4 ms·

> However, do you know why two flight enthusiasts from Dayton, Ohio succeeded? This just makes me think that Alberto Santos-Dumont also "invented" heavier-than

> However, do you know why two flight enthusiasts from Dayton, Ohio succeeded? This just makes me think that Alberto Santos-Dumont also "invented" heavier-than-air flight, only 3 years later and it was better. Wouldn't we still have the same flying ability if the Wrights never pursued flying? Previous discussion on Santos-Dumont: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9542480 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9542480

LyndsySimon 7y ago
I can't think of any technological advance that was achieved primarily through the effort of a single individual - in retrospect, it seems "obvious" that the fundamental principles had been in place and that it "only" took someone to come along and put them together in a new way. I'm a firearms enthusiast and have spent some time studying the development of small arms. If transported back to the late 18th Century, I could explain and document the mechanism for an automatic rifle suitable for use by infantry like an AR or AK - but I likely could not produce one, and certainly could not produce them on an industrial scale. The metallurgy simply wasn't up to the task, nor was the machinery of the day. The metallic cartridge would't even make a lot of sense; as the percussion cap hadn't yet been invented. Even a manually-operated mounted Gatling gun wouldn't be possible without it. Once a stable, impact-sensitive explosive suitable for use as a primer was invented, everything was in place for the invention of the metallic cartridge - and that's exactly what happened. Metallic cartridges lead to breech-loading firearms, which lead to the bolt action, which in turn lead to automatic and then semi-automatic actions. Neither of the last two made much sense until the invention and adoption of smokeless powder, as traditional gunpowder leaves so much residue that it would only work for a few shots before "fouling". All that said, there are individuals that push the state of the art forward a great deal through their contributions. John Moses Browning, for instance. He created the first gas-operated machinegun and several of his designs remain in use (essentially unchanged) by major militaries around the world more than a century later.
- technothrasher 7y ago
  which in turn lead to automatic and then semi-automatic actions Hmm, now you've got me curious. I'm not exactly a firearms history scholar, but the earliest automatic firearm I know of (not including civil war era Gatling type guns, which aren't actually automatic) is the Mannlicher 1886, which was also produced as a semi-automatic at the same time. So I was under the impression that we got fully and semi auto firearms at exactly the same time.
starpilot 7y ago
In the book Visions of a Flying Machine (about the Wright brothers), the author's answer to this is "definitely." If the Wrights, and Santos-Dumont had failed, someone else in the world would have come up with a practical airplane within the next year or two. There were certain enabling technologies, like more efficient motors, that made it possible. Understanding of gas dynamics in academia was very high (Ludwig Prandtl was studying supersonic flow in tubes at the time), though fluid mechanics not as much. This is apparent in how rapidly aircraft development proceeded around the world after the Wrights, and how it left the brothers behind despite their patent protection attempts.

LyndsySimon 7y ago

I can't think of any technological advance that was achieved primarily through the effort of a single individual - in retrospect, it seems "obvious" that the fundamental principles had been in place and that it "only" took someone to come along and put them together in a new way. I'm a firearms enthusiast and have spent some time studying the development of small arms. If transported back to the late 18th Century, I could explain and document the mechanism for an automatic rifle suitable for use by infantry like an AR or AK - but I likely could not produce one, and certainly could not produce them on an industrial scale. The metallurgy simply wasn't up to the task, nor was the machinery of the day. The metallic cartridge would't even make a lot of sense; as the percussion cap hadn't yet been invented. Even a manually-operated mounted Gatling gun wouldn't be possible without it. Once a stable, impact-sensitive explosive suitable for use as a primer was invented, everything was in place for the invention of the metallic cartridge - and that's exactly what happened. Metallic cartridges lead to breech-loading firearms, which lead to the bolt action, which in turn lead to automatic and then semi-automatic actions. Neither of the last two made much sense until the invention and adoption of smokeless powder, as traditional gunpowder leaves so much residue that it would only work for a few shots before "fouling". All that said, there are individuals that push the state of the art forward a great deal through their contributions. John Moses Browning, for instance. He created the first gas-operated machinegun and several of his designs remain in use (essentially unchanged) by major militaries around the world more than a century later.

technothrasher 7y ago
which in turn lead to automatic and then semi-automatic actions Hmm, now you've got me curious. I'm not exactly a firearms history scholar, but the earliest automatic firearm I know of (not including civil war era Gatling type guns, which aren't actually automatic) is the Mannlicher 1886, which was also produced as a semi-automatic at the same time. So I was under the impression that we got fully and semi auto firearms at exactly the same time.

starpilot 7y ago

In the book Visions of a Flying Machine (about the Wright brothers), the author's answer to this is "definitely." If the Wrights, and Santos-Dumont had failed, someone else in the world would have come up with a practical airplane within the next year or two. There were certain enabling technologies, like more efficient motors, that made it possible. Understanding of gas dynamics in academia was very high (Ludwig Prandtl was studying supersonic flow in tubes at the time), though fluid mechanics not as much. This is apparent in how rapidly aircraft development proceeded around the world after the Wrights, and how it left the brothers behind despite their patent protection attempts.