Gustave Whitehead: First in Flight breaking news
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Arizona
Age: 77
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IF there was an aeronautical mount rushmore, Wilbur, Orville, Charles Lindbergh and James Doolittle would be on it.
Doolittle would not be there, he never designed an airplane nor did he make any major advancements in aero engineering.
I would add Clarence "Kelly" Johnson to the group. (Lockheed Electra, F-104, P-38, Constellation, F-80, U-2, SR-71, F-117 and the C-130.)
Doolittle would not be there, he never designed an airplane nor did he make any major advancements in aero engineering.
I would add Clarence "Kelly" Johnson to the group. (Lockheed Electra, F-104, P-38, Constellation, F-80, U-2, SR-71, F-117 and the C-130.)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: flyover country USA
Age: 82
Posts: 4,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Billy" Mitchell opened our eyes to the potential of aerial bombardment, albeit in a staged demonstration. Yamamoto executed Mitchell's plans in real life.
But it was Doolittle who quickly improvised a plan, using existing weaponry, to "return fire" and force the enemy to reconsider its strategy.
But it was Doolittle who quickly improvised a plan, using existing weaponry, to "return fire" and force the enemy to reconsider its strategy.
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: yankton, sd
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
niner lima charlie
I do not offer jimmy doolittle's tokyo raid as reason for mt rushmore inclusion.
you might not know this, but thanks to doolittle we can land in fog. thanks to doolittle there was enough high octane gasoline to support engines during WW2. His blind landing and other instrument flying technique development happened well before WW2.
Doolittle did a lot. Not just the tokyo raid. I always laugh when people get doolittle's contribution to aviation wrong. Gallantry during WW2 is just a part of this amazing man.
add to the instrument flying, he was a pioneer in high speed flying during the interwar years .
And, just for good measure, if it were not for the doolittle raid, the battle of midway may not have happened which was the turning point in the war in the pacific..
I should have made it more obvious, but my aviation mt rushmore requires people to be pilots too.
I do not offer jimmy doolittle's tokyo raid as reason for mt rushmore inclusion.
you might not know this, but thanks to doolittle we can land in fog. thanks to doolittle there was enough high octane gasoline to support engines during WW2. His blind landing and other instrument flying technique development happened well before WW2.
Doolittle did a lot. Not just the tokyo raid. I always laugh when people get doolittle's contribution to aviation wrong. Gallantry during WW2 is just a part of this amazing man.
add to the instrument flying, he was a pioneer in high speed flying during the interwar years .
And, just for good measure, if it were not for the doolittle raid, the battle of midway may not have happened which was the turning point in the war in the pacific..
I should have made it more obvious, but my aviation mt rushmore requires people to be pilots too.
I think the point should be noted that our friend's 'Mt.Rushmore' of American Aviation pioneers has, inevitably, to be almost exclusively limited to the 20th Century.
By which time ,of course, most of the essential aviation fundamentals had been pretty much established elsewhere, including the first pilots.
By which time ,of course, most of the essential aviation fundamentals had been pretty much established elsewhere, including the first pilots.
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: yankton, sd
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
excuse me, perhaps someone might explain to me anyone else they might want for an INTERNATIONAL mt rushmore of aviation.
You might want to throw in whittle and his gas turbine. maybe. but as i mentioned I would want the person to be a pilot too.
And, it does so happen that every major aviation triumph was american. Anyone care to offer another opinion?
You might want to throw in whittle and his gas turbine. maybe. but as i mentioned I would want the person to be a pilot too.
And, it does so happen that every major aviation triumph was american. Anyone care to offer another opinion?
You might want to throw in whittle and his gas turbine. maybe. but as i mentioned I would want the person to be a pilot too.
But of course , in the light of your latter statements , one can't really be surprised as to your ignorance of that fact.
Last edited by Haraka; 16th Jun 2015 at 07:16.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Auckland, NZ
Age: 79
Posts: 722
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And, it does so happen that every major aviation triumph was american. Anyone care to offer another opinion?
Let's see. Cayley; Lilienthal; Santos Dumont; Bleriot; Alcock and Brown; Hans von Ohain (I don't know if he was a pilot, but he could have been); Alan Cobham; Igor Sikorsky (before he went to America); Hugo Eckener; Artem Mikoyan and Mikhail Gurevich. To pluck only a few names at random.
Face it: by most criteria that count, the Wrights were first. But apart from them, Chanute and maybe Langley, aviation in the US was way behind Europe, especially France, until the 1920s, which is the time frame relevant to this thread.
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: UK
Age: 68
Posts: 736
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And, it does so happen that every major aviation triumph was american. Anyone care to offer another opinion?
Yes, my opinion is that this is the most blinkered, nationalist and wildly untrue statement I have ever read on PPRUNE !
Yes, my opinion is that this is the most blinkered, nationalist and wildly untrue statement I have ever read on PPRUNE !
And a fair bit of US progress in the 40s and 50s was predicated on jet technology we gave them, and the work of the German scientists illegally transferred to the US under Op Paperclip and other similar programmes.
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: yankton, sd
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah, the view from the other side of the pond is out.
Whittle? Well, he took marine turbines and turned them into airborne turbines. I would trump that with the ground breaking work of R Goddard and the liquid fuel rocket. (after all , the fastest plane is still the X15 with a liquid fuel rocket!)
It is interesting to see what people think. I laughed at some of the views like, "EXCEPT FOR THE WRIGHT BROTHERS..."
And the bit about german technology and research was interesting, but they seemed to borrow heavily from Goddard's work on rockets. Oh well.
Indeed most of the names mentioned are just sorts of footnotes and not the kind of transforming personalities of aviation. Even the montgolfiers didn't invent hot air!
I stand by my original 4 for an ALL encompassing aviation Mt. Rushmore.
Whittle? Well, he took marine turbines and turned them into airborne turbines. I would trump that with the ground breaking work of R Goddard and the liquid fuel rocket. (after all , the fastest plane is still the X15 with a liquid fuel rocket!)
It is interesting to see what people think. I laughed at some of the views like, "EXCEPT FOR THE WRIGHT BROTHERS..."
And the bit about german technology and research was interesting, but they seemed to borrow heavily from Goddard's work on rockets. Oh well.
Indeed most of the names mentioned are just sorts of footnotes and not the kind of transforming personalities of aviation. Even the montgolfiers didn't invent hot air!
I stand by my original 4 for an ALL encompassing aviation Mt. Rushmore.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: flyover country USA
Age: 82
Posts: 4,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Niner Lima Charlie:
Just a moment's diversion: Lindbergh's 1927 flight was remarkable in many respects: Astute engineering (minimum weight and drag and power), great personal dedication, and salesmanship. One man, nonstop NY - Paris. Just enough to win the Orteig prize.
But just one decade later, Kelly Johnson's design, a Lockheed 14, flew that same route in one-half the time, with five aboard - Howard Hughes was piloting.
They refueled and flew onward around the world, albeit not a true circumnavigation (about 10000 miles short.)
I would add Clarence "Kelly" Johnson to the group.
But just one decade later, Kelly Johnson's design, a Lockheed 14, flew that same route in one-half the time, with five aboard - Howard Hughes was piloting.
They refueled and flew onward around the world, albeit not a true circumnavigation (about 10000 miles short.)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: flyover country USA
Age: 82
Posts: 4,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Leaving aside for the moment the "international vs American" aspects of this imaginary Mt. Rushmore of aviation:
I deem it more significant to reward the engineers and designers and dreamers of aviation. The Wrights were above all homemade engineers, who conducted a series of ever-more-sophisticated experiments using the best tools they could find. Among these was engineering wind tables which had been used to design tall structures; and when they found discrepancies in their own data, they designed and built a wind tunnel. They then used it to collect original data to rewrite the wind tables to reflect reality! This is true scientific curiosity in action, and made heavier-than-air flight a reality.
Thus I submit that it is engineering, not piloting, that places the Wrights on our mythical Mt. Rushmore, even though they taught themselves and others the skills of piloting. Likewise I would go down the list of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collier_Trophy awards to find worthy engineers to add to stone gravings.
I deem it more significant to reward the engineers and designers and dreamers of aviation. The Wrights were above all homemade engineers, who conducted a series of ever-more-sophisticated experiments using the best tools they could find. Among these was engineering wind tables which had been used to design tall structures; and when they found discrepancies in their own data, they designed and built a wind tunnel. They then used it to collect original data to rewrite the wind tables to reflect reality! This is true scientific curiosity in action, and made heavier-than-air flight a reality.
Thus I submit that it is engineering, not piloting, that places the Wrights on our mythical Mt. Rushmore, even though they taught themselves and others the skills of piloting. Likewise I would go down the list of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collier_Trophy awards to find worthy engineers to add to stone gravings.
If I can add some fuel to the fire- If we use the chiseled in stone metaphor for 4 American aviation icons I offer: Orville, Wilbur, Lindburg, Armstrong.....
I think these 4 have ther best chance of being long, long remembered...
Note I did not say "best" or most inovative or influential- that may be a different list. It is not always about personal contibution, invovation, etc. Some are just held higher in the public conscious.
I think these 4 have ther best chance of being long, long remembered...
Note I did not say "best" or most inovative or influential- that may be a different list. It is not always about personal contibution, invovation, etc. Some are just held higher in the public conscious.
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: yankton, sd
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dear haraka
pearl harbor, the movie was rotten, the other two I didn't see.
Somehow I think teaching the world to fly on instruments is more important than anything bleriot, santos dumont, or even whittle did. Therefore I believe doolittle belongs on the mt rushmore i propose. By the way, he had a degree from M.I.T. in aeronautics/aeronautical engineering.
Lindbergh helped design, construct the plane, did the navigation and actually accomplished what he set out to do. Fly from New York to Paris, nonstop. This (along with the brilliant orteig prize) opened the world to the possibility of a vast air transportation system. Others tried to do things like this, take earhart. She tried to do less, with more and still failed in her attempt to fly to paris, and not even from new york!
The Wrights figured out how to control a plane, found that previous calculations on lift were wrong, and taught the world to fly, for about 1000 dollars of their own money. And they are both on my pilot's license!
And I submit that it is a little of both, piloting and engineering that would make the case for those on the Mt Rushmore of aviation.
pearl harbor, the movie was rotten, the other two I didn't see.
Somehow I think teaching the world to fly on instruments is more important than anything bleriot, santos dumont, or even whittle did. Therefore I believe doolittle belongs on the mt rushmore i propose. By the way, he had a degree from M.I.T. in aeronautics/aeronautical engineering.
Lindbergh helped design, construct the plane, did the navigation and actually accomplished what he set out to do. Fly from New York to Paris, nonstop. This (along with the brilliant orteig prize) opened the world to the possibility of a vast air transportation system. Others tried to do things like this, take earhart. She tried to do less, with more and still failed in her attempt to fly to paris, and not even from new york!
The Wrights figured out how to control a plane, found that previous calculations on lift were wrong, and taught the world to fly, for about 1000 dollars of their own money. And they are both on my pilot's license!
And I submit that it is a little of both, piloting and engineering that would make the case for those on the Mt Rushmore of aviation.
I have always had an interest in Bletchley, Enigma, etc since they came into the public domain. I was therefore somewhat blown away on taking up my post at a well known south coast Yacht Club to find that one of the members was the guy who took Enigma off U-110. At the end of a Members' lecture on the subject he showed with permission a clip of "U571", about to be released, pointing out that at the end there was a frame saying the film was a work of fiction, based on the exploits of a certain sub lieutenant RN, and which he had persuaded the producers to add.
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,091
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And, it does so happen that every major aviation triumph was american
Packard-Le Père LUSAC-11, (1920, a modified French design, not actually pressurized but with an enclosed, oxygen enriched cockpit)
Engineering Division USD-9A, a modified Airco DH.9A (1921 - the first aircraft to fly with the addition of a pressurized cockpit module)
Junkers Ju 49 (1931 - a German experimental aircraft purpose-built to test the concept of cabin pressurization)
Farman F.1000 (1932 - a French record breaking pressurised cockpit, experimental aircraft)
Chizhevski BOK-1 (1936 - a Russian experimental aircraft)
Lockheed XC-35 (1937 - an American pressurized aircraft. Rather than a pressure capsule enclosing the cockpit, the monocoque fuselage skin was the pressure vessel.)