Wright aircraft

Attention everyone.

On CBS Evening News with Dan Rather, there was a 'trailer' tonight
announcing that on the CBS Evening News tomorrow (Thursday Night)
there would be section on the Wright's and their airplane(s).

I plan on watching and seeing what they put on.

Big John

Attention everyone.

On CBS Evening News with Dan Rather, there was a 'trailer' tonight
announcing that on the CBS Evening News tomorrow (Thursday Night)
there would be section on the Wright's and their airplane(s).

I plan on watching and seeing what they put on.

Probably something akin to this - this report is from one of our flying club
members today:
-------

Under the category of it's better to be lucky than smart! I saw the Wright
Flyer make its first successful flight today!!!!!!!!!! It flew 128 feet as
compared to the original first flight of 120 feet. Everyone involved was
extremely excited in spite of the fact that they broke two or three bottom
wing spars on the left wing. They were already repairing them before we
left.

How, you might ask, could someone as dumb as me be so lucky? A friend of
mine asked me at church Sunday if I would like to fly to First Flight this
week and see what we could see. My friend is Fred Mistr that owns a C206
(N5072U hangered in D12 at FCI). He called me at work at 9:45 and asked if
I could get away from work. We took off from FCI at Noon and flew the 206
to First Flight. We walked to the exhibit area in the shadows of the
monument when Fred said THERE IS THE WRIGHT FLYER. They were carrying it
from the hanger to the flight rail that it is launched from. We asked what
was going on and we were told that they would be making a test flight any
minute.

With a "crowd" of about 10-15 other dumb lucky people and 4 or 5
photographers and cameramen we watched as the engine was started, it raced
down the rail with a person at each wing and rose to (in my estimation) the
dizzying height of about 4 feet, came down into the sand and did a bit of a
ground loop (hence the broken wing ribs) and history was successfully
re-created!!

My penmanship does not do justice to the event but I hope each of you will
share some of my excitement at the event and will know for certain that this
entire project, after today, is successful!

hmmm, the first successful flight of the '03 Wright Flyer replica at Kitty Hawk
didn't end in broken parts (the second did) and according to Scott Crossfield
all of the flights they make are 119 feet as they don't want to disrespect the
Wright Brothers. That's the party line and I like it ;-).

Margy

John Harlow wrote:

Attention everyone.

On CBS Evening News with Dan Rather, there was a 'trailer' tonight
announcing that on the CBS Evening News tomorrow (Thursday Night)
there would be section on the Wright's and their airplane(s).

I plan on watching and seeing what they put on.

Probably something akin to this - this report is from one of our flying club
members today:
-------

Under the category of it's better to be lucky than smart! I saw the Wright
Flyer make its first successful flight today!!!!!!!!!! It flew 128 feet as
compared to the original first flight of 120 feet. Everyone involved was
extremely excited in spite of the fact that they broke two or three bottom
wing spars on the left wing. They were already repairing them before we
left.

How, you might ask, could someone as dumb as me be so lucky? A friend of
mine asked me at church Sunday if I would like to fly to First Flight this
week and see what we could see. My friend is Fred Mistr that owns a C206
(N5072U hangered in D12 at FCI). He called me at work at 9:45 and asked if
I could get away from work. We took off from FCI at Noon and flew the 206
to First Flight. We walked to the exhibit area in the shadows of the
monument when Fred said THERE IS THE WRIGHT FLYER. They were carrying it
from the hanger to the flight rail that it is launched from. We asked what
was going on and we were told that they would be making a test flight any
minute.

With a "crowd" of about 10-15 other dumb lucky people and 4 or 5
photographers and cameramen we watched as the engine was started, it raced
down the rail with a person at each wing and rose to (in my estimation) the
dizzying height of about 4 feet, came down into the sand and did a bit of a
ground loop (hence the broken wing ribs) and history was successfully
re-created!!

My penmanship does not do justice to the event but I hope each of you will
share some of my excitement at the event and will know for certain that this
entire project, after today, is successful!

On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 22:20:25 -0500, Margy Natalie
wrote:

hmmm, the first successful flight of the '03 Wright Flyer replica at Kitty Hawk
didn't end in broken parts (the second did) and according to Scott Crossfield
all of the flights they make are 119 feet as they don't want to disrespect the
Wright Brothers. That's the party line and I like it ;-).


Is this out of politeness to comrades? Or the worship of mystics?
This first is understood by all, for most all should know the meaning
of the word 'grace.' The second (if actually taken that far -- and I
think this is much to common), will likely isolate, and recall a bad
connotation onto the word 'comrade.' Even though common (and
therefore 'understood' by even many), I refuse grace at this point.

I know this party line of questioning to be a dangerous one. It is
accusational, and therefore can't help but be disrespectful. But I
don't care about those hurt feelings.
I've learned to have a certain amount of distaste for clubs -- of
any kind. I believe such a group psychology has a negative impact on
everyone. Groups tend to multiply feelings. If good then they heep
them up high. If bad then everyone gets that kind of drunk together.
They don't want that, so, (if they think they can get away with it),
they tend to tell everyone everything is a-okay. Some of us prefer
circumstances to be seen for what they are, not for what they would
have wanted them to be.

All the Wright brothers had to do was observe the arrow, as it flies a
precise flight; and consider what might happen if they changed that
very simple design. And all they had to do was observe the bird in
its astonishing air-dance. Apparently they did not do that, and put
part of their tail feathers up front. That was really kind of dumb,
wouldn't you say? But I do know what the party line is on this
matter, and I don't like it.

Mike

"Mike Rhodes" wrote in message
...

All the Wright brothers had to do was observe the arrow, as it flies a
precise flight; and consider what might happen if they changed that
very simple design. And all they had to do was observe the bird in
its astonishing air-dance. Apparently they did not do that, and put
part of their tail feathers up front. That was really kind of dumb,
wouldn't you say?


No, I wouldn't. They had sound reasons for putting the horizontal surfaces
in front. One of them was crashworthiness; they understood that everything
may not go as hoped and wanted structure in front of them. Another was
their belief that the pilot needed to see the position of the control
surface in order to effectively control the machine.

On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 15:20:17 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:

No, I wouldn't. They had sound reasons for putting the horizontal surfaces
in front. One of them was crashworthiness; they understood that everything
may not go as hoped and wanted structure in front of them. Another was
their belief that the pilot needed to see the position of the control
surface in order to effectively control the machine.

I've been reading a series of books on the Wright design.

The reason for their choice of a canard is not documented.
It had the happy effect of producing different stall characteristics
in their airplanes, which meant that their early airplanes mushed
down relatively safely compared to other early designs.
The canard provided extra lift and stalled before the
wings did. That meant that the wings were kept in a
better angle of attack in slow flight regimes. See
Peter L. Jakab, Visions of a Flying Machine, for the
full analysis of the historical record and the aerodynamics
of the early Flyers.

Marty

On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 15:20:17 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:


"Mike Rhodes" wrote in message
.. .

All the Wright brothers had to do was observe the arrow, as it flies a
precise flight; and consider what might happen if they changed that
very simple design. And all they had to do was observe the bird in
its astonishing air-dance. Apparently they did not do that, and put
part of their tail feathers up front. That was really kind of dumb,
wouldn't you say?


No, I wouldn't. They had sound reasons for putting the horizontal surfaces
in front. One of them was crashworthiness; they understood that everything
may not go as hoped and wanted structure in front of them. Another was
their belief that the pilot needed to see the position of the control
surface in order to effectively control the machine.


Steven,

If they were trying for a stable machine first then the
crashworthiness problem might've been assisted with a simple (though
Heavy) structure up front built for that purpose.
The idea of 'full' control in flight might make the second argument
also difficult to get around. I would want to see the position of the
control suface. Birds, however, do quite well without watching every
feather. And bicycles, or any other vehicle they had during that
time, do not need to have their wheels watched to know what to do with
steering.
They likely did feel a strong need to see the position of the
control surface. But couldn't they have decided to trust the position
of the control stick? This if they had wanted to trust nature in its
flight design. I'm not sure they even saw it. Putting the elevator
up front, even from their perspective, is historically unusual. And
for aero engineers to expect me to accept it in that position (almost
without question) I feel is an insult to me. Hence the nature of my
previous post.

Mike

Mike,

Apparently they did not do that, and put
part of their tail feathers up front. That was really kind of dumb,
wouldn't you say?


Uh, no. Why? Ever heard of Canard designs.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

"Mike Rhodes" wrote in message
...
| On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 22:20:25 -0500, Margy Natalie
| wrote:
|
| hmmm, the first successful flight of the '03 Wright Flyer replica at
Kitty Hawk
| didn't end in broken parts (the second did) and according to Scott
Crossfield
| all of the flights they make are 119 feet as they don't want to
disrespect the
| Wright Brothers. That's the party line and I like it ;-).
|
|
| Is this out of politeness to comrades? Or the worship of mystics?

mystical nonsense snipped

I guess he didn't have much to say.

mystical nonsense snipped

I guess he didn't have much to say.


Mr. Campbell, I really thought I did have something to say.