Odd thoughts about the Wright Flier

Doug, Then I'll build you some robots to replace those programmed human patriots. ;) The cynics created this Democracy. Ignorant patriots can turn into dangerous Nationalists, as history has shown.

-John

Reply to
John DeMar
Loading thread data ...

I'm sure he is a great guy (I've seen his name mentioned before). But, someone who is an avid Wright enthusiast is not an independent source. It is very difficult to be open minded about something that one has believed in for so long and has had a stake in perpetuating.

For the most part, he was just that. And much faster at getting to the patent office.

It is of utmost importance to science and engineering to give credit where credit is due. It has been an ethical anchor to progress, and it is part of what drives the silent minority of intelligent people in our society. Everyone benefits from the technology born from this system. Very few people who step over the ethical line survive in their field... or the march of History.

You and I can tell the difference. Obviously, textbook publishers and the mainstream media have no clue.

Of course history has always been a matter of public opinion! Ask any professional historian. My argument is that it shouldn't be. It should be based on the total accumulation of facts, especially from primary sources. In the case of technical histories, weight should be given to the sources who understood the technology.

The written (and rewritten) histories will always be a matter of interpretation at any given time by those who write it. That is why one needs to read as much as they can on a historic subject (from various periods, and from various points of view) before coming up with one's own interpretation. All I can say is that I have given my interpretation, and it is subject to modification in the future as I learn more on the topic.

Technical accomplishments and invention are two different things. The Wrights were clearly hard-working technologists but it is extremely difficult in light of the facts to award them an invention. In my opinion, it takes a great deal away from those who are true innovators. It would be like saying that Bill Gates invented the computer or graphical operating systems. Unfortunately, most kids today would believe it.

-John DeMar

Reply to
John DeMar

In article , John DeMar wrote with the appearance of temporary insanity:

Huh?

Are you EVER right?

Jerry

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

I don't think I disagree, but that means there were NO inventors in aviation. Birds could fly and after that it was just 'technical' to get a man to do so. No "idea". Differs from say the phonograph which there wasn't one.

Not knowing the background other than last night's show, the prop issue alone seems like innovation.

Gates didn't invent any operating system (he bought DOS). Ask people what Henry Ford invented....

Joel. phx

What dId Henry Ford invent?

Reply to
Joel Corwith

Integrating previously-known technologies is itself innovation, and deserves as much credit as producing those technologies. If that were all the Wrights had done, they would still deserve a lot of credit. Of course, they also reached a new understanding of the importance of control, as well.

To compare this to Gates.... it's more like concluding von Neumann invented the computer, which is arguably true.

Reply to
Joe Pfeiffer

Just like saying apple invented the gui (false)

either way THEY DID INVENT the FIRST Viable WORKING powered controlled airplane.

that is a so far irrefutable fact.

Why do you have a problem giving them credit for inventing what they CLEARLY invented.

NO ONE is trying to claim they invented the airplane. I believe that happened HUNDREDS of years earlier.

they did however invent the very first man carrying controlled powered airplane.

What "exactly" are you claiming that they did not invent ?

Chris Taylor

formatting link

Reply to
Chris Taylor Jr

Not at all. I'm trying my best to do exactly that :-) John seems to be mixing up sociology with history. As I read his argument (and I don't want to put words in his mouth) that because the Wrights didn't open up and widely distribute their knowledge of the airplane (even for a price), and ignored the input from other researchers, that they are somehow not "worthy" of being called the inventors of the airplane. Powered human flight was a technical problem and the Wrights solved it by technical means. That they didn't personally change the world with what they learned has absolutely no bearing one way or the other on this historical fact.

Again, that's sociological, not technical.

- Jack

Jack Hagerty ARA Press

formatting link

Reply to
Jack Hagerty

I have come to my personal conclusions, based on a great deal of evidence, much of it their own writings, that they were often unethical, misleading to the public, disruptive to the true advancement of the field of aviation, and not worthy to be recognized for all that is claimed in the modern popular historic image.

Reply to
GCGassaway

Gates' great accomplishment was the realization that, at a particular time, features and price in software were more valued by a large market than robustness. At least part of IBM's problem was that it failed to realize this and sold over-engineered solutions to that same market[1]. That IBM, Sun, DEC, etc. failed to realize this in the ensuing battle for the desktop show that this wasn't an entirely obvious thing at the time. That Apple failed to realize the importance of price shows that this wasn't even obvious to the players born into personal computers.

Many of Microsoft's current woes come from reliability becoming more mportant because of the hostile network environment most computers operate in, and because they need to grow into a market where reliablility is crucial.

The relevance to this thread is that not all important insights are of the form "I know how to do that which no one else knows how to do", but rather can be of the form "I know that X, Y and Z that others may know how to do are the crucial things that need to be combined for success." And, it is the latter insights that separates perhaps cool ideas from products that change our life. [1] I have heard from a reliable source that IBM attempted to sell on the basis of reliablity a system to be purchased by all incoming freshman at a large engineering school. The big selling point was that a PC that would be obsolete in 4 years would last 10 years, and you only paid 50-100% more for this.

Sam Midkiff

A better email address than the one given in the message header is: s m i d k i f f aaaat p u r d u e dottttt e d u

Reply to
Sam Midkiff

Who claimed that a catapulted flight was truly a milestone in "powered" flight?

Reply to
Steven P. McNicoll

There are no photos of a catapult at Kitty Hawk.

There are no witnesses to a catapult launch at Kitty Hawk.

The burden of proof is on those that claim the Wrights used a catapult at Kitty Hawk.

Reply to
Steven P. McNicoll

The same applies to Wright detractors.

Reply to
Steven P. McNicoll

Nothing scares me more than ignorant people fighting for what they believe.

Peter Alway

Reply to
PeteAlway

I meant WW I stuff. WW II stuff is mostly conventional -looking.

Peter Alway

Saturn Press PO Box 3709 Ann Arbor, MI 48106-3709

formatting link
scale data at:
formatting link

Reply to
PeteAlway

Not even spiders?

Reply to
Kurt Kesler

businessmen.

What a load of crap. While what the Wrights achieved was more discovery than invention, the first powered, controlled heavier-than air flight was the result of solid research, experimentation, and engineering.

If you're at all familiar with the real story of powered flight you know what you've written here is a deliberate lie.

Reply to
Steven P. McNicoll

Wasn't it the assembly line?

Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!

Reply to
Bob Kaplow

That is going in my quotes file!

Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!

Reply to
Bob Kaplow

ROFL

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

Probably somebody in the Navy. ;)

Alan

>
Reply to
Alan Jones

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.