If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
"robert arndt" wrote in message om... Buying into that NASM crap again Al? The Gustave Weisskopf GW No.21 flew in 1901- two years before the Wrights and it was witnessed by hundreds of people and reported in the local newspaper. But because the scientific reporter did not like taking photos (preferring to sketch instead) and the fact that Herr Weisskopf was not a US citizen... he has been deliberately and conveniently dismissed. It probably helped that the Wrights pressured the US to declare their aircraft the first in order to recieve their permission to display their aircraft in the US and the fact that Weisskopf tried to concentrate on early aviation motors- his personal business that ultimately failed which led him back to Germany and his death. The Wrights have stated that the GW.21 "could have never flown" due to its construction. But they were proven wrong by two different replicas, one flown here in the US by a historic society and the second in Germany with a Luftwaffe pilot at the controls. BTW, who cares about the Wrights? The Germans had Lilienthal's gliders and the Zeppelins. Whitehead's flight witnessed by hundreds of people? Nope. Whitehead "flew" at night, supposedly to avoid crowds. Of course, flying at night offered a convenient explanation as to why nobody had seen his machine fly. http://www.flyingmachines.org/gwhtd.html |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 4 Jul 2003 20:19:19 -0400, "Lawrence Dillard"
wrote in Message-Id: : Not intending a flame war, but I seem to recall that an Australian inventor got his powered, piloted, heavier-than-air a/c into sustained, controlled flight to a safe landing even before (perhaps by years) the Wright Brothers. His feat, however, did not get the publicity it deserved. There's a web site I recall, that very thoroughly lists the aeronautical events of a German immigrant who was reputed to have had some success predating Orv and Wil. There are doubtless other like minded, unpublicized individuals who realized some measure of successful powered heavier-than-air, sustained, controlled flight. The Wright's were the progeny of a clergyman, bright, educated for their day, successful businessmen, and had the foresight to photo-document and journal their work. But what truly set them apart from other aeronautical (crackpot?) experimenters of the time was their abhorrence of the press. This was the beginning of the era that became (and still is) dominated by the use of petro-power to provide useful work that had till then been the provence of steam. Harnessing the energy of the oily remains of the life that has populated this planet for aeons, made man's taking to the skies inevitable. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message rthlink.net...
"robert arndt" wrote in message om... Buying into that NASM crap again Al? The Gustave Weisskopf GW No.21 flew in 1901- two years before the Wrights and it was witnessed by hundreds of people and reported in the local newspaper. But because the scientific reporter did not like taking photos (preferring to sketch instead) and the fact that Herr Weisskopf was not a US citizen... he has been deliberately and conveniently dismissed. It probably helped that the Wrights pressured the US to declare their aircraft the first in order to recieve their permission to display their aircraft in the US and the fact that Weisskopf tried to concentrate on early aviation motors- his personal business that ultimately failed which led him back to Germany and his death. The Wrights have stated that the GW.21 "could have never flown" due to its construction. But they were proven wrong by two different replicas, one flown here in the US by a historic society and the second in Germany with a Luftwaffe pilot at the controls. BTW, who cares about the Wrights? The Germans had Lilienthal's gliders and the Zeppelins. Whitehead's flight witnessed by hundreds of people? Nope. Whitehead "flew" at night, supposedly to avoid crowds. Of course, flying at night offered a convenient explanation as to why nobody had seen his machine fly. http://www.flyingmachines.org/gwhtd.html Absolutely false: http://www.flightjournal.com/articles/wff/wff1.asp Rob |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message ...
"robert arndt" wrote in message om... "Keith Willshaw" wrote in message ... "robert arndt" wrote in message om... The model aircraft that led to the aeroplane: http://www.amars.hpg.ig.com.br/plantas/planoph.html Rob This was only one of the progenitors and scarcely the most advanced. George Cayley laid a lot of the groundwork which was taken up by pioneers such as Henson, Stringfellow and Lillienthal Henson was experimenting with gliders and lightweight steam engines in the 1840's and published his patent (no. 9478) in 1842. This described a machine with bamboo spars and diagonal wire bracing. The surface of the planes was to amount to 4,500 square feet, and the tail, triangular in form was to be 1,500 square feet. The driving power was to be supplied by a steam engine of 25 to 30 horse-power, driving two six-bladed propellers. John Stringfellow flew his first steam powered flying machine in 1848 and his triplane of 1868 is on display in the Early Flight Gallery of the National Air & Space Museum, Washington, DC Otto Lilienthal's work is of course seminal and laid much of the foundations of what is noiwadays referred to as aerodynamics. In particular his analysis of different wing constructions and aspect ratio, wing shape and profile, based on his experiments were invaluable to those who followed. Keith The Planophore (1871) flew farther and longer than the Wright Flyer and was more stable. Langley, Chanute, and the Wrights all acknowledged Penaud's accomplishments. Sure it did but it was a model powered by a rubber band. A machine capable of carrying a man is a rather more advanced device and while it may have flown longer than the Wrights first flight the they assuredly beat its record fairly quickly. Nobody is denying Penaud certainly did good work but he was one on many. Got something else to say? (Of course he does... he ALWAYS does) This is a discussion group old boy, of course other people have something to say. Keith Say something to this: http://www.centennialofflight.gov/es...800s/PH4G9.htm Rob |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
"robert arndt" wrote in message om... "Keith Willshaw" wrote in message news:bdvgdg$nhh$1 Say something to this: http://www.centennialofflight.gov/es...800s/PH4G9.htm Rob It was a very nice toy but scarcely to be compared with a powered machine that could carry passengers. Keith |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
You simply cannot get over the fact that the first powered, heavier than air piloted aircraft was built an flown by Americans and not your Germanic super men, can you? Al Minyard Buying into that NASM crap again Al? The Gustave Weisskopf GW No.21 flew in 1901- two years before the Wrights and it was witnessed by hundreds of people and reported in the local newspaper. But because the scientific reporter did not like taking photos (preferring to sketch instead) and the fact that Herr Weisskopf was not a US citizen... he has been deliberately and conveniently dismissed. It probably helped that the Wrights pressured the US to declare their aircraft the first in order to recieve their permission to display their aircraft in the US and the fact that Weisskopf tried to concentrate on early aviation motors- his personal business that ultimately failed which led him back to Germany and his death. The Wrights have stated that the GW.21 "could have never flown" due to its construction. But they were proven wrong by two different replicas, one flown here in the US by a historic society and the second in Germany with a Luftwaffe pilot at the controls. BTW, who cares about the Wrights? The Germans had Lilienthal's gliders and the Zeppelins. Rob What utter BS. The fact that the US beat Germany (and the rest of the world) in this particular feat diminishes the "Blond Germanic Knight" syndrome, and thus must be wrong. Hitler would have loved it. Al Minyard |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
"robert arndt" wrote in message om... Say something to this: http://www.centennialofflight.gov/es...800s/PH4G9.htm It's a toy. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|