Slashdot Mirror
Replica Flyer Foiled By Weather
An anonymous reader submits: "A replica of the Wright Brothers' 1903 flyer failed to fly yesterday afternoon at a demonstration in Chicago. Organizers blamed the measly 5 MPH winds. Kitty Hawk had 25 MPH back on December 17, 1903. IIRC, isn't Chicago the 'Windy City?'" Here's an earlier story about the various groups attempting to re-enact the Wright brothers' pioneer flight.
Actually... Chicago is called the windy city because of the politians, not the wind. It's a "hot air" sort of wind :)
But it is usually 'blustery' as well...
-Digital Extremist
First line of story says "not enough wind."
Chicago doesn't even make this top average wind speed list. Fargo would be a better choice, especially as flat as it is there.
MT. WASHINGTON, NH 35.3
ST. PAUL ISLAND, AK 17.4
COLD BAY,AK 16.9
JOHNSTON ISLAND, PC 15.8
BLUE HILL, MA 15.4
DODGE CITY, KS 14
WAKE ISLAND, PC 13.8
AMARILLO, TX 13.5
KWAJALEIN, MARSHALL IS., PC 13.3
BARTER IS.,AK 13.2
ROCHESTER, MN 13.1
KOTZEBUE, AK 13
CASPER, WY 12.9
CHEYENNE, WY 12.9
BETHEL, AK 12.8
KAHULUI, HI 12.8
GREAT FALLS, MT 12.7
GOODLAND, KS 12.6
BOSTON, MA 12.5
LUBBOCK, TX 12.4
LIHUE, HI 12.3
WICHITA, KS 12.3
FARGO, ND 12.3
OKLAHOMA CITY, OK 12.3
CONCORDIA, KS 12.2
NEW YORK (LAGUARDIA AP), NY 12.2
BRIDGEPORT, CT 12
CORPUS CHRISTI, TX 12
The website of the Wright Redux Association, the group mentioned in the article.
Why do I h8 apple?
<:
I JUST watched a documentary on this last night. It was really interesting. The wright brothers created the first powered airplane on their own while the goverment wasted thousands funding someone else. It was a fascinating story about these two inseperable brothers who ran a bicycle shop and decided to build their own plane. They were very methodical and:
1) Came up with the idea of what we call "Lift"
2) Created the first propeller as we use it today
3) Invented the wind tunnel for testing
All on their own! They also developed the way modern planes "stear"...as in angle and yaw are connected (i believe that's what they are).
The worked very very hard on this plane and left tons of notes...however...we do not have that plane. That's why the "Wright Experience" set out to build a replica based on the brothers notes...to the T! They knew they could make improvements, fixes...but then they wouldn't be building a replica.
Gives these guys a break...it took years to put this thing together as accuratly as possible...from the fabric to even the damn engine !
Thanks for playing
-- A cat is no trade for integrity!
I don't think that follows. The average F16 doesn't have any trouble at all taking off by itself, even with a tail wind, given a long enough runway.
It would be absolutely accurate, on the other hand, to assert that navy jets don't 'take off' so much as they're thrown in to the air by a giant slingshot. Once aloft, however, they can stay in the air as long as fuel is available.
Gustav Weisskopf
1890.
For some reason it was decided that only the Wright brothers' attempt really counted and was worth teaching in schools, however. Go us, we invented the plane, etc.
Not that this one wasn't overly dependant on weather conditions either, of course (the plane exposed in this museum crashed in 1897 after a flight in bad weather conditions).
-- B.
This sig does in fact not have the property it claims not to have.
Man's First Powered Flight Richard Pearse, Waitohi, New Zealand, March 31, 1902.
HERE
God was my co-pilot, but then we crashed and I was forced to eat him.
From the article:
"The Wrights flew into a 25-mile-per-hour wind. I think we could have flown if we had that," said Mike Gillian, pilot of the replica.
The wind in downtown Chicago, where today's three flights were attempted, was barely 5 mph.
The small four-cylinder engine, also an exact replica of the original, did not have the power to lift the craft."
The Wright Flyer was more like a glider with a sustaining engine - not enough to launch, but enough to stay up.
It's been suggested in several posts that the Wright's requirement of a 25mph headwind was cheating because this somehow reduced their plane to a noisy glider. This really isn't the case. The reason has to do with drag. Even with a modern paved runway and tires, there is still a noticable amount of rolling drag during a take-off roll. It's not uncommon for a pilot (especially in small planes with limited horsepower) to lift the plane of the runaway a few feet to eliminate the rolling drag and then let the plane gain additional speed from the reduced drag before climbing out. Using a headwind just makes this process easier. Considering that the Wright Bros were using a crude track, wheels, and skids it's amazing they were able to get off the ground at all.
But their biggest contribution was that the Wrights recognized that existing aerodynamic theory was wrong. Using their wind tunnel and full size models, they literally re-wrote the book on aerodynamic theory of the time. Unlike other attempts at flight of the time, the Wright flyer was a product of sound scientific research rather than throw-it-together-and-hope-it-flies which was so common a the time. For that, they deserve to be recognized as the fathers of flight.
When all else fails, run.
Personally, I like this project done by Utah State University. It uses the Wright Brothers design, but it's all composite and uses a Harley Davidson engine.
m l
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/plane-100-03a.ht
-- Remember, we're not happy until you're not happy. -- Local FAA Inspector --
I was there yesterday morning (I live right across the street from the Museum of Science and Industry), and remember a few pieces of information that might provide some insight...
The plane they made was an exact replica of the 1903 Wright Flier, and slightly different to the more famous 1904 version. The replica, including the "pilot" weighs around 830lb, but the 4 cynlinder 12-hp engine which maxes at 1200 rpm only has something like 160lb of thrust.
I only stayed to watch the first failed attempt (they said they would have multiple attempts), but it was an exhilirating sight nonetheless. As it accelerated down the tracks, you could almost see it become light on the skids. Just the uncertainty made it more exciting than watching a modern plane take off (which, I think, is pretty exciting enough).
---
Open Source Shirts
Given the fact that the aircraft is not completely finished and they plan to do the flight on th 100th anniversary, it's not entirely a surprise!!
Atlas stands on the earth and carries the celestial sphere on his shoulders.
There is something i am wondering. Why many people think the wright brothers invented the airplane? The truth is that the first airplane was invented by Clement Ader and flew for the first time on october 1890, 13 years _before_ the Wright brothers!
The forward speed is the result of the loss in gravitational potential energy (by falling form the sky) minus the parasitic and induced drag of the aircraft, minus the induced drag (which is merely the conversion of forward speed into lift and a few vortices, etc).
Believe it or not, with a glider, as long as you are above the stalling speed (wing stops producing lift) and the angle of attack is below the critical angle (causes stalling due to turbulence on wing surface) you will always have the same glide ratio for that aircraft. (if wind speed changes, the glide in relation to the ground will differ)
Variables are obviously drag (not induced, but all others), air density (a result of air temperature and air pressure) and of course the aircraft in question.
If the variables above stay constant, the glider *should* always glide to the same spot. Add weight, it glides faster. Remove weight, glides slower. Nose up = more lift, slower speed but same impact point. Nose down = less lift, faster speed but same impact point.
A cliff? At sea level? Wow, you must be a geographic genius! The Wrights used Kill Devil Hill as the launching hill for their 3 years of glider tests (1899-1902). The 1903 flyer was launched from level ground, along a track. It was not launched from Kill Devil Hill. The first flight lasted ~12 seconds. The forth (and last) flight that day was almost 4x longer. The 1903 flyer was not trading forward velocity for left. It pushed itself along the track and lifted off when the wings were generating enough lift to carry the aircraft. It proceeded forward under its own power and the pilot's control. There was no need to "improve" their design after 12/17/1903. They took four years to make teh design and it worked for the first flight. I don't know where you are getting your incorrect history. You need to read some other books or, better yet, take a trip to Kitty Hawk. The memorial and the visitor's center are outstanding. The Park Guides will talk your ear off about what the Wright brothers went through and accomplished.
The Wright brother's catapulted 120 foot flight into the wind in 1903 was indeed not recognized as the first motorised and non-buoyed flight by the Avionics society. Neither was Clement Ader's 165 foot flight in 1890 recognized (i.e. a longer flight than the Wright brothers could claim, 13 years earlier).
Others had done similar semi-motor-driven "flights" too, but they did not have the advantage of as much press coverage and American chauvinism, which is probably the main reason why Wright's flight is in the books of history instead of similar attempts by others. The first recognized motor-driven flights without catapults and strong winds, which met the already established criteria for what was to be considered a successful flight, were done in Brazil and France, but that wasn't as interesting to the press and American public.
The Wright brothers might indeed have been the first to perform controlled sustained flight over a period of time longer than a glide, or what we would reasonably call flying, but not until 1905.
Full honour to the Wright brothers -- they were pioneers, even if they (by their own admission) built their avionics on the works of Lilienthal and the flyer more directly on the works of Octave Chanute. Chanute was a sporty chap, and supported the Wright brothers and had no qualms with them building their flyers based on his blueprints and earlier plane attempts -- all that mattered back then was to get someone flying!
All in all, it's hard to say who was "first" in flight -- but Wilbur and Orville Wright deserve their part of the honour, along with Otto Lilienthal, Alberto Dumont, Alexander Moshaisky, Leonardo daVinci, Clement Ader, Octave Chanute, Marquee de Arlandes and others.
Regards,
--
*Art
It still amazes me how many people get the location wrong.
The Wright brothers did not make their "historic" (and somewhat debated) flight at Kitty Hawk, NC, they made it at Kill Devil Hills, a few miles to the south. This misconception was started because they sent the telegram to their mother from Kitty Hawk, which was the nearest town with a telegram station.
The only museum I've ever seen this info correct is the Wright Brothers National Memorial which is located where the flight occurred. Even the National Air & Space Museum has it wrong.
End of line..
Navy jets don't take off just with their power but after take off they keep flying just with their power.
The Wright brothers couldn't repeat that flight, so that wasn't accepted by the world's scientific society that recognizes Santos Dumont the creator of the airplane. But "if you (holywood) say i lie thousand of times it becames true"