"Bill Silvey" wrote in message om...
"robert arndt" wrote in message
om
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2003Sep20.html

Awww, too bad. The two Gustav Weisskopf replicas flew easily enough,
proving that the Wrights were dead wrong when they claimed the GW
No.21 CANNOT FLY... just look at the design.
Time to admit the real first to fly sustained powered and controlled
flight was in 1901 with the GW No.21 and NOT in 1903 with the Wrights.

Rob

Time for you to go in the killfile, Kraut-eater.

Hey Bill, with all your "hot air" maybe you could just stand behind
the Wright Flyer replica and rant on to generate the necessary lift
for the a/c!
As for the kill file statement- go ahead, I don't care. This is a NG
and it exists to debate such topics as "who flew first" or "who broke
Mach 1 first". So you disagree with me. Fine. If you have to killfile
anyone who disagrees with you then you are childish and immature.
My point above is not to take away from the Wright's flight, only to
dispute their claims that the GW No.1 could not fly based solely on
its design. How ironic that the two GW No.21 replicas did fly while
the Flyer replica fails to get off the ground.
The only true problem with all of this is a single photo of the GW
No.21 in flight. That could have been solved in 1901 if the scientific
reporter for the newpaper article had taken photos- he didn't as he
preferred sketches. That is certainly not Gustav Weisskopf's fault...
but it prevents him from proving beyond a shadow of doubt that the GW
No.21 flew BEFORE the Wrights by 2 yrs.
Too bad we can't time travel back to that date in time and view the
event firsthand; yet, for some diehards on this NG it wouldn't matter.
They just want to forever wave the USA-Number-One flag around and
ignore other nations aeronautical achievements (or to a lesser extent
downgrade them).
But I could care less. Germany is firmly in aeronautical history and
deserves proper credit for their contributions in both war and peace.
Fair enough?

Rob