Wright bros. - True distance

"Jay" wrote in message om...
From what I understand, they were flying on a down slope with the wind
coming strait on.

I believe that was only the case for Wilbur's first flight (which wasn't
overly successful). The December 17th flights were on level ground.

That is true. On December 14, the wind was about 5-10 mph (variable.) The
machine was run down a slight slope, however it probably crashed because Wilbur
over-pitched the machine and stalled it. Considering the moment of the
doubble-canard elevator, that was extremely easy to do in the 1903. Also,
having tried out the "cockpit" of John Reynolds' 1903 replica, I can say that
forward visibility is almost completely obscured when the elevator is pitched
up.

All of the flights on Dec. 17 were made from dead-flat level ground. I've been
to Kitty Hawk and researched it myself... its flatter than a pancake. And
every attempt to fly the 1903 was made directly into the wind.

Now, I'd like to bring up three more points. First point: consider the way a
modern airplane takes off, versus the 1903 Flyer. A modern airplane uses a
long runway to achieve sufficient airspeed above stall before rotating and
lifting off. The Wrights did not have that option. They only had a 40 ft.
launch rail. They used existing wind as a way to build enough airspeed to
rotate while keeping ground speed to an absolute minimum. That was a good idea
considering the plane's fragile construction. However, all four flights were
made using engine power alone as a power source. There was no ridge-lift or
other orrigraphic component. There was no thermal lift. And, the plane moved
forward, landing at a point as high as it started from, so there was no gliding
/ gravity component. Therefore, the plane was flying in the true sense, not
soaring downward through rising air.

Second point: in 1904, the Wrights tried again with a machine almost identical
to the 1903. With winds less than 10 mph, they made flights in excess 1300
feet. Their attempts at using a very long launch rail were largely
unsuccessful. However, the long flights of 1904 were made by launching off a
40 ft. rail using a catapult to help build initial airspeed. Once the plane
was above stall speed and lifted off, it was all engine.

Third point: the Wright 1903 flier was not the first powered aircraft to lift
off the ground using engine power alone. That honor goes to Sir Hiriam Maxim's
1896 aircraft. Maxim's plane wieghed almost 8,000 lbs (yeah, eight Thousand
pounds!) and was powered by twin 180 HP steam engines. However, it lacked the
critical element that would make it successful. The one thing that the Wrights
alone had developed... a fully-functional, three-axis flight control system.
And they had it by Oct. 8, 1902.

Now if anyone thinks that they could do better than the Wrights did in 1903,
considering the existing level of materials, technology, and aerodynamic
knowledge, I'd like to see them try. In the last 100 years, only 4
historically acurate 1903 replicas have managed to fly. The Wright 1903 Flyer
may be the most marginal airplane ever successfully flown. But, it is an
airplane, and it did fly, and that makes all the difference.

Harry "hip-cradle bruises" Frey

Third point: the Wright 1903 flier was not the first powered aircraft to lift
off the ground using engine power alone. That honor goes to Sir Hiriam Maxim's
1896 aircraft. Maxim's plane wieghed almost 8,000 lbs (yeah, eight Thousand
pounds!) and was powered by twin 180 HP steam engines. However, it lacked the
critical element that would make it successful. The one thing that the Wrights
alone had developed... a fully-functional, three-axis flight control system.
And they had it by Oct. 8, 1902.

Some fun reading about that at http://www.ctie.monash.edu.au/hargrave/maxim.html

Ed Wischmeyer

Thanks for the reference Ed. I've not seen that one before.

Harry