c++.chat - Anniversary of First Flight
- "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> Dec 17 2003
- Jan Knepper <jan smartsoft.us> Dec 17 2003
- Cesar Rabak <csrabak ig.com.br> Dec 17 2003
- "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> Dec 17 2003
- Jan Knepper <jan smartsoft.us> Dec 17 2003
- Cesar Rabak <csrabak ig.com.br> Dec 19 2003
- "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> Dec 19 2003
- Cesar Rabak <csrabak ig.com.br> Dec 20 2003
- "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> Dec 20 2003
- Cesar Rabak <csrabak ig.com.br> Dec 21 2003
- John Reimer <John_member pathlink.com> Dec 26 2003
- "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> Dec 26 2003
- John Reimer <John_member pathlink.com> Dec 27 2003
- "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> Dec 28 2003
- roland <--nancyetroland free.fr> Jan 07 2004
- "Sean" <seanchen telus.net> Dec 18 2003
- roland <--nancyetroland free.fr> Jan 07 2004
- "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> Jan 08 2004
- roland <--nancyetroland free.fr> Jan 09 2004
- "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> Jan 09 2004
I started out in engineering as an aero engineer, and I have always had a fascination for the Wright brothers and the magnitude their accomplishment. Today is the 100th anniversary of the first manned, powered, controlled flying machine.
Dec 17 2003
Jan Knepper <jan smartsoft.us> Great! Likewise... Started out with Aircraft Design & Maintenance... ;-) www.nlc.nl Although, I do not keep track of the dates that closely, but it is great that today is the 100th anniversary of manned, powered & controlled flying. Walter wrote:I started out in engineering as an aero engineer, and I have always had a fascination for the Wright brothers and the magnitude their accomplishment. Today is the 100th anniversary of the first manned, powered, controlled flying machine.
-- ManiaC++ Jan Knepper
Dec 17 2003
Walter escreveu:I started out in engineering as an aero engineer, and I have always had a fascination for the Wright brothers and the magnitude their accomplishment. Today is the 100th anniversary of the first manned, powered, controlled flying machine.
More or less. . . "...first manned, powered, controlled flying machine." would be a complete description for a dirigible airship. This is attributed to Santos Dumont. The Wright brothers might have done it with the then called "heavier than air" apparatus, but their feat was not done in public. . . For the records, the attempt of reproducing their flight today did not succeed. . .! On the other hand, if you are patient, you can wait three more years and wait for the first worldwide recognized "hevier than air" flight made in 1906 (by the same Santos Dumont). The replica of this plane flies every year in fairs! -- Cesar Rabak GNU/Linux User 52247. Get counted: http://counter.li.org/
Dec 17 2003
"Cesar Rabak" <csrabak ig.com.br> wrote in message news:3FE0E7EA.9000108 ig.com.br...Walter escreveu:I started out in engineering as an aero engineer, and I have always had
fascination for the Wright brothers and the magnitude their
Today is the 100th anniversary of the first manned, powered, controlled flying machine.
would be a complete description for a dirigible airship. This is attributed to Santos Dumont. The Wright brothers might have done it with the then called "heavier than air" apparatus, but their feat was not done in public. . .
You're right, I should have added heavier than air.For the records, the attempt of reproducing their flight today did not succeed. . .!
The 1903 Flyer was a marginal aircraft, and the Wrights themselves wrecked it the first try. But it did fly in 1903 - the picture proves it. The Flyer replica did fly on Dec. 4. http://www.newsobserver.com/firstinflight/story/3039258p-2780945c.htmlOn the other hand, if you are patient, you can wait three more years and wait for the first worldwide recognized "hevier than air" flight made in 1906 (by the same Santos Dumont). The replica of this plane flies every year in fairs!
The Wrights made improved Flyers in 1904 http://www.nasm.si.edu/wrightbrothers/fly/1904/huffman.cfm and 1905 http://www.asme.org/history/roster/H224.html. See also http://wright.nasa.gov/airplane/air1905.html.
Dec 17 2003
Cesar Rabak wrote:Walter escreveu:I started out in engineering as an aero engineer, and I have always had a fascination for the Wright brothers and the magnitude their accomplishment. Today is the 100th anniversary of the first manned, powered, controlled flying machine.
More or less. . . "...first manned, powered, controlled flying machine." would be a complete description for a dirigible airship. This is attributed to Santos Dumont. The Wright brothers might have done it with the then called "heavier than air" apparatus, but their feat was not done in public. . .
Hey, they had in on film in case you forgot about that!For the records, the attempt of reproducing their flight today did not succeed. . .!
I saw some on TV. To me it looked like they had balance issue's. I do not know if they had any aircraft specialists out there, but without people with a bit of the proper knowledge is it not so easy to get that model of a plain to fly stable.On the other hand, if you are patient, you can wait three more years and wait for the first worldwide recognized "hevier than air" flight made in 1906 (by the same Santos Dumont). The replica of this plane flies every year in fairs!
Of course... Once you have it stable you can fly it any time! -- ManiaC++ Jan Knepper
Dec 17 2003
Jan Knepper escreveu:Cesar Rabak wrote:Walter escreveu:I started out in engineering as an aero engineer, and I have always had a fascination for the Wright brothers and the magnitude their accomplishment. Today is the 100th anniversary of the first manned, powered, controlled flying machine.
More or less. . . "...first manned, powered, controlled flying machine." would be a complete description for a dirigible airship. This is attributed to Santos Dumont. The Wright brothers might have done it with the then called "heavier than air" apparatus, but their feat was not done in public. . .
Hey, they had in on film in case you forgot about that!
I only read about the 1904 experiments being filmed, but, I cannot be sure since we have not all the info.For the records, the attempt of reproducing their flight today did not succeed. . .!
I saw some on TV. To me it looked like they had balance issue's. I do not know if they had any aircraft specialists out there, but without people with a bit of the proper knowledge is it not so easy to get that model of a plain to fly stable.
You bet! Also, as Walter points out, the plane was a marginal aircraft. We have to concede they were pioneering!On the other hand, if you are patient, you can wait three more years and wait for the first worldwide recognized "hevier than air" flight made in 1906 (by the same Santos Dumont). The replica of this plane flies every year in fairs!
Of course... Once you have it stable you can fly it any time!
The other issue besides stability, it seems from literature I had access (and IIRC from some info in the Wright Patterson Base Air Museum), that for its aerodynamics that plane was underpowered. -- Cesar Rabak GNU/Linux User 52247. Get counted: http://counter.li.org/
Dec 19 2003
"Cesar Rabak" <csrabak ig.com.br> wrote in message news:3FE3A14D.3090306 ig.com.br...The other issue besides stability, it seems from literature I had access (and IIRC from some info in the Wright Patterson Base Air Museum), that for its aerodynamics that plane was underpowered.
The power was enough, the trouble was the stall speed wasn't that much slower than the speed at which the instability caused it to be uncontrollable. There was only a narrow speed range within which it would fly.
Dec 19 2003
Walter escreveu:"Cesar Rabak" <csrabak ig.com.br> wrote in message news:3FE3A14D.3090306 ig.com.br...The other issue besides stability, it seems from literature I had access (and IIRC from some info in the Wright Patterson Base Air Museum), that for its aerodynamics that plane was underpowered.
The power was enough, the trouble was the stall speed wasn't that much slower than the speed at which the instability caused it to be uncontrollable. There was only a narrow speed range within which it would fly.
that had a short range between stall and max speed¹. . . -- Cesar Rabak GNU/Linux User 52247. Get counted: http://counter.li.org/ [1] for the curious, it was a spy plane!
Dec 20 2003
"Cesar Rabak" <csrabak ig.com.br> wrote in message news:3FE499C2.7050906 ig.com.br...I see! When in school we did an exercise (drill) of another famous plane that had a short range between stall and max speed¹. . . [1] for the curious, it was a spy plane!
The U2, of course! By all accounts, it was a tough airplane to fly.
Dec 20 2003
Walter escreveu:"Cesar Rabak" <csrabak ig.com.br> wrote in message news:3FE499C2.7050906 ig.com.br...I see! When in school we did an exercise (drill) of another famous plane that had a short range between stall and max speed¹. . . [1] for the curious, it was a spy plane!
The U2, of course! By all accounts, it was a tough airplane to fly.
Yes! And it was funny how many students kept checking calculations because the computed latitude was so narrow ;-) -- Cesar Rabak GNU/Linux User 52247. Get counted: http://counter.li.org/
Dec 21 2003
The U2, of course! By all accounts, it was a tough airplane to fly.
Speaking of Lockheed-Martin (a little off topic, sorry): Walter, you used to work for Boeing, right? Did you watch the documentary recently on the JSF VTOL or STOVL-capable aircraft competition between Boeing and Lockheed-Martin. It was a fascinating coverage of two design teams competing to make the next fighter for Air Force/Navy. Boeing lost unfortunately, but I loved their plane, the weird looking X-32. It was sad that they lost. The Boeing X-32: http://members.lycos.co.uk/aerospace21/jsf/x-32.html The Lockheed X-35: http://www.codeonemagazine.com/archives/2001/articles/arp_01/xplanes/xplane_x35.html Later, John
Dec 26 2003
"John Reimer" <John_member pathlink.com> wrote in message news:bsiijm$lsh$1 digitaldaemon.com...Walter, you used to work for Boeing, right? Did you watch the documentary recently on the JSF VTOL or STOVL-capable aircraft competition between
and Lockheed-Martin. It was a fascinating coverage of two design teams competing to make the next fighter for Air Force/Navy. Boeing lost unfortunately, but I loved their plane, the weird looking X-32. It was
they lost.
I saw the documentary. Based on the information in the documentary, it looked like Boeing had the superior design.
Dec 26 2003
I saw the documentary. Based on the information in the documentary, it looked like Boeing had the superior design.
No, no... that can't be true because the US government chose the other one ;-D.
Dec 27 2003
"John Reimer" <John_member pathlink.com> wrote in message news:bsleoe$2cv2$1 digitaldaemon.com...I saw the documentary. Based on the information in the documentary, it looked like Boeing had the superior design.
Political considerations trump practical ones <g>.
Dec 28 2003
Cesar Rabak a écrit :For the records, the attempt of reproducing their flight today did not succeed. . .!
yes it did. a french university did it. Unfortunately I couldn't find a link on the web but I've seen it at the TV. roland
Jan 07 2004
Surprise! Still remember how I was enchanted by those aviation magazine when I was a boy, which led to my majoring in aircraft design... Didn't know that they made the engine themselves, cool... "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> дÈëÓʼþ news:brqkb2$l8h$1 digitaldaemon.com...I started out in engineering as an aero engineer, and I have always had a fascination for the Wright brothers and the magnitude their
Today is the 100th anniversary of the first manned, powered, controlled flying machine.
Dec 18 2003
Walter a écrit :I started out in engineering as an aero engineer, and I have always had a fascination for the Wright brothers and the magnitude their accomplishment. Today is the 100th anniversary of the first manned, powered, controlled flying machine.
.. see http://www.ctie.monash.edu.au/hargrave/ader.html :-) Hem controlled you say ? so ok its the Wright brothers plane ;-) roland
Jan 07 2004
"roland" <--nancyetroland free.fr> wrote in message news:bti4v8$7ki$1 digitaldaemon.com...Walter a écrit :I started out in engineering as an aero engineer, and I have always had
fascination for the Wright brothers and the magnitude their
Today is the 100th anniversary of the first manned, powered, controlled flying machine.
.. see http://www.ctie.monash.edu.au/hargrave/ader.html :-) Hem controlled you say ? so ok its the Wright brothers plane ;-)
I'm not convinced that Ader flew. In fact, I'm extremely skeptical <g>.
Jan 08 2004
Walter a écrit :"roland" <--nancyetroland free.fr> wrote in message news:bti4v8$7ki$1 digitaldaemon.com...Walter a écrit :I started out in engineering as an aero engineer, and I have always had
afascination for the Wright brothers and the magnitude their
accomplishment.Today is the 100th anniversary of the first manned, powered, controlled flying machine.
Hem .. but the first flight was done by Clement Ader in october 9 1890 .. see http://www.ctie.monash.edu.au/hargrave/ader.html :-) Hem controlled you say ? so ok its the Wright brothers plane ;-)
I'm not convinced that Ader flew. In fact, I'm extremely skeptical <g>.
posting. So you knew Adler ? I thought the french were the only one to know him. The funny thing is that all french childrens are taught at school that the first flight was Adler one. Here there is streets, schools or university with his name. There should be some evidences it really flew. He didn't pretend it was a big success, only 20 cm altitude. But well it doen't really mater: the truth is that even if it really flew, that was a technical dead end. roland
Jan 09 2004
"roland" <--nancyetroland free.fr> wrote in message news:btneo3$28ia$1 digitaldaemon.com...Ok I should have posted on the other thread. I've didn't see it before posting. So you knew Adler ?
I'm not that old <g>. But I find the Wrights fascinating, and have read a lot about them and some of the other claims.I thought the french were the only one to know him. The funny thing is that all french childrens are taught at school that the first flight was Adler one. Here there is streets, schools or university with his name. There should be some evidences it really flew. He didn't pretend it was a big success, only 20 cm altitude. But well it doen't really mater: the truth is that even if it really flew, that was a technical dead end.
Yup.
Jan 09 2004