The Wright brothers just glided in 1903. They flew in 1908.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Auckland, NZ
Age: 79
Posts: 722
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@joyride
It seems that the Wrights weren't especially nice people, and in their concern about monetizing their work, they lost first-mover advantage, and probably didn't do the best for their profit.
The evidence for their flights isn't what you'd expect for a modern record attempt, and there were at the time no definitions of what constituted powered flight for them to comply with; but using some form of assistance for take off is surely OK, whether it's JATO, water boost, a ski-jump or just taking off into wind--it's not the same as depending on the residual energy of the launch boost.
Above all, powered flight was bound to happen in the first decade of the twentieth century, whoever got there first.
But history is full of contingencies, and the Wrights lucked out. But it wasn't sheer luck--there's evidence that they started with the best available knowledge (Oscar Chanute does seem to have been a gentleman), and worked at applying it assiduously. They didn't invent the aeroplane, they weren't Corinthians, and they didn't document every stage of the development as well as modern process-oriented management would require ("Sure, you've done good work; but can you prove you've done good work?" They were their own bosses, and didn't have to put up with that sort of BS); but that doesn't prove they were outright liars.
It's great to correct the popular view, but if doubt is cast on the Wrights' priority, that implies that someone else was really first, and we're back with the question of who invented the aeroplane, to which one might as well reply Daedalus. If someone else did get there first, that's great and we should all know it; but there is no real evidence in this thread that "first" would mean anything but "before December 1903".
It seems that the Wrights weren't especially nice people, and in their concern about monetizing their work, they lost first-mover advantage, and probably didn't do the best for their profit.
The evidence for their flights isn't what you'd expect for a modern record attempt, and there were at the time no definitions of what constituted powered flight for them to comply with; but using some form of assistance for take off is surely OK, whether it's JATO, water boost, a ski-jump or just taking off into wind--it's not the same as depending on the residual energy of the launch boost.
Above all, powered flight was bound to happen in the first decade of the twentieth century, whoever got there first.
But history is full of contingencies, and the Wrights lucked out. But it wasn't sheer luck--there's evidence that they started with the best available knowledge (Oscar Chanute does seem to have been a gentleman), and worked at applying it assiduously. They didn't invent the aeroplane, they weren't Corinthians, and they didn't document every stage of the development as well as modern process-oriented management would require ("Sure, you've done good work; but can you prove you've done good work?" They were their own bosses, and didn't have to put up with that sort of BS); but that doesn't prove they were outright liars.
It's great to correct the popular view, but if doubt is cast on the Wrights' priority, that implies that someone else was really first, and we're back with the question of who invented the aeroplane, to which one might as well reply Daedalus. If someone else did get there first, that's great and we should all know it; but there is no real evidence in this thread that "first" would mean anything but "before December 1903".
Join Date: May 2013
Location: have I forgotten or am I lost?
Age: 71
Posts: 1,126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
and we're back with the question of who invented the aeroplane
who invented the first successful aeroplane is a more valid question.
birds ultimately showed mankind that something was possible.
it took thousands of years for mankind to understand enough of the world around them to be able to create a machine that could do what birds had done ...seemingly forever.
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: UK
Age: 68
Posts: 736
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good post FP. As I said before I feel it is really hard to rule out any of the important claimants with complete certainty; as you say, and as I said earlier: powered flight was inevitable.
I feel that criteria, definitions, semantics, legal and political actions all play a part in this debate and they all blur the lines to some extent. Wherever you draw the line it excludes one set of criteria. If I am expected to accept the word of the Wrights' witnesses why should I NOT accept the witnesses of other flights?! How can we be sure that anyone in those days measured "level" or any other contributory factor accurately? As you say, nowadays we demand far higher standards!
I remember reading an article in National Air and Space Smithsonian Magazine describing how Chanute was a key figure in the Wright's work as he was fully aware of developments in Europe, particularly through the Royal Aeronautical Society. No harm in benefiting from someone else's experience.
I feel that if we HAVE to single out a single person/team then no-one actually has as good a claim as the Wrights, all things considered. However, I really see Human Flight as a multi-party international effort, and I consider the hero-worship associated with the Wrights is completely out of all proportion to the contribution of others in the bigger picture.
Ultimately my opinion is the same as a Coroner's Court which cannot decide 100% on the evidence presented...."Open Verdict".
I feel that criteria, definitions, semantics, legal and political actions all play a part in this debate and they all blur the lines to some extent. Wherever you draw the line it excludes one set of criteria. If I am expected to accept the word of the Wrights' witnesses why should I NOT accept the witnesses of other flights?! How can we be sure that anyone in those days measured "level" or any other contributory factor accurately? As you say, nowadays we demand far higher standards!
I remember reading an article in National Air and Space Smithsonian Magazine describing how Chanute was a key figure in the Wright's work as he was fully aware of developments in Europe, particularly through the Royal Aeronautical Society. No harm in benefiting from someone else's experience.
I feel that if we HAVE to single out a single person/team then no-one actually has as good a claim as the Wrights, all things considered. However, I really see Human Flight as a multi-party international effort, and I consider the hero-worship associated with the Wrights is completely out of all proportion to the contribution of others in the bigger picture.
Ultimately my opinion is the same as a Coroner's Court which cannot decide 100% on the evidence presented...."Open Verdict".
Join Date: May 2014
Location: California
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lilienthal wings & motor = Whitehead flights of 1901-1902
Gustave Whitehead, of Bridgeport, CT, used a design based on Lilienthal's gliders to develop and fly a manned, powered, heavier-than-air flying machine in 1901 and 1902, at Fairfield, Bridgeport, and Stratford, CT. This is a matter of record with extensive documentation. He predated the Wrights into the air by two years four months and three days, making a sustained flight on August 14, 1901. Earlier manned powered flight tests occurred in Bridgeport, CT, on their streets in the West End, a somewhat rural section. He flew over the entire neighborhood as well, that summer. The Wrights needed to be considered "first" when they started suing everyone, trying to control world aviation and get paid if anyone else flew for profit or built airplanes. They were reviled for this then. This IS the history, it is evident in the media of the era and in countless communications of the era, including those of the Wrights and their inner circle. In latter days we have been fed a lie - that the Wrights were saintly do-gooders who could do no wrong. That is not the case. A new book, "Birdmen", is much more realistic on those points, as was "Pendulum" by Jack Carpenter, and "History by Contract" by O'Dwyer - all of these were meticulously researched. What we may not realize is that the pablum we're being fed by our so-called authorities on aviation history in this country are spoonfeeding false history for many reasons. One is a Contract with the Wright heirs, to obtain and keep the "Wright Flyer" for $1. If ever the Wrights are declared not to have flown first, the premiere Smithsonian exhibit reverts to the heirs. Thus you have the endless falsifications institutionalized at present. The original claim to "first flight" by the Wrights was necessary for broad patent application. If they were not first, there was no world control. I have the research, it is solid. They weren't first, not at all. Gustave Whitehead First to Fly
Join Date: May 2014
Location: California
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jane's All the World Aircraft's Decision Not Flawed
Even though the Wright-Wing element gave a nasty backlash to the Jane's announcement, this is Jane's All the World Aircraft's official position. Gustave Whitehead, first in powered flight, ahead of the Wrights. All the nay-saying won't change it. Brown was using the research from O'Dwyer and Randolph - it was the weight of the witness statements and affidavits (18 of them) that did it. Brown merely summarized it. The records of the early 1900's show that Whitehead was given worldwide recognition for his #21 aeroplane, which made a sustained, powered flight on Aug. 14, 1901, and others during that year. These were witnessed by credible people and they are on the record as such. Gustave Whitehead First to Fly
The records of the early 1900's show that Whitehead was given worldwide recognition for his #21 aeroplane, which made a sustained, powered flight on Aug. 14, 1901
And proved by a few high quality photos of course cough ! cough !
There is always another side to the coin
In connection with Junius Harworth's claim that he saw Whitehead fly one and one-half miles at an altitude of 200 feet on August 14, 1901, the following facts are relevant. Harworth is collaborating with a certain Washington journalist in preparing a book, the aim of which is to prove that Whitehead flew before the Wright brothers. Harworth is under contract to receive ten per cent or the profits of the projected book. His testimony, therefore, is not disinterested.
Furthermore, Harworth's elder brother, Nicholas Horvath, who operates a drug-store in Bridgeport, asserts that he never once heard his younger brother mention the alleged one and one-half mile flight or the seven mile flight. It was news to him that Whitehead had made such flights. In fact, it was news to everyone of Whitehead's old neighbors and former helpers who still live in the vicinity of Pine Street. Even Louis Darvarich, who was Whitehead's first partner in flying experiments in Pittsburgh in 1899, and who accompanied Whitehead to Bridgeport and lived near him for several years, had never heard of the alleged one and one-half mile flight or the seven mile flight. "
Furthermore, Harworth's elder brother, Nicholas Horvath, who operates a drug-store in Bridgeport, asserts that he never once heard his younger brother mention the alleged one and one-half mile flight or the seven mile flight. It was news to him that Whitehead had made such flights. In fact, it was news to everyone of Whitehead's old neighbors and former helpers who still live in the vicinity of Pine Street. Even Louis Darvarich, who was Whitehead's first partner in flying experiments in Pittsburgh in 1899, and who accompanied Whitehead to Bridgeport and lived near him for several years, had never heard of the alleged one and one-half mile flight or the seven mile flight. "
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The flight of Lindbergh was replicated
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Alaska
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A Pope - Toledo motor used by the Wright brothers
Flyer III 1905 weighted 925 lb and was powered by a 12 - 15 hp, 240 lb engine similar to the ones used by Pope - Toledo cars made in Ohio about that time!!
Aviation history books attribute a mass over 900 lb and a 15 hp engine to Flyer II 1904, not Flyer III 1905. Secondly the use of a Pope - Toledo motor, even with modifications, discredits the claims of the two brothers that they utilized engines of their own design for the 1903, 1904 and 1905 planes.
While traveling in a tramway going to the place near Dyton where the Wright brothers flew their planes, M. Weaver (a US journalist) and Orville Wright talked about the Sep. - Oct. 1905 flights and plane.
In a letter written on Dec. 6, 1905 to Frank S. Lahm (an American close to L'Aerophile), Weaver stated, amongst other things, that the plane weighted 925 lb and its engine, developing 12 - 15 hp, strongly resembled the motors used by Pope - Toledo cars, manufactured in Ohio (see: Pope Motor Car Co).
"Lettre de M. Weaver à M. Frank S. Lahm. Mansfield, Ohio, 6 décembre 1905.
...
Pendant notre trajet en tramway, M. Wright m'avait brièvement raconté ce qu'ils avaient fait pendant la saison 1905, qui a été terminée brusquement, le 5 octobre, pour des raisons que je donnerai plus tard. Pendant la saison, ils avaient fait environ 50 vols ; les premiers, d'un succès relatif. Cependant, après des changements et des modifications successivement apportés à l'appareil, ils remarquaient, à la fin de chaque semaine, qu'il y avait des progrès importants. A partir du 15 septembre jusqu'à la fin de la saison, on n'a rien changé à l'appareil. Le châssis est fait en bois de larix ou mélèze (larch wood). La largeur d'un bout à l'autre est de 40 pieds. Le moteur à gazoline, d'une construction spéciale — fabriqué par eux-mêmes — présente une grande ressemblance avec le moteur d'automobile de la marque « Pope-Toledo » ; sa force est de 12 à 15 chevaux. Il pèse 240 livres. Le châssis est recouvert de mousseline ordinaire, mais de bonne qualité. Pas d'effort spécial pour arriver à construire légèrement, mais, au contraire, un véritable soin de construire solidement, de façon à supporter des chocs. L'appareil est muni de patins comme un traîneau, assez hauts pour protéger les hélices des chocs à l'atterrissage. L'appareil complet avec moteur pèse 925 livres."
Source: FRANÇOIS PEYREY, "Les Premiers Hommes=Oiseaux Wilbur et Orville WRIGHT", PARIS, Henry Guiton, Imprimeur - Editeur, 35, rue de Trévise,35, pag. 64-69, August 1908, https://archive.org/stream/lespremie...e/n84/mode/2up
Flyer III 1905 weighted 925 lb and was powered by a 12 - 15 hp, 240 lb engine similar to the ones used by Pope - Toledo cars made in Ohio about that time!!
Aviation history books attribute a mass over 900 lb and a 15 hp engine to Flyer II 1904, not Flyer III 1905. Secondly the use of a Pope - Toledo motor, even with modifications, discredits the claims of the two brothers that they utilized engines of their own design for the 1903, 1904 and 1905 planes.
While traveling in a tramway going to the place near Dyton where the Wright brothers flew their planes, M. Weaver (a US journalist) and Orville Wright talked about the Sep. - Oct. 1905 flights and plane.
In a letter written on Dec. 6, 1905 to Frank S. Lahm (an American close to L'Aerophile), Weaver stated, amongst other things, that the plane weighted 925 lb and its engine, developing 12 - 15 hp, strongly resembled the motors used by Pope - Toledo cars, manufactured in Ohio (see: Pope Motor Car Co).
"Lettre de M. Weaver à M. Frank S. Lahm. Mansfield, Ohio, 6 décembre 1905.
...
Pendant notre trajet en tramway, M. Wright m'avait brièvement raconté ce qu'ils avaient fait pendant la saison 1905, qui a été terminée brusquement, le 5 octobre, pour des raisons que je donnerai plus tard. Pendant la saison, ils avaient fait environ 50 vols ; les premiers, d'un succès relatif. Cependant, après des changements et des modifications successivement apportés à l'appareil, ils remarquaient, à la fin de chaque semaine, qu'il y avait des progrès importants. A partir du 15 septembre jusqu'à la fin de la saison, on n'a rien changé à l'appareil. Le châssis est fait en bois de larix ou mélèze (larch wood). La largeur d'un bout à l'autre est de 40 pieds. Le moteur à gazoline, d'une construction spéciale — fabriqué par eux-mêmes — présente une grande ressemblance avec le moteur d'automobile de la marque « Pope-Toledo » ; sa force est de 12 à 15 chevaux. Il pèse 240 livres. Le châssis est recouvert de mousseline ordinaire, mais de bonne qualité. Pas d'effort spécial pour arriver à construire légèrement, mais, au contraire, un véritable soin de construire solidement, de façon à supporter des chocs. L'appareil est muni de patins comme un traîneau, assez hauts pour protéger les hélices des chocs à l'atterrissage. L'appareil complet avec moteur pèse 925 livres."
Source: FRANÇOIS PEYREY, "Les Premiers Hommes=Oiseaux Wilbur et Orville WRIGHT", PARIS, Henry Guiton, Imprimeur - Editeur, 35, rue de Trévise,35, pag. 64-69, August 1908, https://archive.org/stream/lespremie...e/n84/mode/2up
Last edited by simplex1; 21st Jun 2014 at 23:46.
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whitehead
I have two questions relating to Gustave Whitehead being the first to fly.
#1. What happened to Number 22?
#2. If it were true that he flew in 1901, did Whitehead submit a bid to the December 23, 1907 US Gov't Board of Ordnance and Fortification solicitation for a flying machine? Why not?
#1. What happened to Number 22?
#2. If it were true that he flew in 1901, did Whitehead submit a bid to the December 23, 1907 US Gov't Board of Ordnance and Fortification solicitation for a flying machine? Why not?
Last edited by 99Cruiser99; 23rd Jun 2014 at 22:01.
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A Pope - Toledo motor used by the Wright brothers
Flyer III 1905 weighted 925 lb and was powered by a 12 - 15 hp, 240 lb engine similar to the ones used by Pope - Toledo cars made in Ohio about that time!!
Flyer III 1905 weighted 925 lb and was powered by a 12 - 15 hp, 240 lb engine similar to the ones used by Pope - Toledo cars made in Ohio about that time!!
If you look carefully at my post 522 you will see that the 1905 Flyer was lighter than the 1904 Flyer because the Wrights removed 70 lb of ballast used in the nose of the 1904 Flyer to improve the C of G...
Hence...
Hence...
The engine stayed the same as the 1904 aircraft and the weight was decreased to 860 pounds by eliminating the iron bars (70 lbs ballast in 1904 a/c) . The 1905 aircraft could be flown until the fuel tank was empty; staying in the air for more than a half hour, flying nearly 25 miles around Huffman's farm, executing turns and figure 8's, and flying more than 50 feet off the ground. The brothers now had a practical working airplane and began to market it to the War Department.
1903.....750 lbs (inc pilot) with 12HP motor - 505 sq feet wing area
1905......860lbs (inc pilot) with 18HP motor - 505 sq feet wing area
1903.....750 lbs (inc pilot) with 12HP motor - 505 sq feet wing area
1905......860lbs (inc pilot) with 18HP motor - 505 sq feet wing area
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Alaska
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Pope-Toledo engine used by Flyer III 1905 is not OK and strongly discredits the Wright brothers
see: http://www.pprune.org/aviation-histo...ml#post8531778 (link to post 560)
see: http://www.pprune.org/aviation-histo...ml#post8531778 (link to post 560)
Join Date: May 2014
Location: SoCal
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Simplex says -
... the use of a Pope - Toledo motor, even with modifications, discredits the claims of the two brothers that they utilized engines of their own design for the 1903, 1904 and 1905 planes.
In a letter written on Dec. 6, 1905 to Frank S. Lahm (an American close to L'Aerophile), Weaver stated, amongst other things, that the plane weighted 925 lb and its engine, developing 12 - 15 hp, strongly resembled the motors used by Pope - Toledo cars, manufactured in Ohio
... the use of a Pope - Toledo motor, even with modifications, discredits the claims of the two brothers that they utilized engines of their own design for the 1903, 1904 and 1905 planes.
In a letter written on Dec. 6, 1905 to Frank S. Lahm (an American close to L'Aerophile), Weaver stated, amongst other things, that the plane weighted 925 lb and its engine, developing 12 - 15 hp, strongly resembled the motors used by Pope - Toledo cars, manufactured in Ohio
Second, I can read and it appears, at best, that you have a bias and are being overzealous. The back-to-English translation of Lahm's French translation of Weaver's 1905 letter is below (emphasis mine).
Based on his own words, it's obvious that Weaver didn't see the engine and tell Lahm that he believed that it looked like a plagiarized copy of the Pole-Toledo engine. Instead, during their tram ride, Mr. Wright told Weaver that the Wright engine was of special construction and was manufactured by them. And, Mr. Wright told Weaver that the Wright engine resembled the Pope-Toledo engine.
You do see the difference, non?
English translation of letter excerpt:
During our tram ride, Mr. Wright had briefly told me what they had done during the 1905 season, which was ended abruptly, October 5, for reasons I will give later. During the season, they had about 50 flights; first, a relative success. However, after successive changes and modifications made to the device, they noticed at the end of each week, there was significant progress. From September 15 until the end of the season, we did not change anything to the device. The frame is made of wood or larch Larix (larch wood). The width from one end to another is 40 feet. The gasoline engine, a special construction - manufactured by themselves - has a great resemblance to the automotive engine of the "Pope-Toledo" brand; its strength is 12 to 15 horses. It weighs 240 pounds. The frame is covered with plain muslin, but good quality. No special effort to get to build slightly, but, on the contrary, a real task of building securely, so withstand shocks. The unit is equipped with pads like a sled, high enough to protect propellers landing shocks. The complete unit with motor weighs 925 pounds.
Last edited by eetrojan; 22nd Jun 2014 at 00:40. Reason: Corrected 1906 to 1905
Join Date: May 2014
Location: SoCal
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I laughed out loud when I ran across this Dayton, Ohio web page that described the skeptical reaction of the members of the aviation committee of the Aero Club of France when Lahm read a French translation of Weaver's letter to them:
Source
More than 100 years later, even though these fine men were in a much better position to delve into it while people were, you know, still alive, Simplex stills "knows" this too and carries on the torch of skepticism.
All conceded that Lahm’s friend Weaver had doubtless been sincere in what he wrote but they insisted that he somehow been fooled. They “knew” flight was impossible with a motor of only twelve horsepower.
More than 100 years later, even though these fine men were in a much better position to delve into it while people were, you know, still alive, Simplex stills "knows" this too and carries on the torch of skepticism.
If you compare pictures of the wright engine and that of any car engine it is obvious that the early Wright engines were 'homemade'
Quote from one of the Smithsonian sites...
Quote from one of the Smithsonian sites...
The Wrights were only twice charged with having plagiarized others'
work, a somewhat unusual record in view of their successes, and both times
apparently entirely without foundation. A statement was published that
the 1903 flight engine was a reworked Pope Toledo automobile unit, and
it was repeated in an English lecture on the Wright brothers. This was
adequately refuted by McFarland but additionally, it must be noted, there
was no Pope Toledo company or car when the Wright engine was built.
This company, an outgrowth of another which had previously manufactured
one- and two-cylinder automobiles, was formed, or reformed, and a
Pope license arrangement entered into during the year 1903.
work, a somewhat unusual record in view of their successes, and both times
apparently entirely without foundation. A statement was published that
the 1903 flight engine was a reworked Pope Toledo automobile unit, and
it was repeated in an English lecture on the Wright brothers. This was
adequately refuted by McFarland but additionally, it must be noted, there
was no Pope Toledo company or car when the Wright engine was built.
This company, an outgrowth of another which had previously manufactured
one- and two-cylinder automobiles, was formed, or reformed, and a
Pope license arrangement entered into during the year 1903.
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Pope-Toledo engine used by Flyer III 1905 is not OK and strongly discredits the Wright brothers
see: The Wright brothers just glided in 1903. They flew in 1908. (link to post 560) (simplex1)
see: The Wright brothers just glided in 1903. They flew in 1908. (link to post 560) (simplex1)
Pendant la saison, ils avaient fait environ 50 vols (Henry Weaver)
"During the season, they had made about 50 flights"
Simplex1, are you now admitting that the Wright Bros. flew in 1905?
Because if you hold the first statement as evidence to discredit them, then you must also hold the second sentence from the same letter as evidence to their credit of flight.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Alaska
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It appears the Wright brothers paid the US army $ 2500 to gain only $ 25 000 in case a plane meeting some tough conditions had been delivered to the US government
In 1908, the US army simply accepted any plane offer coming from anybody that was capable to make a deposit amounting to 10% of the sum of money the US government would have paid to the constructor if the airplane, satisfying some conditions, had been delivered.
Once the plane accepted, the US army had the right to multiply it and do whatever it wanted to do with it without any further obligations regarding the inventor/constructor.
Basically the US government did not risk anything, did not pay anything in advance. The only ones who risked their money were the Wright brothers and the other candidates and all these just to get a prize no greater than the revenue a dentist made in 10 years.
"Le 10 février (1908) dernier, le correspondant de l'Auto, à New-York, télégraphiait à ce journal :
"L'armée américaine a commandé aux frères Wright, à M. Herring (de New-York), et à M. Scott (de Chicago), trois aéroplanes. Le premier sera payé 25.000 dollars (125.000 fr.), le second 20.000 (100.000 fr.), et le troisième 1.000 dollars (5.000 fr.). Le cahier des charges impose aux soumissionnaires certaines conditions de vitesse et de durée."
Complétons cette information sensationnelle : Les essais de recette auront lieu sous le contrôle du Signal Corps, au fort Myers (Virginie). Ils comporteront : (1) une épreuve de vitesse moyenne sur 5 milles aller (8 kil. 45 m.) et 5 milles retour, soit 10 milles au total (16 kil. 90 m.) ; (2) une épreuve d'endurance d'une heure de vol continu à la vitesse de 40 milles à l'heure (64 kil. 360 m.). L'aéroplane doit être monté par deux personnes.
Chacun des soumissionnaires peut faire trois tentatives dans chaque épreuve de recette. Si un appareil fait moins de 40 milles à l'heure, il est pénalisé, et le prix payé sera moindre que le prix demandé ; s'il fait moins de 36 milles à l'heure, il sera purement et simplement refusé ; s'il fait plus de 40 milles à l'heure, le prix convenu sera majoré suivant une certaine progression, et se trouvera presque doublé si la vitesse atteint 60 milles à l'heure.
En cas d'insuffisance de l'engin sur un point quelconque de ce programme rigoureux, la caution espèces — 10 % — ne sera pas remboursée.
Les cautions versées ont été de : 10.000 francs pour M. Herring ; de 12.500 francs pour les frères Wright, et de 500 francs seulement pour M. Scott, qui a peut-être simplement cherché une réclame peu coûteuse, car il est difficilement admissible qu'on puisse construire une machine volante automobile pour 5.000 francs.
Le prix convenu ne s'entend que de l'achat d'un appareil, sans aucune licence de brevet ni monopole de fabrication."
Source: FRANÇOIS PEYREY, "Les Premiers Hommes=Oiseaux Wilbur et Orville WRIGHT", PARIS, Henry Guiton, Imprimeur - Editeur, 35, rue de Trévise,35, pag. 31-32, August 1908, https://archive.org/stream/lespremie...e/n38/mode/2up
Note: According to ( History Lesson -- 1908 ), in 1908, the revenue of a worker ranged between 200 and 400 dollars/year and a dentist made 2500 $/year.
In 1908, the US army simply accepted any plane offer coming from anybody that was capable to make a deposit amounting to 10% of the sum of money the US government would have paid to the constructor if the airplane, satisfying some conditions, had been delivered.
Once the plane accepted, the US army had the right to multiply it and do whatever it wanted to do with it without any further obligations regarding the inventor/constructor.
Basically the US government did not risk anything, did not pay anything in advance. The only ones who risked their money were the Wright brothers and the other candidates and all these just to get a prize no greater than the revenue a dentist made in 10 years.
"Le 10 février (1908) dernier, le correspondant de l'Auto, à New-York, télégraphiait à ce journal :
"L'armée américaine a commandé aux frères Wright, à M. Herring (de New-York), et à M. Scott (de Chicago), trois aéroplanes. Le premier sera payé 25.000 dollars (125.000 fr.), le second 20.000 (100.000 fr.), et le troisième 1.000 dollars (5.000 fr.). Le cahier des charges impose aux soumissionnaires certaines conditions de vitesse et de durée."
Complétons cette information sensationnelle : Les essais de recette auront lieu sous le contrôle du Signal Corps, au fort Myers (Virginie). Ils comporteront : (1) une épreuve de vitesse moyenne sur 5 milles aller (8 kil. 45 m.) et 5 milles retour, soit 10 milles au total (16 kil. 90 m.) ; (2) une épreuve d'endurance d'une heure de vol continu à la vitesse de 40 milles à l'heure (64 kil. 360 m.). L'aéroplane doit être monté par deux personnes.
Chacun des soumissionnaires peut faire trois tentatives dans chaque épreuve de recette. Si un appareil fait moins de 40 milles à l'heure, il est pénalisé, et le prix payé sera moindre que le prix demandé ; s'il fait moins de 36 milles à l'heure, il sera purement et simplement refusé ; s'il fait plus de 40 milles à l'heure, le prix convenu sera majoré suivant une certaine progression, et se trouvera presque doublé si la vitesse atteint 60 milles à l'heure.
En cas d'insuffisance de l'engin sur un point quelconque de ce programme rigoureux, la caution espèces — 10 % — ne sera pas remboursée.
Les cautions versées ont été de : 10.000 francs pour M. Herring ; de 12.500 francs pour les frères Wright, et de 500 francs seulement pour M. Scott, qui a peut-être simplement cherché une réclame peu coûteuse, car il est difficilement admissible qu'on puisse construire une machine volante automobile pour 5.000 francs.
Le prix convenu ne s'entend que de l'achat d'un appareil, sans aucune licence de brevet ni monopole de fabrication."
Source: FRANÇOIS PEYREY, "Les Premiers Hommes=Oiseaux Wilbur et Orville WRIGHT", PARIS, Henry Guiton, Imprimeur - Editeur, 35, rue de Trévise,35, pag. 31-32, August 1908, https://archive.org/stream/lespremie...e/n38/mode/2up
Note: According to ( History Lesson -- 1908 ), in 1908, the revenue of a worker ranged between 200 and 400 dollars/year and a dentist made 2500 $/year.
Last edited by simplex1; 22nd Jun 2014 at 03:15.