Wright Flyer I Model Airplane

Alan Moore wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 21:55:58 -0800 (PST), "aircraftsmodel@gmail.com"
> <aircraftsmodel RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The Wright Flyer was also known as the Flyer I and sometimes Kitty
>> Hawk. It was an experimental airplane designed and built by the
>> Wright Brothers. It was the first sustained controlled
>> heavier-than-air powered flight.
>
> Not that it has anything to do with motorcycles, but the Wrights,
> assuming that their 1903 claims are true, were still at least eight
> years after the first such flight, which took place in Paris in
> 1895.
> That's a flight leaving level ground under its own power. Powered
> glides, which would fit your description, had been made even
> earlier.

There were three points to the Wright's flight--sustained, controlled,
and heavier than air. The only record I can find of a flight in Paris
in 1895 was of the Avion III, which supposedly made one and only one
flight--whether it was a controlled flight or not depends on who you
believe, some sources say that it crashed. It never flew again in any
case. There is a photo of the Wright Flyer airborne at Kitty Hawk in
1903, ergo there is no question that their claim was true. They made
more than 105 flights in the next year and in another year were flying
tens of miles. Or are you saying that in 1908 they magically appeared
in Paris with a fully controllable airplane far more capable than any
other in the world at the time having done absolutly no prior research
and development?

> The assumption that their claims were true may be stretching it.
> Although they wanted to sell airplanes to anybody who was buying,
> when
> the Brits came over to evaluate their plane, and ready to place an
> order, they declined to demonstrate it in 1906.

They did not "decline to demonstrate it", the refused to demonstrate
it to anybody prior to the signing of a contract. Today they would
probably have simply required a non-disclosure agreement but at the
time such things were unknown. They didn't seem to be all that
interested in _selling_ anyway.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
 >> Stay informed about: Wright Flyer I Model Airplane 

On Feb 21, 8:28 am, "J. Clarke" <jclarke.use....DeleteThis@cox.net> wrote:
> Alan Moore wrote:
> > On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 21:55:58 -0800 (PST), "aircraftsmo...@gmail.com"

> There is a photo of the Wright Flyer airborne at Kitty Hawk in
> 1903, ergo there is no question that their claim was true. They made
> more than 105 flights in the next year and in another year were flying
> tens of miles. Or are you saying that in 1908 they magically appeared
> in Paris with a fully controllable airplane far more capable than any
> other in the world at the time having done absolutly no prior research
> and development?

Ahh, but isn't that why we all read reeky ? To learn the
real truth that the government apologists and stooges
don't want you to know ?

You say there are photos of the 1903 Kittyhawk and 1908
Paris fights. And I suppose you never heard of photoshop ?

How sad that you never learned critical thinking.
 >> Stay informed about: Wright Flyer I Model Airplane 

On Feb 21, 6:35 pm, "J. Clarke" <jclarke.use....RemoveThis@cox.net> wrote:
> Rob Kleinschmidt wrote:

> > You say there are photos of the 1903 Kittyhawk and 1908
> > Paris fights. And I suppose you never heard of photoshop ?
>
> > How sad that you never learned critical thinking.
>
> Well, if you think that the Wright Brothers had Photoshop then why is
> it so implausible that they also had a little help from Kelley
> Johnson? I mean Dr. Who can transport one as easily as the other.

Early version Photoshop, probably an evaluation copy.
Designed to work on glass plate negatives.

A few anachronisms should never be allowed to detract
from a good conspiracy theory anyway.
 >> Stay informed about: Wright Flyer I Model Airplane 

Rob Kleinschmidt wrote:
> On Feb 21, 8:28 am, "J. Clarke" <jclarke.use....RemoveThis@cox.net> wrote:
>> Alan Moore wrote:
>>> On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 21:55:58 -0800 (PST),
>>> "aircraftsmo...@gmail.com"
>
>> There is a photo of the Wright Flyer airborne at Kitty
>> Hawk in 1903, ergo there is no question that their claim was true.
>> They made
>> more than 105 flights in the next year and in another year were
>> flying tens of miles. Or are you saying that in 1908 they
>> magically
>> appeared
>> in Paris with a fully controllable airplane far more capable than
>> any
>> other in the world at the time having done absolutly no prior
>> research
>> and development?
>
> Ahh, but isn't that why we all read reeky ? To learn the
> real truth that the government apologists and stooges
> don't want you to know ?
>
> You say there are photos of the 1903 Kittyhawk and 1908
> Paris fights. And I suppose you never heard of photoshop ?
>
> How sad that you never learned critical thinking.

Well, if you think that the Wright Brothers had Photoshop then why is
it so implausible that they also had a little help from Kelley
Johnson? I mean Dr. Who can transport one as easily as the other.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
 >> Stay informed about: Wright Flyer I Model Airplane 

"J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet DeleteThis @cox.net> wrote

> Well, if you think that the Wright Brothers had Photoshop then why is
> it so implausible that they also had a little help from Kelley
> Johnson?

Kelly Johnson?

This thread's beginning to stink.
 >> Stay informed about: Wright Flyer I Model Airplane 

On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 11:28:15 -0500, "J. Clarke"
<jclarke.usenet.TakeThisOut@cox.net> wrote:

>Alan Moore wrote:
>> On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 21:55:58 -0800 (PST), "aircraftsmodel@gmail.com"
>> <aircraftsmodel.TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The Wright Flyer was also known as the Flyer I and sometimes Kitty
>>> Hawk. It was an experimental airplane designed and built by the
>>> Wright Brothers. It was the first sustained controlled
>>> heavier-than-air powered flight.
>>
>> Not that it has anything to do with motorcycles, but the Wrights,
>> assuming that their 1903 claims are true, were still at least eight
>> years after the first such flight, which took place in Paris in
>> 1895.
>> That's a flight leaving level ground under its own power. Powered
>> glides, which would fit your description, had been made even
>> earlier.
>
>There were three points to the Wright's flight--sustained, controlled,
>and heavier than air.

All of those had been achieved many years before. Another item that
the Wrights were trying to accomplish was to lift off of level ground
under it's own power. They did not trouble to mention this item to
either of the only two witnesses, neither of whom was an expert, and
there remains some dispute about whether their launch rail was level,
or sloped down.

>The only record I can find of a flight in Paris
>in 1895 was of the Avion III, which supposedly made one and only one
>flight--whether it was a controlled flight or not depends on who you
>believe, some sources say that it crashed.

Here's and 1897 photograph of the Avion III in flight, in 1897:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/97/AderAvion3%281897%29.jpg

>It never flew again in any case.

In fairness to Ader, it should be pointed out that the first Wright
flyer never flew again either, having been damaged.

>here is a photo of the Wright Flyer airborne at Kitty Hawk in
>1903, ergo there is no question that their claim was true.

Experts have examined the photographic evidence, and have not been
able to conclude definitely one way or the other. I refer you to
Oliver Stewart's _Aviation: The Creative Ideas_. Stewart was himself a
test pilot and an historian of aviation. And there is no doubt
whatever about Ader's accomplishments, because not only were they
photographed, they were conducted in front of a commission of experts
appointed by the military for the purpose, rather than in secluded
secrecy.

>hey made
>more than 105 flights in the next year and in another year were flying
>tens of miles. Or are you saying that in 1908 they magically appeared
>in Paris with a fully controllable airplane far more capable than any
>other in the world at the time having done absolutly no prior research
>and development?

No, I'm saying that it isn't clear that they did anything that had not
been done by others before.
>
>> The assumption that their claims were true may be stretching it.
>> Although they wanted to sell airplanes to anybody who was buying,
>> when
>> the Brits came over to evaluate their plane, and ready to place an
>> order, they declined to demonstrate it in 1906.
>
>They did not "decline to demonstrate it", the refused to demonstrate
>it to anybody prior to the signing of a contract. Today they would
>probably have simply required a non-disclosure agreement but at the
>time such things were unknown. They didn't seem to be all that
>interested in _selling_ anyway.

According to Stewart, they were trying to interest everybody's
militaries in the airplane. The British representative made it clear
to them that purchase was conditional on performance. Their excuse for
not demonstrating it was that they felt he was only trying to satisfy
his own curiousity. If they were flying as far, and as often as you
assert, and doing all of the things they were claiming, there should
have been no problem about inviting him to such an event. Unless, of
course, they didn't want an expert witness...

Al Moore
DoD 734
 >> Stay informed about: Wright Flyer I Model Airplane 

On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 19:18:13 -0800 (PST), Rob Kleinschmidt
<Rkleinsch1216128.TakeThisOut@aol.com> wrote:

>On Feb 21, 6:35 pm, "J. Clarke" <jclarke.use....TakeThisOut@cox.net> wrote:
>> Rob Kleinschmidt wrote:
>
>> > You say there are photos of the 1903 Kittyhawk and 1908
>> > Paris fights. And I suppose you never heard of photoshop ?
>>
>> > How sad that you never learned critical thinking.
>>
>> Well, if you think that the Wright Brothers had Photoshop then why is
>> it so implausible that they also had a little help from Kelley
>> Johnson? I mean Dr. Who can transport one as easily as the other.
>
>Early version Photoshop, probably an evaluation copy.
>Designed to work on glass plate negatives.

Possibly running under windows two dozen, the first fully functional
32 bit multitasking operating system for the abacus.

Al Moore
DoD 734
 >> Stay informed about: Wright Flyer I Model Airplane 

"Alan Moore" <alan.s.moore RemoveThis @comcast.net> wrote

> If they were flying as far, and as often as you
> assert, and doing all of the things they were claiming, there should
> have been no problem about inviting him to such an event. Unless, of
> course, they didn't want an expert witness...

Wright.

And George Bush personally ordered the destruction of the WTC.
 >> Stay informed about: Wright Flyer I Model Airplane 

P. Roehling wrote:
> "J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet.RemoveThis@cox.net> wrote
>
>> Well, if you think that the Wright Brothers had Photoshop then why
>> is
>> it so implausible that they also had a little help from Kelley
>> Johnson?
>
> Kelly Johnson?
>
> This thread's beginning to stink.

It took me a while to get that one. Bad pun. BAD!

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
 >> Stay informed about: Wright Flyer I Model Airplane 

"J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet.RemoveThis@cox.net> wrote

>> Kelly Johnson?
>>
>> This thread's beginning to stink.
>
> It took me a while to get that one. Bad pun. BAD!

Puns are graded thusly:

A Grade #1 only gets a groan.

Grade #2 gets a more extended verbal reaction such as yours above.

Grade #3 wins a mimed physical reaction such as gagging in addition to
various obscene verbal comments.

A Grade #4 pun -the very best- gets none of the above. Everyone within range
simply picks up the solid object nearest at hand and throws it at the
punster just as hard as they can.

I've scored threes on occasion, but the coveted Grade 4 still eludes me.
 >> Stay informed about: Wright Flyer I Model Airplane 

Alan Moore wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 11:28:15 -0500, "J. Clarke"
> <jclarke.usenet.TakeThisOut@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> Alan Moore wrote:
>>> On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 21:55:58 -0800 (PST),
>>> "aircraftsmodel@gmail.com"
>>> <aircraftsmodel.TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The Wright Flyer was also known as the Flyer I and sometimes
>>>> Kitty
>>>> Hawk. It was an experimental airplane designed and built by the
>>>> Wright Brothers. It was the first sustained controlled
>>>> heavier-than-air powered flight.
>>>
>>> Not that it has anything to do with motorcycles, but the Wrights,
>>> assuming that their 1903 claims are true, were still at least
>>> eight
>>> years after the first such flight, which took place in Paris in
>>> 1895.
>>> That's a flight leaving level ground under its own power. Powered
>>> glides, which would fit your description, had been made even
>>> earlier.
>>
>> There were three points to the Wright's flight--sustained,
>> controlled, and heavier than air.
>
> All of those had been achieved many years before.

By who?

> Another item that
> the Wrights were trying to accomplish was to lift off of level
> ground
> under it's own power. They did not trouble to mention this item to
> either of the only two witnesses, neither of whom was an expert, and
> there remains some dispute about whether their launch rail was
> level,
> or sloped down.

You're grasping at straws here.

>> The only record I can find of a flight in Paris
>> in 1895 was of the Avion III, which supposedly made one and only
>> one
>> flight--whether it was a controlled flight or not depends on who
>> you
>> believe, some sources say that it crashed.
>
> Here's and 1897 photograph of the Avion III in flight, in 1897:
> http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/97/AderAvion3%281897%29.jpg

Uh huh. I really like the way that they managed to stop the motion of
the propellers with that very high speed shutter that did not exist
then. Hell, I can't stop a propeller that thoroughly with my Leica.
And who was flying it? The guy hanging out the side would have had
trouble reaching the controls I would think.

The photo is also rather sharp for an 1897 photo of a flying machine.

And if it flew so well then why didn't the French military continue to
develop it?

>> It never flew again in any case.
>
> In fairness to Ader, it should be pointed out that the first Wright
> flyer never flew again either, having been damaged.

It made four flights, not just the one claimed for Ader.

>> here is a photo of the Wright Flyer airborne at Kitty Hawk in
>> 1903, ergo there is no question that their claim was true.
>
> Experts have examined the photographic evidence, and have not been
> able to conclude definitely one way or the other.

Which experts are these? Are you saying that the aircraft clearly
flying at Kitty Hawk was faked somehow?

> I refer you to
> Oliver Stewart's _Aviation: The Creative Ideas_. Stewart was himself
> a
> test pilot and an historian of aviation. And there is no doubt
> whatever about Ader's accomplishments, because not only were they
> photographed, they were conducted in front of a commission of
> experts
> appointed by the military for the purpose, rather than in secluded
> secrecy.

So show me a photograph that is clearly and incontrovertibly of Ader's
machine in powered flight. I want to see evidence of propellers
turning and a background that allows the altitude to be judged. The
one you link appears to be of it on the ground with the background cut
out.

>> hey made
>> more than 105 flights in the next year and in another year were
>> flying tens of miles. Or are you saying that in 1908 they
>> magically
>> appeared in Paris with a fully controllable airplane far more
>> capable than any other in the world at the time having done
>> absolutly no prior research and development?
>
> No, I'm saying that it isn't clear that they did anything that had
> not
> been done by others before.
>>
>>> The assumption that their claims were true may be stretching it.
>>> Although they wanted to sell airplanes to anybody who was buying,
>>> when
>>> the Brits came over to evaluate their plane, and ready to place an
>>> order, they declined to demonstrate it in 1906.
>>
>> They did not "decline to demonstrate it", the refused to
>> demonstrate
>> it to anybody prior to the signing of a contract. Today they would
>> probably have simply required a non-disclosure agreement but at the
>> time such things were unknown. They didn't seem to be all that
>> interested in _selling_ anyway.
>
> According to Stewart, they were trying to interest everybody's
> militaries in the airplane.

Get a few more sources. If you get your sense of history from only
one source then you are often misled.

> The British representative made it clear
> to them that purchase was conditional on performance. Their excuse
> for
> not demonstrating it was that they felt he was only trying to
> satisfy
> his own curiousity. If they were flying as far, and as often as you
> assert, and doing all of the things they were claiming, there should
> have been no problem about inviting him to such an event. Unless, of
> course, they didn't want an expert witness...

Or unless they didn't want him to steal their ideas without
compensation.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
 >> Stay informed about: Wright Flyer I Model Airplane 

P. Roehling wrote:
> "J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet.DeleteThis@cox.net> wrote
>
>>> Kelly Johnson?
>>>
>>> This thread's beginning to stink.
>>
>> It took me a while to get that one. Bad pun. BAD!
>
> Puns are graded thusly:
>
> A Grade #1 only gets a groan.
>
> Grade #2 gets a more extended verbal reaction such as yours above.
>
> Grade #3 wins a mimed physical reaction such as gagging in addition
> to
> various obscene verbal comments.
>
> A Grade #4 pun -the very best- gets none of the above. Everyone
> within range simply picks up the solid object nearest at hand and
> throws it at the punster just as hard as they can.
>
> I've scored threes on occasion, but the coveted Grade 4 still eludes
> me.

That one was really a 4 but I can't throw that far.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
 >> Stay informed about: Wright Flyer I Model Airplane 

On Feb 22, 11:28 am, "Bob Myers" <nospample....RemoveThis@address.invalid> wrote:
> "Alan Moore" <alan.s.mo....RemoveThis@comcast.net> wrote in message
>
> news:dvmsr3dmmhjt2qst7u5p1b0nd0400uf7a8@4ax.com...
> >
>
> > In fairness to Ader, it should be pointed out that the first Wright
> > flyer never flew again either, having been damaged.
>
> The original Flyer flew four times on Dec. 17, 1903, with the
> final flight lasting 59 seconds and covering a distance of a
> little over 850 feet. That particular aircraft was overturned
> by gusty winds and damaged after that final flight, and could
> not be quickly repaired, but other versions of the same basic
> design continued to be flown by the Wrights through 1904
> and 1905, culiminating in a circling, 24-mile, 39-minute flight
> with Wilbur at the controls, on Oct. 5 of that year.
>
> > No, I'm saying that it isn't clear that they did anything that had not
> > been done by others before.
>
> What they did that had not been done before was sustained,
> *fully-controlled* flight by a heavier-than-air craft. The attempts
> by Adler and others prior to the Wright's experiments did manage
> to get something into the air, but all lacked the capability for
> sufficient control. In any event, the Federation Aeronautique
> Internationale recognizes the Wright flights in Dec., 1903, as "the
> first sustained and controlled heavier-than-air powered flight."
>
> (See:http://www.fai.org/news_archives/fai/000295.asp)

As I understood it, it was the ability to make controlled
turns that so impressed the Europeans, much of this
attributable to the Wright's development work with wind tunnels.

Turning without crashing is generally considered really
important.
 >> Stay informed about: Wright Flyer I Model Airplane