Book Excerpt: The Wright Brothers

Read the forum code of contact

Member for

20 years 5 months

Posts: 1

I have permission from AMACOM Books to distribute an excerpt from "The Wright Way: 7 Problem-Solving Principles from the Wright Brothers," a new book by Mark Eppler. Published to coincide with the Centennial of Flight (December 17), "The Wright Way" celebrates the contributions of Orville and Wilbur to business theory as well as air travel.

How did two high school dropouts with less than $1,000 solve the greatest problem of the century in a matter of months, when teams of well-financed scientists and engineers couldn't find a solution after decades of trying? Some credit genius or just good luck, but Eppler says it was the application of a set of problem-solving principles the Wright Brothers learned at home and honed through several business ventures. These principles are every bit as applicable to today's business problems.

The excerpt I'm distributing is called "The Heart of the Matter" and describes the brothers' insatiable curiosity and voracious reading habits. It concludes with a section called "Learning to Soar," extracting business advice about using the library, seeking guidance from mentors, and sharing research with others.

To get the excerpt, send mail to [email]rematherne@bellsouth.net[/email] with the subject line "Send Wright" and I will reply with the text (and *only* the text -- NO file attachments or "opt-in mailing list" jive). Thanks.

Original post

Member for

9 years 10 months

Posts: 8

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. The brothers simply lied about their flights in 1903-1905. They built their planes in France in 1908 with french engines (Bariquand & Marre), french propellers and using the entire French flight experience of 1908.

For more details see: http://wright-brothers.wikidot.com

There is also the declaration of Alpheus W. Drinkwater, telegraph operator, who clearly states:

"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.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]228486[/ATTACH]

Attachments

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 3,208

I wonder how they faked all those flights they made from Huffman Prairie Flying Field in 1904-5? :)

Member for

10 years 5 months

Posts: 29

"The brothers simply lied about their flights in 1903-1905."

Smile when you say that, pardner.

Member for

19 years 1 month

Posts: 6,043

Oh Dear ! Oh Dear !

Interesting first post by simple x :D

Member for

19 years 5 months

Posts: 9,821

Perhaps his name say it all? :)

Really, how much credence do you want to give to a guy who was not present the morning of Dec 17*...and if he was a telegraph operator in North Carolina, how did he know about their 1908 flight?

Remember that when Wilber travelled to France in 1908 for his exhibitions even the French were impressed...not an easy thing to do. And the Shorts took a license.
And although the 1903 Flyer had limitations, they were largely solved the next year, and the 1905 aircraft was again much improved and fully controllable as their many flights around Huffman Prairie prove.

*"Drinkwater was out of sight down the beach, watching the remains of one of the first U.S, Navy submarines, the Moccasin, which had broken loose and washed ashore under tow. A federal employee, Drinkwater had been instructed to keep an eye on the sub until the Navy arrived. Convinced there was a promotion in it, he declined the Wrights' invitation to come to the camp that morning," From The Bishop's Boys, The Life or Orville and Wilbur Wright. Tom Crouch, former curator of the national Air & Space Museum. 1989. Pg. 267.

There were several actual witnesses...members of the lifesaving station among them.

Member for

15 years 3 months

Posts: 923

[QUOTE=J Boyle;2139726]Perhaps his name say it all? :)

*"Drinkwater was out of sight down the beach, watching the remains of one of the first U.S, Navy submarines, the Moccasin, which had broken loose and washed ashore under tow. A federal employee, Drinkwater had been instructed to keep an eye on the sub until the Navy arrived. Convinced there was a promotion in it, he declined the Wrights' invitation to come to the camp that morning," From The Bishop's Boys, The Life or Orville and Wilbur Wright. Tom Crouch, former curator of the national Air & Space Museum. 1989. Pg. 267.

Perhaps he had a spare moment from watching the submarine, and climbed up "the grassy knoll", that's where it all happens...

Member for

9 years 10 months

Posts: 8

"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 http://www.loc.gov/resource/mwright.05001173/#seq-4

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 http://www.loc.gov/resource/mwright.05001574/#seq-1 , 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 or in both. 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 ex.: http://www.loc.gov/resource/mwright.05001/#seq-58 ).

Member for

9 years 10 months

Posts: 8

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 59 seconds 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:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kg46QLzO3b0

Member for

9 years 10 months

Posts: 8

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: http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/science/astro/2001-07-05-wright-flyer.htm

Member for

17 years 11 months

Posts: 2,024

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

Does that article and signature have generally accepted provenance?

Member for

9 years 10 months

Posts: 8

I wonder how they faked all those flights they made from Huffman Prairie Flying Field in 1904-5? :)

The Wright brothers started to publish pictures about their alleged flights from 1903-1905 only beginning with September 1908.
see: "The Wright Brothers' Aeroplane" that appeared in The Century Magazine (see http://www.loc.gov/resource/mwright.05001574/#seq-1 , page 644 ).

They simply claimed, in the Sep. 1908 article, the photos had been taken at various moments between Dec. 17, 1903 and the autumn of 1905. We have to thrust them. There is no evidence about the authenticity of the dates.

Details from large pictures the Library of Congress has (see the attachments), which you do not normally see in books, show "Flyer I" just about to go down a slope and landed in front of a large sand dune, respectively. It is quite clear from the images the two brothers landed below the starting point which disqualifies the Dec. 17, 1903 flights as true powered flights. We can talk at best about engine assisted descents in strong headwinds not about what is normally understood by powered flights.

Regarding the large number of witnesses the two brothers had in 1904-1905 this is again a pure claim. I want to see the list of witnesses and their declarations.

Image 1: "First flight, 120 feet in 12 seconds, 10:35 a.m., December 17, 1903; Kitty Hawk, North Carolina", Library of Congress.
Image 2: "Close-up view of damaged 1903 machine, rudder frame broken in landing, on ground at end of last flight, December 17, 1903; Kitty Hawk, North Carolina", Library of Congress.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]228533[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]228534[/ATTACH]

There were several actual witnesses...members of the lifesaving station among them.

That witness is John T. Daniels who, in a letter addressed to a friend in 1933, 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.

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: http://wrightstories.com/eyewitness-account-of-first-flight-by-john-daniels

Attachments

Member for

9 years 10 months

Posts: 8

Does that article and signature have generally accepted provenance?

The Library of Congress does not list it as a fake.

Member for

19 years 1 month

Posts: 6,043

Not really sure where you are going with this simplex...
But perhaps it should be remembered that the wright brothers were used to flying 'uncontrollable' aircraft,I doubt anybody would claim that the 1903 flyer was anything but imperfect !
For a modern pilot to fly an early aircraft - It is much more difficult to 'unlearn' than learn handling characteristics etc !
One of the Shuttleworth pilots described to me that the Bristol Fighter handling characteristics were 'dreadful'...but he still loves flying it ; )
Your first post on this forum was just like a 'troll' - please do not assume that the forum members on here are clueless and naive !

Member for

19 years 1 month

Posts: 6,043

If I may quote myself from an earlier thread about the Wright Brothers ...

They certainly went about it all in a very practical way and dare I say - in a more scientific way than earlier errr scientists !
Easy to bash pioneers - nobody knew the best way of going about designing/building/flying aeroplanes - they really did start from scratch since much of the previously accepted scientific 'knowledge' turned out to be inaccurate and flawed !
Not easy when you are learning to fly and being the engineer/test pilot at the same time !

Stability and control was in its infancy,might be a little unfair to say that the Wrights control system was poor but certainly along with all early aeroplanes - structural strength and control systems were marginal!
But surely it would be fair to say that the Wrights laid the basis for the 3 axis control system and had worked out most of the basics of aerodynamics/stability and control !

Member for

9 years 10 months

Posts: 8

If I may quote myself from an earlier thread about the Wright Brothers ... "it would be fair to say that the Wrights laid the basis for the 3 axis control system and had worked out most of the basics of aerodynamics/stability and control !"

It is said like this that the Wright brothers laid the basis for the 3 axis control system for planes. However if you scratch a bit below the surface and go back to primary sources and do not read only aviation history books written by people with a degree in arts, then you find a completely different reality.

1) The theory that (wing warping) ailerons, manual roll control, made the powered flight possible is a pure myth. People (Henri Farman or Leon Delagrange) flew without ailerons of any kind, in a close circuit, for about 20 minutes before the moment the Wright brothers showed their planes (Aug 8, 1908).

2) Wing warping ailerons were not invented by the Wright brothers.
Tom Crouch: "wing torsion ... was first applied in practice by Edson F. Gallaudet in his 1897 craft, tested on Long Island Sound and now on public display at the NASM."
Source: http://www.flightjournal.com/blog/20...to-john-brown/
Wikipedia seems to support Crouch:
"Edson Fessenden Gallaudet (April 21, 1871 - July 1, 1945) was a pioneer in the field of aviation, being the first person to experiment with warped wings in 1896."
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edson_Fessenden_Gallaudet
Wing-warping as a roll control method was used by Edson Gallaudet in 1898, according to http://www.flyingmachines.org/gallau.html .
The Wright brothers simply obtained, on May 22, 1906, a glider (not plane) patent for something already tested in 1898 by somebody else.

3) The standard ailerons were patented in 1868 by Matthew Piers Watt Boulton ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Piers_Watt_Boulton ) and first employed in a manned flight by Robert Esnault-Pelterie in 1904 (on a glider).

4) Even in 1908, when people saw them flying, the Wright brothers' planes did not have a tail horizontal stabilizer, a fact that made them unstable in pitch. The 1908 french planes were stable in pitch.

5) The 1903 plane, just to be flown straight line, required the pilot to maneuver continuously the front rudder (elevator), the tail vertical rudders and the wing warping ailerons. An enormous headache. Later in 1908 they appeared in public with planes having dihedral stability which considerably improved the stability in roll. French planes had already had this feature since 1906.

Member for

19 years 1 month

Posts: 6,043

Your first post on this forum was just like a 'troll' - please do not assume that the forum members on here are clueless and naive !

OK ignoring my previous post - we know all of that - but please feel free to post away ; )

You obviously have an ax(e) to grind about the Wrights - as others have in the past ; )

Member for

9 years 10 months

Posts: 8

The much celebrated 66% efficiency of the 1903 propellers not confirmed by wind tunnel tests

In an alleged March 6, 1903 note, with calculations regarding the efficiency of their propellers, (see http://www.localhangar.com/cgi-bin/clubs/pictures_pages.pl?POP=yes&CLUBNO=6&reason=show_page&PAGEID=116 ) the Wright brothers simply applied a known elementary relation:

Efficiency_propeller=Thrust * Plane_speed / Power_available,

( 66%=90lbf*24mph/8.73HP )

They needed a 90lbf propeller at 24mph considering a 8.73HP engine was available and they calculated that their propeller should be at least 66% efficient otherwise the required 90lbf thrust to keep the plane aloft would not have been reached.

Their calculations show just how great the performance of the propeller should have been not how great it really was.

This efficiency was never obtained by the Wright Experience team. The site http://archive.today/0pne0 says that many tests were effectuated and efficiencies between 75% and 82% were obtained which in not 66%.

Wright Experience team also say they replicated, with the help of computers, the 1903 propellers using badly damaged parts of the originals. However, in their reconstructions, they made some assumptions that could have alter the efficiency.

In conclusion the 66% figure is not confirmed. When a team wants to replicate the results or predictions of some inventors the team has to obtain exactly the same results not much better!

In the article "The Wright Brothers' Aeroplane, O. and W. Wright, The Century Magazine, September 1908, pag. 648-649, http://www.loc.gov/resource/mwright.05001574/#seq-5 ", the brothers themselves wrote:

"Our first propellers, built entirely from calculations, gave in useful work 66 per cent. of the power expended. This was about one third more than had been secured by Maxim or Langley."

The text is clear, the two brothers calculated and then obtained a 66% efficiency.

An advanced high efficiency propeller, made by Lucien Chauviere, can be seen in L'Aerophile from May 15, 1908, pag. 182 (see http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k6550620m/f192.image.r=helice.langEN ). It is above the propellers presented by the Wright brothers on Aug. 8, 1908 and clearly made before the propellers of the two American inventors became known.

Definitely, Europeans or other inventors did not learn from the Wright brothers how to make efficient propellers. The opposite seems to be true.

Basically the two brothers appeared in Aug. 1908 with propellers already available in France since 1907 and claimed they had invented them back in 1903.