel supply, the machine itself, and any cargo/passengers.

But, despite the obvious difficulties, inventive men kept on trying. In February 1864, the New York Freeman’s Journal reported:

M. Bray, of Bloomfield, is making a flying machine “on the model of the wild goose,” with wings and a practical tail. This modern Icarus intends to make his first flight this spring.


By May 14, Mr. Bray’s first flight had not yet taken place, and the Boston American Traveler remarked;

A flying machine is in course of construction, and is being made on the model of a wild goose. We suppose the inventor sits as the model.

Besides human power (which might work briefly, but endurance is a real problem), the only motive power source available was the steam engine (iron boiler filled with water plus a few tons of coal or wood … you see the problem!)
 
I remember being told by my second grade teacher, a rather elderly lady who had been teaching since the 1930s, that man would never be able to fly to the moon and back and that I should stop reading Jules Verne, H.G. Wells, and all that nonsense science fiction.

A few years later, I watched on a black and white TV along with the rest of my class, sitting on the gym floor, the first Ranger probe to take pictures of the Moon, doing so right until it crashed into the surface of that body.

On my 16th birthday, I watched as Apollo 11 landed on the Moon and heard Neil Armstrong say his famous words.

In response to all these articles on men trying to fly in the 19th century, I feel one phrase that comes to my mind.

Dreamers gotta dream.
 
Besides human power (which might work briefly, but endurance is a real problem), the only motive power source available was the steam engine (iron boiler filled with water plus a few tons of coal or wood … you see the problem!)

This is actually one of the keys to the Wright Brothers' success at Kitty Hawk -- of all the early attempts at flight, they had one critical piece, a light, 12HP gasoline engine built by their "mechanician," Charlie Taylor. Without that, all they had was a sophisticated glider. Their chief U.S. competitor, Langley, was still farting around with steam engines.

http://www.wright-brothers.org/Information_Desk/Just_the_Facts/Engines_&_Props/1903_Engine.htm
 
This is actually one of the keys to the Wright Brothers' success at Kitty Hawk -- of all the early attempts at flight, they had one critical piece, a light, 12HP gasoline engine built by their "mechanician," Charlie Taylor. Without that, all they had was a sophisticated glider. Their chief U.S. competitor, Langley, was still farting around with steam engines.

http://www.wright-brothers.org/Information_Desk/Just_the_Facts/Engines_&_Props/1903_Engine.htm

As you mentioned the Wright Brothers I cannot resist to hint to my fellow Hannoverian Karl Jatho, who seems to be forgotten, even though he made his first motorized flight even four months before the Wright brothers at Kitty Hawk:
Snip-it_1529253249909.jpg


Read more:
http://www.findingdulcinea.com/news...Take-the-First-Manned--Motorized-Flight-.html
 
Hm, the "Mayo" is left out all too often in public recognition... but mind you, a good Hot Dog needs both!

FarawayFriend,

I see that you have been seduced by the M&A (Mayo & Applesauce) doctrine of evil. I admonish you for the sake of your immortal soul and precious taste buds, that you return to the true faith's two, pure, enlightened ingredients,

MUSTARD and ONIONS.

I will remember you in my prayers at the Local Hot Dog Stand of Truth.

Sincerely and with trepidation for your soul,

Brother Blue of the Union

(PS: I'm glad he gave it a try in his country too!)
 
Last edited:
FarawayFriend,

I see that you have been seduced by the M&A (Mayo & Applesauce) doctrine of evil. I admonish you for the sake of your immortal soul and precious taste buds, that you return to the true faith's two, pure, enlightened ingredients,

MUSTARD and ONIONS.

I will remember you in my prayers at the Local Hot Dog Stand of Truth.

Sincerely and with trepidation for your soul,

Brother Blue of the Union

(PS: I'm glad he gave it a try in his country too!)
Forgive me, it's my European heritage.
Here come the ingredients for a Danish Dog, which is what I'm used to...
Mustard, mayo - and ketchup! Plus gherkins and onions.
29491939-zutaten-für-dänische-hot-dogs.jpg
 
Forgive me, it's my European heritage.
Here come the ingredients for a Danish Dog, which is what I'm used to...
Mustard, mayo - and ketchup! Plus gherkins and onions.
View attachment 192697

AAAAHHHHHHH!

Backslider! You worship at a false hot dog stand!

Gerkins AND Onions? Away with your false ingredients and temptations! I make the Sign of Mustard and Onions to counter your evil mixture!

I retreat to the safety of my own Hot Dog Shrine and pray for your souls and buds.

Amen,
Brother Blue of the Union
 
Back
Top