![]() |
| 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 |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
"robert arndt" wrote in message om... "Keith Willshaw" wrote in message ... "Michael Starke" wrote in message news:gf%cb.434068$Oz4.239319@rwcrnsc54... "Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message ink.net... "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. There were no Gustave Weiskopf replicas. Threre we http://www.flightjournal.com/articles/wff/wff1.asp No sir , no detailed plans of that aircraft exist, the airframe itself was destroyed without these at best you have a modern aeronautical engineers interpretation of what such an aircraft MIGHT have been. Keith Far from it Keith, they painstakingly recreated the No.21 using the Pentegon's photographic analysis methods and even succeeded in procuring the bamboo ribs from the original company that sold them to Weisskopf and the Japanese silk used for the wings. The only problem is with the motor, which of course was what Weisskopf was most interested in and most unique part of the GW No.21. No sir what they did was rebuild something that LOOKED like No. 21. The photos wouldnt show the details of how control wires and surfaces were rigged for example nor how the fabric and bamboo were attached to each other. Most people mistakenly think the guy wanted to be an aviation pioneer. That simply is not the truth. He built that plane and others to test his motors, That can be done adequately on a test bed, an airframe is not a requirement. which would have been his personal business if he had succeeded in that area of development. Aviation, he said, would be left to others. I have no doubt his motor worked on the original No.21, but even with modern 10 hp engines the basic layout of the a/c proved sound enough to fly. The Wrights said that was impossible- and they were WRONG twice. Two DIFFERENT replicas were built and flown during different decades with different pilots and they both flew. To me, the GW No.21 is as sound a design as the original Taube (which ironically resembles the GW No.21). Rob The fact that the design was not adopted by other aviators argues otherwise. Keith |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Bü 181 replica | Heinz Erben | Home Built | 1 | January 2nd 04 12:38 AM |
| The Wright Stuff and The Wright Experience | John Carrier | Military Aviation | 54 | October 12th 03 05:59 AM |
| they took me back in time and the nsa or japan wired my head and now they know the idea came from me so if your back in time and wounder what happen they change tim liverance history for good. I work at rts wright industries and it a time travel trap | tim liverance | Military Aviation | 0 | August 18th 03 01:18 AM |
| Hughes Racer Replica Lost | Wayne Sagar | Home Built | 9 | August 10th 03 02:45 PM |