3 ms·

Santos-Dumont flew in public for an assembled group of experts. The Wright’s did not. There is no sense in which he was a pretender. He had been “open source”

Santos-Dumont flew in public for an assembled group of experts. The Wright’s did not. There is no sense in which he was a pretender. He had been “open source” flying for years.

WalterBright 2y ago
This article says it better than I can: https://www.wright-brothers.org/History_Wing/History_of_the_Airplane/Who_Was_First/Santos_Dumont/Santos_Dumont.htm https://www.wright-brothers.org/History_Wing/History_of_the_... Not mentioned, though, is Dumont could not turn his airplane. The Wrights could, from the first one.
- brudgers 2y ago
  The evidence of the Wrights first flight consists solely of what the Wrights provided. And of course their first flight report did not describe any turning. The only public evidence of anything is their patent application for the control method…which does not prove the veracity of their claims.
  - WalterBright 2y ago
    The first flight had witnesses, and that famous photograph taken by a non-Wright: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wright_Flyer#/media/File:First_flight2.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wright_Flyer#/media/File:First... Take a look at the wings - no dihedral. That means it was unstable in roll, and would require constant turning control being applied to keep it from crashing. > The only public evidence of anything The Smithsonian has their design notebooks. Also, more than one exacting replica has been made, and they fly and turn.
    - brudgers 2y ago
      That photo was taken on the Wright’s camera and the Wrights had complete custody of the negative. The witnesses aren’t a particularly credible lot. The more I looked into the details the more the story looks like a typical startup’s PR campaign. I’m not saying it is Nikola rolling its truck downhill, but the Wrights had similar incentives for a creation myth. Like I said, I’ve been hearing the story since I was a child. Certainly a Brazilian would be problematic in terms of American exceptionalism and historically prevailing American racial views. The Smithsonian is an organ of the state and the Wrights notebooks are again self-reported evidence…to put it another way, the Wrights now fill the same institutional role at the Smithsonian in regard to first flight as Langley did at the Smithsonian.
      - WalterBright 2y ago
        As I've remarked elsewhere, exacting replicas of the Flyer have been built and flown, verifying everything in their notebooks and accounts. The proof is unusually well documented, and has successfully overcome all kinds of criticism of it.
        brudgers 2y ago
        Looking at the notebooks at the LOC, I don’t see enough detail to constitute construction plans of the Flyer. And these remained in Orville’s hands until after his death in 1949 and mostly the documents from 1903 are attributed to Orville’s hand. Likewise, the Flyer was restored by Orville for display and money many years later during the period of time when Langley was credited as first. [1] Finally, the Smithsonian is prohibited from crediting anyone else by the terms of sale for its purchase of Orville’s restoration. [2] Basically, we have Orville’s word for everything and a contract that contractually incentivizes the Smithsonian to take it as gospel. Again, thanks for inspiring me to go beyond the national myth and look at the Wrights critically. [1] https://www.loc.gov/collections/wilbur-and-orville-wright-papers/about-this-collection/rights-and-access/?fa=subject:kitty+hawk https://www.loc.gov/collections/wilbur-and-orville-wright-pa... [2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wright_Flyer#After_Kitty_Hawk https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wright_Flyer#After_Kitty_Haw...
        brudgers 2y ago
        Going down the rabbit hole further http://truthinaviationhistory.blogspot.com/2019/11/the-wrights-fourth-flight-mensuration.html?m=1 http://truthinaviationhistory.blogspot.com/2019/11/the-wrigh...

Santos-Dumont flew in public for an assembled group of experts. The Wright’s did not. There is no sense in which he was a pretender. He had been “open source” flying for years.

WalterBright 2y ago

This article says it better than I can: https://www.wright-brothers.org/History_Wing/History_of_the_Airplane/Who_Was_First/Santos_Dumont/Santos_Dumont.htm https://www.wright-brothers.org/History_Wing/History_of_the_... Not mentioned, though, is Dumont could not turn his airplane. The Wrights could, from the first one.

brudgers 2y ago
The evidence of the Wrights first flight consists solely of what the Wrights provided. And of course their first flight report did not describe any turning. The only public evidence of anything is their patent application for the control method…which does not prove the veracity of their claims.
- WalterBright 2y ago
  The first flight had witnesses, and that famous photograph taken by a non-Wright: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wright_Flyer#/media/File:First_flight2.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wright_Flyer#/media/File:First... Take a look at the wings - no dihedral. That means it was unstable in roll, and would require constant turning control being applied to keep it from crashing. > The only public evidence of anything The Smithsonian has their design notebooks. Also, more than one exacting replica has been made, and they fly and turn.
  - brudgers 2y ago
    That photo was taken on the Wright’s camera and the Wrights had complete custody of the negative. The witnesses aren’t a particularly credible lot. The more I looked into the details the more the story looks like a typical startup’s PR campaign. I’m not saying it is Nikola rolling its truck downhill, but the Wrights had similar incentives for a creation myth. Like I said, I’ve been hearing the story since I was a child. Certainly a Brazilian would be problematic in terms of American exceptionalism and historically prevailing American racial views. The Smithsonian is an organ of the state and the Wrights notebooks are again self-reported evidence…to put it another way, the Wrights now fill the same institutional role at the Smithsonian in regard to first flight as Langley did at the Smithsonian.
    - WalterBright 2y ago
      As I've remarked elsewhere, exacting replicas of the Flyer have been built and flown, verifying everything in their notebooks and accounts. The proof is unusually well documented, and has successfully overcome all kinds of criticism of it.
      - brudgers 2y ago
        Looking at the notebooks at the LOC, I don’t see enough detail to constitute construction plans of the Flyer. And these remained in Orville’s hands until after his death in 1949 and mostly the documents from 1903 are attributed to Orville’s hand. Likewise, the Flyer was restored by Orville for display and money many years later during the period of time when Langley was credited as first. [1] Finally, the Smithsonian is prohibited from crediting anyone else by the terms of sale for its purchase of Orville’s restoration. [2] Basically, we have Orville’s word for everything and a contract that contractually incentivizes the Smithsonian to take it as gospel. Again, thanks for inspiring me to go beyond the national myth and look at the Wrights critically. [1] https://www.loc.gov/collections/wilbur-and-orville-wright-papers/about-this-collection/rights-and-access/?fa=subject:kitty+hawk https://www.loc.gov/collections/wilbur-and-orville-wright-pa... [2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wright_Flyer#After_Kitty_Hawk https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wright_Flyer#After_Kitty_Haw...
        brudgers 2y ago
        Going down the rabbit hole further http://truthinaviationhistory.blogspot.com/2019/11/the-wrights-fourth-flight-mensuration.html?m=1 http://truthinaviationhistory.blogspot.com/2019/11/the-wrigh...