Wright Brothers not first???

[helolumpy]

Looks like some historians have dug up a German immigrant who flew two years earlier than the Wright Brothers.
Jane's and the Smithsonian are disagreeing with each other over the validity of this claim.

http://sheltonherald.com/13133/part...-local-inventor-preceded-the-wright-brothers/

If true, it will cause a whole lot of history books to need to be rewritten!

http://www.gustave-whitehead.com/

 

[Harrier Dude]

This is the first proof that the first pilot to the bar won.

 

[scoolbubba]

Not merrican. Doesn't count.

 

[BusyBee604]

Looks like some historians have dug up a German immigrant who flew two years earlier than the Wright Brothers.

I've become quite skeptical of "historians" who often write some fairly weird versions of events that occurred years before they were born, without having access to witnesses who were alive to verify facts of the event. Some historians record events; however, there are many who manipulate history for their own gain or agenda. I have little faith in the Smithsonian's claim (very political org.), IMO... Janes has more credibility.

It seems that if someone beat the Wrights taking off on the world's most famous Fam-1 solo, that would have been revealed (and verified) long before now! If anyone else had actually beaten the 'bros' into the wild blue, I'd bet my money on A4s!

BzB

 

[phrogdriver]

Not merrican. Doesn't count.

Uh, just because he's an immigrant doesn't mean he's not American. Yeah, I know you were joking, but still.

Sounds like his marketing skills needed work, though.

 

[scoolbubba]

Uh, just because he's an immigrant doesn't mean he's not American. Yeah, I know you were joking, but still.

Sounds like his marketing skills needed work, though.

Whoops...didn't see German immigrant....

 

[phrogpilot73]

I've become quite skeptical of "historians" who often write some fairly weird versions of events that occurred years before they were born, without having access to witnesses who were alive to verify facts of the event. Some historians record events; however, there are many who manipulate history for their own gain or agenda. I have little faith in the Smithsonian's claim (very political org.), IMO... Janes has more credibility.

BzB, you must be getting old...

The article clearly states that Janes is identifying this guy as having flown two years before the Wrights, and that the Smithsonian disputes that, saying the Wrights were first...

The publication, Jane’s All the World’s Aircraft, in its 100th anniversary edition March 8, acknowledged that Gustave Whitehead flew his No. 21 aircraft more than two years before the Wright brothers left the ground at Kitty Hawk.

Not all agree. The Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum issued a statement March 15 defending the Wrights and dismissing Whitehead for a lack of evidence.

 

[insanebikerboy]

I read a book in high school in the mid-nineties about this very guy. There have been historians that have made this claim for years but the Smithsonian has fought them tooth and nail. I don't know what the true history is but the fact is that this story has been around for quite some time.

 

[phrogpilot73]

I read a book in high school in the mid-nineties about this very guy. There have been historians that have made this claim for years but the Smithsonian has fought them tooth and nail. I don't know what the true history is but the fact is that this story has been around for quite some time.

Based on this statement from the article:

The Smithsonian has no choice but to recognize that the Wright brothers were first. The agreement that gives the museum possession of the Wright Flyer includes this legal caveat: “The Smithsonian shall [not state] any aircraft … earlier than the Wright aeroplane of 1903 … was capable of carrying a man under its own power in controlled flight.”

And thinking about how the Wrights made their money post-first-flight was by suing people who infringed on their patent, my personal opinion is that there may be something to this article... The Wrights were incredibly legally savvy for their day...

 

[squeeze]

This debate dates back to 1903. Nothing new here. This is pretty much the best example of "pics or it didn't happen." The Wrights had the pics, others didn't. Ergo, they were first.

 

[phrogdriver]

If only he'd invented the cameraphone in 1901 too, he'd have a leg to stand on, huh?

 

[BusyBee604]

BzB, you must be getting old...

You nailed it, got them backwards...my bad. Still no Smithsonian fan.
BzB

 

[Flash]

I've become quite skeptical of "historians" who often write some fairly weird versions of events that occurred years before they were born, without having access to witnesses who were alive to verify facts of the event.......It seems that if someone beat the Wrights taking off on the world's most famous Fam-1 solo, that would have been revealed (and verified) long before now!

This debate dates back to 1903. Nothing new here. This is pretty much the best example of "pics or it didn't happen." The Wrights had the pics, others didn't. Ergo, they were first.

As Squeeze points out this has been debated for the Wrights claimed the first flight. Apparently in Brazil Alberto Santos-Dumont is considered the father of aviation and not the Wright bothers, since his airplanes had wheels instead of skids and took off without a catapult. If you want to read more there is a whole Wikipedia page devoted to it.

The one thing that the Wright brothers had over all of their competing claims was not only the photographic evidence but also that they flew their aircraft repeatedly over the next few years in successively longer flights in very similar aircraft, including over 100 flights the following year in the Wright Flyer II that were witnessed and photographed numerous times. Europeans didn't really buy their claims, and after seeing Santos-Dumont fly in 1906 were even more dismissive, until they made a trip there in 1908 and flew in front of thousands.

.......And thinking about how the Wrights made their money post-first-flight was by suing people who infringed on their patent, my personal opinion is that there may be something to this article... The Wrights were incredibly legally savvy for their day...

They had left the bicycle business and put all their money into the airplane business, their litigiousness and secrecy can be attributed to trying to make money out of their inventions which were often particular to their aircraft. I went to the website supporting the claims and mentioned by Janes, the evidence is really thin.

 

[NavAir42]

The one I don't get is if the guy they claim flew first really did it, why didn't he do it again sometime in the intervening 2-ish years? I don't know what the Wright's log book looked like after their first flight but I'm pretty sure they kept doing it once they had figured it out. What kind of person becomes the first human in history to fly under power then says, "Well that's good enough, now what?"

 

[helolumpy]

Ma

The one I don't get is if the guy they claim flew first really did it, why didn't he do it again sometime in the intervening 2-ish years? I don't know what the Wright's log book looked like after their first flight but I'm pretty sure they kept doing it once they had figured it out. What kind of person becomes the first human in history to fly under power then says, "Well that's good enough, now what?"

Any chance there was sequestration back then?