The Wright brothers just glided in 1903. They flew in 1908.
 

The Wright brothers just glided in 1903. They flew a powered plane for the first time in 1908.

I know that books teach us the Wright brothers were the first to fly a heavier than air machine but, if one starts to study primary sources, documents of the time, he finds absolutely no serious evidence the two inventors really flew in 1903, 1904 or 1905.

There are many technical problems with "Flyer I 1903". The plane was unstable, underpowered and had propellers that appeared only in 1908, exactly in the same year when the Wright brothers flew for the first time in front of credible witnesses, beyond any doubt, using planes built in France in 1908 with french engines (Bariquand & Marre) and french propellers.

Beside the technical aspects (see the internet address I attached to this text, for a detailed analysis) which demonstrate "Flyer I 1903" was unflyable, there is also the declaration of Alpheus W. Drinkwater, telegraph operator, who clearly said:

"the brothers only “glided” off Kill Devil Hill that day. Their first real flight came on May 6, 1908"

"Wilbur and Orville Wright are credited with making their first powered flight in a heavier-than-air machine on Dec. 17, 1903. But Alpheus W. Drinkwater, 76 years old, who sent the telegraph message ushering in the air age, said the brothers only “glided” off Kill Devil Hill that day. Their first real flight came on May 6, 1908, he said." Source: New York Times, Dec. 17, 1951.

Another witness, John T. Daniels, in a 1933 letter addressed to a friend, wrote he had seen the plane being carried up on a hill twice. In one picture, Daniels claimed he had made himself (see image 1), the slope going down in front of the airplane, that had just taken off, is visible. Another picture, with the plane landed, displays a big sand dune in the background as if the plane came from it.

For more details and evidence see:

http://wright-brothers.wikidot.com

and read it with care before making comments.

http://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/attach...8&d=1400942912
1) Detail from the well known picture showing "Flyer I 1903" taking off on Dec. 17, 1903. The slope going down in front of the plane is clearly visible.

http://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/attach...9&d=1400942935
2) "Flyer I 1903" on the ground (just landed) after its last (59 seconds) alleged flight performed on Dec. 17, 1903. A big sand dune can be seen in the background as if the plane came from it.

http://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/attach...7&d=1400942879
3) The declaration of Alpheus W. Drinkwater: "the brothers only “glided” off Kill Devil Hill that day. Their first real flight came on May 6, 1908".

stop being stupid and look at your own evidence.
look at photo 1
when the aircraft reached the end of the takeoff track it was how high in the air?
look at your own photo for the evidence.
look also at the propeller which can be seen running.

the wright brothers aren't remembered as the fathers of flight because they were the first to fly. they weren't. but they were the first to perfect controllable flight.
all subsequent aviation became possible because flight in the air could be controlled.

next you'll show photos "proving" that mankind hasn't been to the moon....:mad:

The plane is below the level of the point where it left the ground.
The speed of the headwind was 22 miles/hour = 35 km/h, (see: L'Aerophile, January 1904, L'Aérophile (Paris) ). At such a strong wind, blowing along the slope, uphill, the plane received a considerable lift. Without engine and propellers Flyer I would have taken off and glided a long distance!!
Just because the propellers were running it does not mean they generated enough thrust. A power assisted descent is not a real powered flight.

The Wright brothers are claimed as the first to fly. There is no other inventor that can seriously pretend he flew a powered plane before Dec. 17, 1903.

Regarding the priority of the Wright brothers, in being the first to perfect controllable flight, this is the most ridiculous claim aviation history books have perpetuated. "Flyer I 1903" was incredibly unstable as a few aviation experts have noticed:

Piloting "Flyer I 1903" is "like balancing a yardstick on one finger, two at one time. If you lose it, it goes — quickly, said Fred Culick …"

(1)"EL SEGUNDO, Calif. (AP) — Aviation experts … have found the Wright stuff — in the hands of modern pilots … — is a little wrong."
(2)"I'd say it was almost a miracle they were able to fly it, said Jack Cherne"
(3)"Using that data, they created a computer flight simulator that shows the plane to be so unstable, it is nearly impossible to fly."
(4)"It's like balancing a yardstick on one finger, two at one time. If you lose it, it goes — quickly, said Fred Culick …"
(5)"Every pilot, his first try, crashed the simulator. It took less than a second, said Capt. Tim Jorris".
(6)"I thoroughly cannot imagine the Wright brothers, having very little experience in powered aircraft, getting this airborne and flying, said Major Mike Jansen. "My respect for what they did went up immediately the first time I took the controls.""
(7)"Modifications will include … . A computer feedback system will assist the pilot. We want the experience, but we don't want to kill ourselves, Cherne said."
see: USATODAY.com - Wright Flyer a handful for today's pilots

The 2003 replica of "Flyer I 1903" couldn't fly more than 115 feet (35 m)

The 2003 accurate replica of the Wright brothers' plane (tested on December 17, 1903) was not able to do more than short flights (using a more powerful engine than the original). None of its takeoffs came close to the claimed 852 feet, 59 seconds best flight performed on December 17, 1903. What the 2003 experiment really showed was that the 1903 airplane could have been theoretically able to take off and fly chaotically for 100 - 115 feet, no more. "Flyer I" was uncontrollable and not capable to execute a sustained 59 sec. flight.

1) "On November 20, 2003, Dr. Kevin Kochersberger piloted the 1903 Wright Experience Replica Flyer. With 15-18 mph winds he flew a distance of nearly 100 feet."
see video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1mscspl-VU

2) "December 3, 2003 test flight of the Wright Experience 1903 Wright Flyer Replica. Dr. Kevin Kochersberger was at the controls and piloted the Flyer for a distance of 115 feet. Slight cross wind after initial rotation which is compensated with slight wing warp."
see video:

People (ex., Henri Farman) flew stably, in close circuit, for about 19 minutes, without Wing Warping or any kind of aileron, before Aug. 8, 1908 the day when the Wright brothers showed their plane and performed their first public flight (1 min and 45 sec). All the things the Wright brothers claimed as their invention, in the patent they finally got on May 22, 1906, were simply non essential for stable flight or controlling the trajectory of planes.

Wing Warping as an effective method to steer a glider (plane) can not be considered the invention of the Wright brothers
Mouillard and Octave Chanute have a clear priority

There is the US patent No. 582,757 of 1897 by Mouillard and Octave Chanute (see: https://www.google.com/patents/US582757 ) which describes a glider equipped with flexible wing tips. The deformation level of the wings extremities is controlled by the pilot with the main goal to steer the plane to the right of left efficiently.

Excerpt from the US patent No. 582,757 by Mouillard and Octave Chanute (a professor the Wright brothers knew before they built their first gliders):

"In order to provide for the horizontal steering of the apparatus-that is, the guiding it to the right or left--I substitute for the ordinary rudder a novel and more effective arrangement. A portion (J) of the fabric at the rear of each wing is free from the frame at its outer edge and at the sides. It is stiffened with suitable blades or slats (N), of flexible material, and normally rests up against the netting. Cords (O) are attached to the rear edge of the portion (J') and pass forward to rings (P), where they unite and run to the handles (Q) near the inner ends of the wings. A pull upon one of these handles causes the portion (J') to curve downward (as shown in fig. 10), and thus catch the air, increasing the resistance upon that side of the apparatus and causing it to turn in that direction. Any other equivalent device for creating at will an additional resistance to the air on either side of the apparatus may be employed, and I do not limit myself to the one shown and described....

"The horizontal steering is effected by the downwardly movable rear portion (J') of the fabric in the manner already described. When both sides are pulled down together, they serve as an effective brake to cheek the speed."

As a note: The Wright brothers have a patent published on May 22, 1906 also for a glider not a powered plane (same as Mouillard). The brevet, amongst other things, claims Wing Warping (deforming the wing tips) as a method for effectively steering a glider.

http://www.ctie.monash.edu.au/hargra...ard_1897_1.jpg
L. P. Mouillard's glider with flexible wing tips.

And how is Elvis these days?

:rolleyes:

"Flyer I 1903" had a propeller placed underneath that revolved horizontally!!, according to an article signed Wilbur Wright and published in Feb. 1904

"One of the propellers was set to revolve vertically and intended to give a forward motion, while the other underneath the machine and revolving horizontally, was to assist in sustaining it in the air. … After the motor device was completed, two flights were made by my brother and two by myself on December 17th last."
Source, "The Experiments of a Flying Man", author Wilbur Wright, The Independent, Feb. 04, 1904, pag. 246, internet address The Experiments of a Flying Man [Wilbur Wright, Independent, February 1904] | Library of Congress

Definitely, the flying machine W. Wright talked about in the article is not the one with two pusher propellers, well known from pictures published for the first time in September 1908 in "The Wright Brothers' Aeroplane" that appeared in The Century Magazine (see The Wright Brothers' Aeroplane [Orville and Wilbur Wright, The Century Magazine, September 1908] | Library of Congress , page 644 ).

In conclusion, two different articles, written by the same Wright brothers and published more than four years and half apart, talk about two distinct airplanes (two different Flyer I) as flying on Dec. 17, 1903. The brothers definitely lied in one of the two texts. There is no way they could have told the truth in both articles.

"Flyer I" with a propeller beneath appeared in numerous publications as late as May 1906 (see: Scrapbooks: January 1902-December 1908 | Library of Congress ).

Quiet day in Alaska?

The only witness that said something helpful about the alleged powered flights performed on Dec. 17, 1903 was John T. Daniels who in a letter addressed to a friend, 30 years after the events, wrote:

"Manteo NC, June 30 —- 1933,

Dear friend,
I Don’t know very much to write about the flight. I was there, and it was on Dec the 17, — 1903 about 10 o’clock. They carried the machine up on the Hill and Put her on the track, and started the engine … and he went about 100 feet or more, and then Mr. Wilbur taken the machine up on the Hill and Put her on the track and he went off across the Beach about a half a mile …
Sincerely,
John T. Daniels, Manteo NC, Box 1W"

Source: Eyewitness Account of First Flight by John Daniels

John Daniels talks about two, not four flights, and clearly specifies the plane was carried up on a hill before each flight.
Engine assisted descents in strong headwinds do not qualify as true powered flights.

The Wright brothers had this idea to couple the movements of the rudder with those of the Wing Warping ailerons by using a mechanism but soon they realized they had made a mistake and came back to separate controls for the rudder and ailerons.

The Wright brothers just glided in 1903. They flew in 1908.
 

I'm still trying to figure out your angle in all this. I've recently finished Assassins Creed IV, tell me, you wouldn't happen to have one blue eye and one brown?

The engine sustained the Flyer, and although a modern pilot with training on modern aircraft have trouble handling the Flyer, the brothers Wright had experience with their design style already.

In the words of the Ice Queen, Let it go, let it goooo...

How could an unqualified man have designed and built an engine in 6 weeks?!

About the engine that powered "Flyer I 1903" various authors said that:

"The Wrights wrote to several engine manufacturers, but none met their need for a sufficiently lightweight power-plant. They turned to their shop mechanic, Charlie Taylor, who built an engine in just six weeks in close consultation with the brothers."

The article about Taylor ( Charlie Taylor (mechanic) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ) also does not bring more light saying just that Taylor was a mechanic hired by Wright brothers to repair bicycles and "He designed and built the aluminum water-cooled engine in only six weeks, based partly on rough sketches provided by the Wrights."

It is not uncommon for a mechanic to adapt a ready made engine to a specific purpose, but to design it from scratch and build it in 6 weeks is simply incredible.

The Wright brothers just glided in 1903. They flew in 1908.
 

Incredible but not impossible. My grandfather, god rest his soul, was 'only' a techy with GEC Marconi. But he had also been a Royal Electrical & Mechanical Engineer corporal during National Service. When it came to anything with an engine, you could trust him to take care of the issue or have a contact who could.

Just because you can't, doesn't mean others can't.

I posit again, what is your angle and beef? Who are you touting as the true first pilot? Ikarus does not count and da Vinci is out of the running also.

Did you grandfather design and build an original plane or a car engine in 6 weeks? If not the example is irrelevant.

1) Kevin Kochersberger, the one who piloted the 2003 replica of Flyer I, beside his experience as a pilot, practiced, before flying the actual plane, on a Flyer I simulator. (The Wright brothers had just the gliding experience.) see: http://www.wrightexperience.com/edu/...ml/9284966.htm

2) Replicas of the gliders built by the Wright brothers were flown without problems by many people. Flyer I, despite the fact it resembles the gliders, behaves quite differently. It is a different machine.

3) Apart from Kevin Kochersberger and his team there was a group of pilots who tried to fly a Learjet 24D programmed to behave like the original Flyer I and they failed.

"The exercise also humbled experienced Air Force test pilots.
"Every pilot, his first try, crashed the simulator. It took less than a second," said Capt. Tim Jorris, one of a small group of pilots at Edwards Air Force Base who tried the simulator.
The pilots eventually took to the skies in a Learjet 24D programmed to fly like the original Flyer. Most had to rely on a computer-assisted stability system to keep the jet aloft.
"I thoroughly cannot imagine the Wright brothers, having very little experience in powered aircraft, getting this airborne and flying," said Major Mike Jansen. "My respect for what they did went up immediately the first time I took the controls.""
Source: USATODAY.com - Wright Flyer a handful for today's pilots

In conclusion, the modern pilots trained and already knew how to handle Flyer I before taking the controls.

simplex you are a revisionist crank and are deluding yourself and wasting pprune space.

1. 30 years AFTER the fact, daniels writes a little note. You do not know the state of mind he was in when (and if ) he wrote the note. He may have been a victim of disease, drugs, or booze. AND NO ONE ELSE of the company of men who watched the flights was contacted or questioned.

IF there was any question about the flight, it would have to have come to light within 10 years of the flight to have any real meaning. I am using 10 years as the time frame because it was during Wilbur's life and would have come up in patent battles in court. BUT IT DID NOT>

REally, how hard was it to build a crude engine? They had a mechanical shop, and could easily get supplies. I'll bet you don't even know what a "make and break" ignition system is. Automobiles were relatively new then and engines were as easy to make as a trip to a computer store was 30 years ago. Provided you had the place to make it (and they did).

Wondering if you even know that Orville built a wind tunnel to test the designs of the wings? Engines, Wind Tunnels , and what have you made simplex?


While it is true that the Wrights did go back to separate rudder and wingwarping/aileron controls, I will remind you that an award winning plane many years later used the same idea of an interconnected rudder and aileron system (ercoupe).

BUT what they did figure out was that you needed RUDDER to overcome warp drag (adverse aileron yaw).

YOU SIR are sadly misinformed.

MODS, please close the thread unless this person has personal information gleaned from direct , empiric observation.


OH and computer simulations of airplanes? Unless they were multi million dollar high quality, airline type , simulators, I can't fly the little computer simulations either. but don't tell all those people sitting behind me, and the flight attendants and my copilot!

I am amazed at your poor analysis. I am amazed at your gullibility in this matter.

REVISIONIST CRANK and a poor one at that.

LOCK IT UP MODS! Over and Out.

Should you ever visit Kill Devil Hill you will see that the flight commenced from the foot of the hill. ie the flights were over level ground from beginning to end. The start point is at the end of the pathway (just to the right of the hangar) the children in the foreground are walking down.

http://www.nps.gov/common/uploads/ph...30A5-large.jpg

The following video gives some idea of the elevator/pitch stability and control. This film was taken in Italy on April 24, 1909. It is the first time a motion picture was ever shot from a plane in flight. The footage shows what it was like to fly on one of the early Wright craft, with Wilbur at the helm.

https://ia600700.us.archive.org/29/i...Italy_1909.mp4

IF you look carefully at the video, you can see the tiny bit of yarn used as an angle of attack gauge.

The Wrights were not just bicycle mechanics, they put a huge amount of scientific effort into their work. In fact, they discovered that lillienthal's equations for flight were in error.

Octave Chanute by the way was very impressed with the Wrights and even joined them one summer at Kitty Hawk with his own glider. Chanute wrote very positively about the Wrights and the US govt took notice.

OF COURSE Chanute was there and simplex1 is still pretty far away from Kitty Hawk,Nc

Curtis was the better mechanic and aviator, he in fact did design the aileron.

John T. Daniels repeated the things he had written in that letter from 1933, two years latter, in 1935, in the presence of another eye witness, A. D. Etheridge, who confirmed he had also seen the same things as Daniels.

In a statement made 32 years later on 12 March 1935, Mr. J. T. Daniels, then a member of the Nags Head Coast Guard Station, stated:Mr. A. D. Etheridge who was at the Nags Head Lifesaving Station on March 12, 1935, gave a few more details on the preparation for the flight in 1903 when he was stationed at the Kill Devil Lifesaving Station:The 1935 declaration of A. D. Etheridge contains another big trouble for the Wright brothers' credibility. Etheridge said the two inventors had taken just the engine back with them while the plane remained with Etheridge who latter sold it for 25$ (big money for 1903).

The story of Orville Wright is that he and his brother took the remains of the 1903 plane back with them and latter Orville rebuilt the plane which reached England, remained there till after WWII and finally returned in US, being displayed now in a museum.

about curtiss, the man who stole patented material from the wrights.

yes, he was a heckuva mechanic. but to be sure, the aileron (french for small wing) was part of alexander graham bells business. bell, trying desperately to save the reputation of langley, paid curtiss to come up with a plane.

bell wanted curtiss to prove that langley's aerodrome could fly, but curtiss was more interested in "THE WRIGHT WAY" to fly.

amazingly enough, wright became a company that built engines, curtiss built airframes and curtiss wright became one.

A multimillion dollar serious and accurate Flyer I simulator was used.

"The pilots eventually took to the skies in a Learjet 24D programmed to fly like the original Flyer. Most had to rely on a computer-assisted stability system to keep the jet aloft."
Source: USATODAY.com - Wright Flyer a handful for today's pilots

You are correct - many conflicts exist over Wright claims
 

I have to say that in studying the Wrights for over thirty years, using primary source documents that rarely have seen the light of day, their true story is far from that which we have been spoonfed. First of all, the "evidence" for what occurred on Dec. 17, 1903, is based entirely on the stories told us by the Wrights themselves, who had just a "wee" conflict of interest at the time of the first tellings. Orville was trying to capture the limelight even while Wilbur was alive - his stories increasingly gave himself credit he didn't deserve (and admitted to this in the earlier years). Reading their letters at the Library of Congress, and rarely seen files at Smithsonian attest to this. But there is far more!

For instance, we have been bamboozled for well over a century about who was "first in flight". It was necessary for the Wrights to claim being first in flight in order to expand their patent rights as pioneer inventors. While they deserve credit for their development of the art, there is at least one other who flew before them and Curtis, who also further developed the art. There are those who contributed to what we use today who also deserve credit. But after Wilbur died (in 1912, during the patent wars), Orville, known as "the lesser brother", did a poor job with the Wright Company and had to sell it, then devoting his life to immortalizing himself for that which he did not do. During their shared lifetimes, Wilbur was the one who was considered to have flown "successfully" on Dec. 17, 1903, even though the flights were all out of control and the last one (the longest, Wilbur's) crashed into the sand. They took off from a rail and required a headwind that was not present during the Centennial celebration in 2003, when all the world saw the Flyer reproduction fail to fly. When Orville died in 1948, his executors arranged for an Agreement (known by most as "the Contract" to be signed by the Smithsonian crediting Orville as "first in flight" even though he wasn't, if it was between the two brothers, it was Wilbur on that date. As Orville and the executors and Orville's closest friends knew, Gustave Whitehead of CT had an existing claim to that title, over two years before (in 1901). In fact, Whitehead had flown in Pennsylvania and crashed, in 1899 (since crashing and being out of control apparently is ok). What the Smithsonian got from that deal was the Wright Flyer for $1. Under the terms of the Contract, the Flyer will revert to the heirs if Smithsonian or any of its nearly 200 affiliates or research facilities recognizes anyone else as first in flight or any other airplane.This was, indeed, "history by contract", and a sorry mess it has caused. Currently, Gustave Whitehead, with his 18 witnesses who watched him fly with power ahead of the Wrights, from 1899-1902, has been recognized (as of March 2013) as "first in flight" by Jane's All the World Aircraft (the bible of aviation history) and by the state of CT. The state of NC is giving up its slogan "first in flight" as a result and adopting another shortly. The Wrights were a wily pair, don't forget they not only waited 5 years to show they could fly, and to produce the photo of Orville's FAILED flight, but they pulled many legal tricks to try to sue all other inventors and aviators, to control world aviation and profit whenever anyone flew or sold a plane for profit. They trotted their invention around to sell to European countries on the brink of war, knowing full well what their planes could be used for. In their own time, they were not known to be saints, this is a fact. And in fact, they were not. Ultimately, Orville stole the title of first in flight posthumously acquired through his closest friends and family, this was the dream of his life and they gave it to him. So don't be so sure you know history if you haven't read the documents. Go to www.gustavewhitehead.info for more information on this topic. :ok:

An interesting discussion - which seems to be generating some passionate responses! And a topic connected to some research I had been doing for an article. According to the FAI, the body which is the keeper of such records, the Wrights are credited with "The first sustained, controlled, powered heavier-than-air manned flight". The question that has to be asked was what was different about their achievement which gives it the distinction.

Their flight was the culmination of a long development of flying machines which properly stated with George Cayley in the UK who was the first to appreciate birds flew due to the shape of their wings and not because of flapping. He also identified stability as a factor for flight and devised a control system. it was proved when his coachman (Cayley was not prepared to try it himself) was the first man to fly a controllable heavier than air machine in 1853. The problem with flight was power and 19th century experiments with steam engines produced powered short hops with one 3hp powered aircraft achieving an altitude of 6 inches.

The Wright brother's real achievement was developing an engine with sufficient power and to realise that sustained flight would require a control system. They had done a lot of research in their own wind tunnel and come up with a system which emphasised control but lacked stability. The engine produced 16hp at peak, but this was barely enough to get the flyer airborne. When they tried to fly subsequent versions without the strong winds of Kittyhawk, they needed a catapult assist, despite the engine having five more horse power. Only when they obtained 30hp could they achieve take off from level ground without assistance. By then, other people had achieved successful powered flight with different designs - largely due to the Wright's vigorous enforcement of their wing-warping patent. Ailerons (which had been first patented in England by Matthew Piers Watt Boulton in 1886) had become the standard, and with better stability characteristics.

There have been other claims to the title including Gustave Whitehead's, but it is the Wright's which is officially recognised. And that is important - just as Chuck Yeager's supersonic flight is recognised as being the first despite quite clearly not being so. (Big can of worms opened here!)

The plane that flew in Italy on April 24, 1909 was similar (according to the Wright brothers, there is no independent confirmation) to the last version of Flyer III which allegedly flew in 1905 (see the picture). There is a significant difference between this 1905 model and the 1903 plane. The stability in pitch increased significantly. The 1909 (1905) airplane had also dihedral stability (auto roll control) while the 1903 machine did not have. We talk about two sensible different airplanes having two totally different engines. Just because the 1909 model was flyable it does not automatically mean the 1903 plane could take off and fly stably.

http://www.wright-brothers.org/Histo..._Side_View.jpg

Not because of flapping?! I do not belieave George Cayley could have said such an enormity. Maybe he said "not only because of flapping" which is something totally different.

It would be curious to read a few more details about that mysterious plane. Was it a heavier than air man carrying flying machine?

I accept that Ader probably did hop into the air in his steam powered planes, but these had no means of 3 Axis control. By some accounts his hop was longer and better witnessed than the Wrights' first flights.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cl%C3%A9ment_Ader

Maxim's experimental steam powered plane is reported to have been deliberately prevented from flying by its guide rail

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiram_Maxim

Lillienthal made many successful flights in gliders, and by the end of the 19th century it was clear that petrol engines would make heavier than air, powered, sustained and controlled flight inevitable, probably within the first decade of 20th century.

I believe that Percy Pilcher was getting very close to full flightl but was killed in a gliding accident.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percy_Pilcher

Chanute studied Cayley and the Wrights learned from Chanute.

Click here for a big picture..
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...y_Museum-1.jpg

Richard Pearse built an aeroplane in 1903 (or 1902 or 1904 depending on who you are talking to).

His aircraft had ailerons, rudder and elevator. It also had a two cylinder double acting four stroke engine (i.e. four combustion chambers).

Unfortunately for him he did not have effective airfoil shape and his propeller was not up to much either.

Actually Hiram Maxim's aircraft ( minus some of its wing panels) generated so much lift that it actually broke its restraining rails. A very much underrated engineer in popular literature.
Surely the real issue is the evolution of the practicable aircraft.
Well over a decade after the Wrights' experiments, during the first World War the U.S.A. was still incapable of generating any significant indigenous aviation product, having to rely almost totally on European engines and airframes for its front-line aircraft.
Even by 1908, at the Le Mans meeting, European aircraft were freely taking-off and landing on wheeled undercarriages. The Wrights were using ground support in the form of a primitive falling weight catapult to get airborne and were still basically landing on skids.

Yes this gentleman has been spouting on the key forum as well,seems to have an angle/grudge against the Wrights,I am sure the Wrights would agree that the 1903 Flyer was not perfect but one of their flights on dec17 1903 has been deemed by the FAI as the first controlled/practical power flight (or similar wording).
He was even casting doubts on their 1905 Flyer - which was a much improved aircraft...somebody has to have been first and even if you didnt like the 1903 Flyer - then the 1905 one should help redress the balance by flying for 30 mins (from memory) ... still far ahead of any other contender.
The Wrights tackled the whole thing in a much more scientific and common sense way than any other team/person.
Sure they were not perfect and got too embroiled in legal cr@p and were slow to adopt wheels but other than that they ended up with a very practical flying machine by 1905 !

No 5hit 5herlock...it is called development...funnily enough this is still going on in aircraft design...the perfect aircaft has still not been built and even in fairly recent times the first flight of an aircraft has been a fairly fraught affair :)

I am sure the Wrights would agree that the 1903 Flyer was imperfect...which is why they redesigned/improved it for the 1905 flights,they did have a self built wind tunnel - and remember not many people at that time knew much about stability etc

Its interesting that the Wright's were slow to fit wheels to their aircarft considering they made a living as bicycle manufacturers.
This is all the more intriguing when its realised that the tensioned wire spoked wheel (universally known these days as a bicycle wheel) was the invention of Sir George Cayley who had realised that a light weight wheel was needed for his flying machines.

Wheels
 

Perhaps they knew they couldn't.
With wheels on skids, in rough pasture with an aircraft unstable in pitch and with marginal excess power available, the catapult and rail was maybe a better option for getting airborne within a reasonable distance in still air.

Wheels
 

Perhaps - but they had greatly improved pitch stability by 1905,I would go more along the lines of trying to keep weight/drag down and also maybe partly a throwback to starting out on sand - where wheels would not have been good :).
By the time they were flying at Huffman in 1905 they could have incorporated wheels and still used the catapult launch but maybe they were more interested in the pure flight characteristics/aerodynamics/stability etc ... whatever the reason -I would have thought it would have been written down somewhere !

Simplex, instead of posting alaskan nutter dribble I'd suggest you read two texts.

"Sir George Cayley's Aeronautics 1796 - 1855" by C.H. Gibbs-Smith.
published by HMSO in 1962.

"Kill Devil Hill, the epic of the wright brothers 1899-1909" by Harry B. Combs with Martin Caidin.
published by Secker and Warburg, London. 1980.

both texts are exceptionally well researched.

btw Harry Combs was the president of Gates Learjet.

The Wright brothers bought french engines Bariquand & Marre to power the planes they finally flew in front of credible witnesses starting with Aug. 8, 1908

The articles, "Aviation in US. Seven french engines for the Wright brothers, L'Aérophile, Apr. 1, 1908, pag. 127" (see: L'Aérophile (Paris) ) which says that the french company "Barriquaud-Mare" had just delivered seven 40 HP Antoinette like plane engines to the Wright brothers and "Progress of the Wright airplane experiments", Scientific American, May 23, 1908 (see: Progress of the Wright Aeroplane Experiments [Scientific American, 1908] | Library of Congress ) that also talks about french engines, demonstrate, both of them, that the brothers needed in May 1908 (at Kitty Hawk in strong headwinds) far more powerful engines for far less spectacular flights than the ones allegedly performed in 1905 (atHuffman Prairie, over a flat pasture, without significant winds).

Also on Aug. 8, 1908, the Wright brothers using same french engines flew only 1 min and 45 sec in France, far from the claimed record 24.5 miles (39.4 km), 38 minutes flight in Dayton in 1905 when a considerable weaker engine was used. These brothers have simply no credibility and only their officially witness flights can be trusted. The rest is their own fiction.

Anyone for

“History by Contract” by O’Dwyer and Randolph :E

(This brought about by the mention of Charles Gibbs-Smith)

I do not rely on aviation history books about the Wright brothers. They are highly inaccurate and basically repeat the brother's own version of events, published in Sep. 1908 (see: The Wright Brothers' Aeroplane [Orville and Wilbur Wright, The Century Magazine, September 1908] | Library of Congress )

I always go to primary sources (especially old articles that can be found at the Library of Congress but also in L'Aerophile collection) to find serious evidence about the powered flights the brothers claimed they had achieved in 1903 - 1905. I have found nothing reliable.

Serious articles - before Dec. 17, 1903
The articles (about the Wright brothers' gliders) written before Dec. 17, 1903 are reliable, illustrated with credible pictures and drawings.

Examples:
- "Daring Men Make Notable Success of Aerial Navigation Experiments", The Dayton Daily News, Jan. 25, 1902 (see: Scrapbooks: January 1902-December 1908 | Library of Congress )
- "Some Aeronautical Experiments", Scientific American, Feb. 22, 1902 (see: Scrapbooks: January 1902-December 1908 | Library of Congress )
- "Gliding Machines. The Latest Aeronautical Experiments.", The Illustrated Scientific News, Feb. 1903, pag. 73 (see: Scrapbooks: January 1902-December 1908 | Library of Congress )
- "Aerial Locomotion in United States", Le Monde Illustre, Paris, 28 March 1903, pag. 293 (see: Scrapbooks: January 1902-December 1908 | Library of Congress )

Not serious articles - between Dec. 17, 1903 and 1908
After Dec. 17, 1903 what was published about the two inventors diverges considerably from the official story the Wright brothers and history books have tried to accredit. (This is the official version of events: The Wright Brothers' Aeroplane [Orville and Wilbur Wright, The Century Magazine, September 1908] | Library of Congress )

Examples:
- "Airship that Flew in North Carolina and Its Inventors", Sunday Tribune, Chicago, December 20, 1903 (see: Scrapbooks: January 1902-December 1908 | Library of Congress ) - One propeller is placed underneath the plane!!
- "The Machine That Flies", New York Herald, Jan. 17, 1904, pag. 3 (see: Scrapbooks: January 1902-December 1908 | Library of Congress ) - Same, a big propeller appears under the plane.
- "Real Story of the First Real Airship Flight Ever Made", New York Herald, May 19, 1907 (see: Scrapbooks: January 1902-December 1908 | Library of Congress ) - The Wright brother's plane is shown with a single propeller placed in front of the wings!! The plane also does not have a front elevator!

I do not rely on aviation history books about the Wright brothers. They are highly inaccurate and basically repeat the brother's own version of events, published in Sep. 1908 (see: The Wright Brothers' Aeroplane [Orville and Wilbur Wright, The Century Magazine, September 1908] | Library of Congress )


Yup! It's called circular reporting.

Keep going!

In May 1904, the Wright brothers just glided in front of journalists according to their own September 1908 account.

The brothers also said the newspapers in May 1904 "in kindness, had concealed" the reality, they had lied!

This is what the Wright brothers themselves declared in 1908 about their witnessed flight attempts in 1904:

"In the spring of 1904 … the new machine was heavier and stronger … When it was ready for its first trial, every newspaper in Dayton was notified, and about a dozen representatives of the press were present. … When preparations had been completed … The machine, after running the length of the track, slid off the end without rising into the air at all. Several of the newspaper men returned the next day, but they were again disappointed. The engine performed badly, and after a glide of only sixty feet, the machine came to the ground. The reporters had now, no doubt, lost confidence in the machine, though their reports, in kindness, concealed it. Later, when they heard that we were making flights of several minutes' duration, knowing that longer flights had been made with air-ships, … they were but little interested."
Source: The Wright Brothers' Aeroplane, The Century Magazine, Sep. 1908, pag 649, columns 3 and 4, The Wright Brothers' Aeroplane [Orville and Wilbur Wright, The Century Magazine, September 1908] | Library of Congress

And here you find what the newspapers wrote in May 1904:

"Flying Machine. Given a Successful Test by Messrs. Wright This Afternoon. Rose Twelve Feet in the Air and Sped Along a Distance of Twenty-Five Feet..Propellers Broke.", Dayton Press, May 26, 1904 (see: Scrapbooks: January 1902-December 1908 | Library of Congress )

Did the brothers glide 60 feet in May 1904 or fly 25 feet?

Also in the Sep. 1908 article, the Wright brothers claimed that "when they (the journalists) heard that we were making flights of several minutes' duration, knowing that longer flights had been made with air-ships, … they were but little interested." which is a big lie. They pretended the journalists had not been interested and this was the reason there was no serious witness for their flights in 1904 - 1905 when it was known the two inventors had refused systematically to show their planes or made public demonstrations before Aug 8. 1908.

I looked up the synonyms for glide. remember folks, flying as we know it today did not have the terms we use today.

one of the synonyms for glide is: FLY

another: WING

so, if someone said : glide , he could have meant FLY, like we use the term today.

AS someone who dealt with many famous news organizations I can tell you that even today, some of the stuff is just made up. AND imagine, how would someone (a reporter/writer) know what to write to describe flight, in 1903?

Quick Jimmy, write something about the wrights and their flying machine. we have to have it ready for the type setter in 10 minutes.

In 1903 the aviation reporters of the day were even more poorly informed than Richard Quest is today!

THE WRIGHTS invented and perfected 3 axis control with rudder countering the effect of wing warp drag. this was the key to the turn. cannonballs have been flying pretty straight for years before the wrights, but they really couldn't do a 360, now could they? The WRIGHTS taught the world to fly airplanes.

Orville wright was given pilot license number1
His godson, Bob Cummings (whom orville taught to fly( became the first licensed flight instructor in the USA

Courts gave the wrights the patent after lengthy hearing. Don't you think that someone on curtiss's side would have found people to prove the wright's hadn't flown?

AND THEY WOULD HAVE DONE IT THEN, not 30 years later, or 100 years later.

Synonyms are not words with the same meaning 100%.

The verb "to glide" is clearly explained in the dictionary
see: Glide - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
and means "to fly without engine power", "to descend gradually in controlled flight"

Regarding the meaning of "glide" in 1904-1905, it was the same as today.

Talking about the Wright brothers, a certain Amos I. Root wrote in January 1905:

"I shall have to apologize a little, friends, for giving a picture of the gliding-machine instead of a flying-machine" (Source: NOVA | Wright Brothers' Flying Machine | The First Reporter | PBS ). Root made a clear distinction between gliding and flying.