On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 17:24:01 GMT, "Kyle Boatright"
wrote:

A few things, primarily building on the fact that the flyer's abiltiy to fly
was extremely marginal...

1) What was the density altitude of the first flight, and what was it on
the replica's attempt?
2) How accurate is the replica? Could it be heavier or maybe the engine or
props are not quite as efficient?
3) The Flyer also failed to fly on its first attempt, resulting in some
damage. On the 17th they had it repaired AND they had more wind. It flew
that day. How much wind did they have for the replica's flight?

In this recreation, a few percentage points of performance means everything.
There are probably a hundred minor issues which could result in the replica
not flying.

KB

Not only was the original marginal in it's ability to fly, the
conditions on the day it made the attempt had winds at 27 mph. The
current replica is built so accurately that it likely needs that kind
of wind too. Or more power. But with more power, it isn't really
like the original...

Corky Scott