early powered flight

"Emmanuel Gustin" wrote in message ...
"Kim Dammers" wrote in message
om...

Contemporary newspaper articles, one of which is from the local paper
and describes the flight constitute serious evidence, albeit not
proof. In addition, at least two alleged eye-witnesses later signed
sworn affidavits.

We are speaking about statements made *many* years later,
probably under fairly strong pressure by enthusiastic
'Whiteheadians', and not always very clear. As for newspaper
articles, to be regarded significant one should require either
photographic evidence or the presence of independent witnesses.
Remember, the 'arrival' of Nungesser and Coli in New York
was enthusiastically celebrated in Paris...

Well recent investigations have dug this up...

http://www.flightjournal.com/articles/wff/wff1.asp

It seems that a wooden print is not a substitute for a photo..
There is some evidence that pictures did exist at one time.
There does seem to be some vested interest in keeping the status quo.

Cheers

There are no pictures of Whitehead's flying machine in flight.
There are only pictures of a modern 'reconstruction', of which
we can at most say that it is outwardly more or less similar,
in brief flights.

"John Cook" wrote in message
om...
"Emmanuel Gustin" wrote in message
...


http://www.flightjournal.com/articles/wff/wff1.asp

It seems that a wooden print is not a substitute for a photo..
There is some evidence that pictures did exist at one time.
There does seem to be some vested interest in keeping the status quo.

Cheers

The claim is made that the reporter never used photos yet we
see photos galore of the Whitehead machine before the
alleged flight but none taken actually during the flight.

Things that make you go hmmm.

Keith