Wright Replica FAILS to Fly

"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. 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,
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

I see that Rob the NAZI is back spreading his unbelievable lies again...first
it was that the Nazi's design a bigger aircraft thatr the Hughes Flying
Boat...but gee, they never built it...now it;s the Wright flyer and the first
supersonic flight.....Hey Nazi Rob, will your buddies be the first on the moon
next?..maybe built the world's fastest aircraft...well, maybe, at least, they
designed it????

Hey, they won WWII also...well, at least they, you, planned it...so that too
make you Nazis right, again...well, at least in you and your nazi friend's
eyes. Any chance you are one of those boys from Brazil?????

Keep on dreamin' Rob....it's really entertaining how warped your mind is...but
even better that you actually put your dillusions in print.

(TBBlakeley) wrote in message ...
I see that Rob the NAZI is back spreading his unbelievable lies again...first
it was that the Nazi's design a bigger aircraft thatr the Hughes Flying
Boat...but gee, they never built it...

No, I said that the HK-1 was no big deal since the Nazis had equally
large designs and engines at the end of WW2. That is a fact. Check out
the ultra-large seaplane section of "Luftwaffe Secret Projects,
Strategic Bombers 1935-1945".

now it;s the Wright flyer and the first
supersonic flight.....

which are topics debated by many more people than myself and certain
publications like Flight Journal and such. So? This a NG. Calling me a
Nazi becuause I favor a different historical view than you is
juvenile.

Hey Nazi Rob, will your buddies be the first on the moon
next?..

No need to go there since American astronauts were trained by Nazi
engineers living in the US postwar and got to the moon via the Saturn
V- Von Braun's ship and dream come true.

maybe built the world's fastest aircraft...well, maybe, at least,
they
designed it????

Quite possibly as the entire German disc aircraft program is still
highly classified since it is directly linked to all US/UK/Canadian
postwar developments in that area, the flying descendents of which we
regard as the very blackest projects.

Hey, they won WWII also...well, at least they, you, planned it...so that too
make you Nazis right, again...well, at least in you and your nazi friend's
eyes. Any chance you are one of those boys from Brazil?????

No, they lost WW2 but saved the Allies a decade or more in postwar
aviation/space development... the wind tunnel data alone invaluable
not to mention all the thousands of German scientists, engineers, and
specialists that were employed by the govts of US, USSR, France, UK,
and Canada.

Keep on dreamin' Rob....it's really entertaining how warped your mind is...but
even better that you actually put your dillusions in print.

No brain warping here, just the historical reality of Germany's
contribution to aviation. And hey, Gustav Weisskopf flew in 1901...
long before the Nazis appeared, so save the "Nazi vilification" theme
of your posts.

Rob

"robert arndt" wrote in message
om...

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. 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,
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).


No. Didn't happen. No true replica of Whiteheads aircraft has ever been
built or flown. Aircraft that resemble Whiteheads but with far more
powerful engines, efficient propellers, and control systems completely
different from Whiteheads have been flown.

"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