(At Least) 100 Years Of Powered Human Flight 515
Rogue-Lion.com writes "Take a time out to remember the accomplishments of two bicycle shop owners who changed the world immeasurably, 100 years ago today. The Telegraph is running a story about a recreation of the Wright's (and world's) first heavier-than-air powered flight. President Bush will be in attendance at the event." Setting aside even more exotic theories, rod writes with an alternative point of view: namely, that man's first flight took place in New Zealand, on March 31, 1902. "I admire the U.S.A and the Wright brothers,but there are facts to consider today, 17/12/03, on the centenary of Kitty Hawk." Update: 12/17 13:44 GMT by T : Or was it a Brazillian invention? (Thanks,
Anderson Silva.)
The real invventors of the airplane. (Score:4, Insightful)
Some others may have flown a few feet before, but the Wrights were the first to make *controlled, long endurance* flights.
Re:Kind of like colossus (Score:5, Insightful)
Further claims of '1. powered flight' include for example Gustave Whitehead [flyingmachines.org] (or Weisskopf [weisskopf.de]) and Karl Jatho [flyingmachines.org].
It's really about more than getting off the ground (Score:5, Insightful)
The Wrights were engineers. Many people have the mistaken impression that they were just bumbling bicycle repairmen that got lucky or that they stumbled upon the right combination to be able to fly. This was simply not the case. The Wrights built the first wind tunnel that they used to test miniature airfoils (and consequently propellers).
The accomplishments of the Wrights cannot be dismissed as they flew an only slightly modifed flyer nonstop over 20 miles in 1906, the time that the Brazillians claim Alberto Santos Dumont achieved the 'real' first flight.
Re:Kind of like colossus (Score:5, Insightful)
The widely believed truth happens to be true.
For instance, the Wright brothers' flight was not the first heavier than air craft to fly. That record belongs to a small experimental glider near the beginning of the 19th -- not 20th -- century. The first manned heavier than air vehicle? What today we would call a hang glider was flown in 1870.
The Wright brothers' claim to fame is as the first repeatable, controlled, powered heavier than air flight. All that is important. Earlier efforts contributed to their accomplishment, but were essentially only experiments in learning the basics of flying.
The Wright brothers also eventually publicized their work. Pearse seems, according to the reports, a bit of an eccentric who didn't call much attention to his work. That's important too. A discovery you don't tell the world about is only half done. Others must know about your work and be able to replicate it.
We now know that Viking journeys to North America preceded Columbus' voyage by some centuries. But, again, they didn't follow up their voyages or make them known to the world at large. We also suspect some fishermen made it to North America years before Columbus. But, again, they didn't tell the world.
Repeatability and disclosure are vitally important parts of discovery. One wonders what poeple 5000 years from now will say about our time. They might remember the Chinese (or New Zealanders perhaps) as the real fathers of space travel -- and make a brief footnote for the academics about a certain event in 1969.
Documentation (Score:5, Insightful)
As for kitty hawk, the significant take offs were on level ground, and the final flight of the day was certainly sustained for almost a minute. Like any geek machine, it was hard to control at first.
So while other attempts may have been successful they were not as well documented., or even that reproducable.
Re:Kind of like colossus (Score:3, Insightful)
Progress? (Score:5, Insightful)
First flight? (Score:5, Insightful)
Who invented powered flight? Well, the Wright brothers were probably the first to achieve sucess in this area, but they didn't invent it. There were people all over the world attemting to master powered flight. Ideas circulated, individuals pulled these ideas together in an effort to get their machines to fly. People failed. People died trying. Perhaps people even suceeded. But 100 years ago the Wright brothers did suceed and told the world.
The way I see it, inventions are of their time. No one person can claim all the glory for anything. Sure, let's celebrate the Wright Brothers, but let's also celebrate the human spirit which drives such people whether they suceed or not. If we do that then it really does not matter one bit if the Wright Brothers really were first, or merely one of the first.
Sad but predictable (Score:2, Insightful)
Thanks, yet again, Slashdot and its wonderful readers.
Re:A quote on Richard Pearse (Score:2, Insightful)
This is what is important today, not only physical objects but process. As in the wright brothers time, there were many people who were building the flying machines. The knowledge base had increased enough so that it was possible. The key was who did it systematically enough to make it matter.
Re:This day should be a day of international mourn (Score:2, Insightful)
Just as the Holocaust was prefigured by colonial genocide, so the bombing raids which reduced Guernica, Hamburg, Dresden, Tokyo and parts of London to ash had been rehearsed in north Africa and the Middle East.
No, the colonizers didn't decide that the problem with the world was the existence of native people (the Nazi creed was basically "The Jews are to blame for everything") and then systematically eradicate them in deathcamps. Furthermore, massive bombing was invented by the Germans (London and Zeppelins in 1917, Spain in 1936), not Italians.
Japan sought to negotiate peace, but the Allies refused to talk until they had taken their firebombing to its logical conclusion, in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Bullshit. Japan did not seek peace with the Allies, on any kind of reasonable terms. The peace imposed on it was extremely reasonable considering how many of its neighbours the feudal, militaristic, racist, imperialistic and fatally suicidal (messing with the US was as good an idea then as it is now) country had killed. The Allies used an atomic bomb to demonstrate to the Japanese that they could stomp the country out AND kill the generals and Emperor. The bastards in the Japanese military finally realized that they had messed up (there were no shelters to hide in that could withstand an A-bomb as compared to a B-29) after starving their country to a standstill in pursuit of a futile war. They had previously been prepared to sacrifice tens of millions of Japanese lives in a suicidal defence of their homeland.
The airplane., more precisely than any other technology, represents the global ruling class. In the past we raised our eyes to the men on horseback. Today we raise our eyes to the heavens. Air travel is cheap and available to anybody. Ever heard of people taking their goats onto planes in Africa? Well they do. And they aren't a global ruling class. Airplanes are definitely not a symbol of domination.
Last week the World Health Organization calculated that climate change is causing 150,000 deaths a year. Bullshit, SHOW ME THE LINK.
By then the 400,000 won't be the only ones wishing that Wilbur and Orville (if indeed they were responsible) had stuck to mending bicycles. You mean those carrying their goats onto planes, or those who got airmail, or those whose medicine and food is delivered by cargo plane, or those who visit their families around the world in a trip lasting a day not a month, or just about anybody who doesn't live near an airport.
Despite almost 400,000 objections to the expansion of airports in Britain, the transport secretary will announce new runways at Stansted and Birmingham, and more flights to Heathrow.
Are you one of the 400,000? Let me guess, you're just pissed off that your little bit of England is near an airport. I think the entirety of your rant is motivated by your falling house price. Nobody wants a shit recycling plant near the house but hell, somebody, has to have it. A lack of new airports would stifle the UK economy, but I guess you're alright, jack, you've got a job. For now...
Oh by the way Mr Ihateairplanesbecausetheykillpeopleandhaveaffecte
Yeah this is flaming but I have a flaming reaction to lies and egoism dressed up as morality.
Re:Another one (Score:2, Insightful)
Insightful my ass. Gliders and balloons are not examples of 'powered flight.' And a heavier- than-air flying machine was truly shocking. Do you honestly believe that the significance of the Wright Brother's flight was the control system? Please.
Re:The Wrights (Score:2, Insightful)
Perhaps. Even though, as early as 1907 (one year after his first flight), Santos Dumont had a very stable and controllable plane made, the Demoiselle. In fact, to demonstrate how easy it was to fly in this machine, he invited a lady without previous flight experience to fly the machine. This model was also used to train novices - like Roland Garros (at the time). So, no, there was a USEFUL machine.
Perhaps, they just didn't care - which was the fact, indeed, in case of Santos Dumont. He already had the money, he didn't feel the need for more. And, in fact, instead of thinking about selling his work, he forfeited his rights and published all the plans in a special edition of Popular Machines in 1910, so people could build their own, improve the design and all the like you might have heard somewhere before. Some eighty years before the appearing of Richard Stallman, he was already 'open source' (GNU/Demoiselle jokes are welcome).
And, just to finish, he didn't created the plane to get richer, but (besides satisfying his own curiosity) to help humanity. After seeing his invention used to kill people in WWI, he entered a state of deep depression which, in the end, has killed him. Or, better, made him kill himself.
PS.: there is a lot of doubt about if the first machine built by the Wright Brothers could actually fly. Do a little research, and you will find that things that you take for sure may not be what you think, NO MATTER HOW LOUD YOU SHOUT.
Re:Brazil vs USA crap (Score:1, Insightful)
"They had calculated that they needed 90 pounds of thrust. When they measured the thrust, it was a spectacular 130 pounds."
"Orville climbs onto the airplane, and when everything's ready to go--he has Wilbur on the right wingtip to kind of keep it balanced...and Orville flipped the clip open, and down they went into the air."
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts/3015_w
Let;'s live in the world of proof, not speculation (Score:4, Insightful)
It all comes down to proof. The proof is there. The Wrights had machines that they made themselves that created tables to show wing lift and speed. They attempted it with German tables, but they were wholly inaccurate. So as good little scientists, they did it themselves. The propellar design (another wing, designed with heavy math) was created by the Wrights, as well as the control scheme. All of these tools they used still work today. They still exsist today. These guys took notes, the rest of the world didn't think that was as necessary as making something that looked like a bird.
A lot of people talk about proof. Well, let me say this. The Wrights were some of the best amateur scientists ever. Period. They took a little bicycle shop and some tools and then THEY DID THE MATH while the rest of the world was still thinking, "how should this thing be shaped?"
The proof is still there people. Where are all of these other crackpot fliers? Are they around? Do they work? Did anyone ever do anything but print about them.
My grandfather told me about his father who went to see the Wrights as a boy when they toured (yes, toured) the country. They offered anyone $100 to fly with them. No one came forward. They thought they were nuts. What they saw defied reason at the time.
Someone said this:
One wonders what poeple 5000 years from now will say about our time. They might remember the Chinese (or New Zealanders perhaps) as the real fathers of space travel -- and make a brief footnote for the academics about a certain event in 1969.
Well, there is always going to be a flag up there, and the bottom half of a lunar lander. The last time I checked, that is all the proof you need. I bet it has US Gov't stamped all over it. Probably a couple of dates written on it too.
Guys, this is all about proof and speculation.
We live in a world of FACTS. Slashdotters should be the more understanding bunch about this subject. The facts, and diligence towards those facts, is what seperates your civilization from space travel and worshipping 'dark wolf the moon God' every time there is an eclipse.
Re:Leonardo da Vinci (Score:0, Insightful)
Seriously, cycling was relevant (Score:3, Insightful)
Furthermore, it was their experience with the bicycle that gave the Wright brothers insight into some of the issues of stability and controllability. When the Wright brothers' plane was first demonstrated before big audiences, people were surprised and shocked that the thing banked, thought something had gone wrong, and expected it to crash. Probably the other aerodynamic pioneers knew better, but there was certainly a mindset that heavier-than-aircraft would maneuver like boats--being turned with a rudder and staying level along the "roll" axis.
The cycling experience was undoubtedly relevant to their achievements.
Re:The real invventors of the airplane. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:The real invventors of the airplane. (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, "heavier-than-air powered flight, taking off the ground" is what makes an airplane for me. And by this criteria, the Wright brothers were 3 years before Santos Dumont. They did not use a catapult on their earlier models.
If you want to claim Pearse was first, we could argue about whether level of control matters, or whether poorly documented hearsay should be beleived. If you want to argue Santos Dumont was first, you're just wrong.
Re: The real inventors of the airplane. (Score:3, Insightful)
> In fact, like the telephone, the airplane is a perfect example of one of those things whose creation is inevitable once the supporting technology is available.
That's the main reason I'm cynical about patents. Technology seems to advance in a wavefront, and and there is an endless list of people who invented the same thing, independently, at the same time. And they always stand on the shoulders of giants.
Re:Kind of like colossus (Score:3, Insightful)
Of course they do. How else would they go up?
Re:Another one (Score:5, Insightful)
ABSO-FRIGIN-LUTELY!!! The thing that set the Writes apart from all the other would-be aviators of the day was there understanding of aerodynamics, and how crucial that was to powered flight.
They invented the technique of using a wind tunnel to measure lift and drag.
They improved propeller efficiency from the standard at the time of 40% to 80%! Modern propellers have an efficiency of about 85%. Holy crap.
Their wing-warping (which many people criticize, even though it is on the come back... Heck, people criticized the flying wing until the B2) mechanism was critical. They learned from their extensive and analytical study that the only way to control a plane in flight was to vary the aerodynamics by varying the wing geometry. Granted, most methods for vairable wing geometry used since then have involved hinged, surfaces, but the critical idea was there.
While many people look at Otto Lilienthal's work as being the foundation of the Write brothers, this is really not true. The Writes tried to follow Lilienthal's work, but were not able to scale it up to a large enough plane to carry a motor. It was only once they reallized that Lilienthal's assumptions about wings were flawed, that they came up with truly modern and workable wings.