|
Science Forum Index » Astronomy Forum » D.Y.K? -- Wright Brothers
Page 1 of 1
|
| Author |
Message |
| Painius |
 Posted: Sun Dec 14, 2003 1:03 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
My mind is roving tonight. Came across this while
traveling through time...
Did you know?
When the Wright brothers, Orville and Wilbur, offered
to the United States Army their airplane that launched
powered flight in 1903, Army officals were so skeptical
of the Wrights' claim that they refused to see a flight
demonstration until 1908!
Record-breaking flights by Orville in the U.S. and by
Wilbur in France brought the brothers worldwide fame.
In 1909, the U.S. government accepted the Wrights'
flying machine for army use.
Is your mind roving, too?
--
happy days and...
starry starry nights!
Painius |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| G=EMC^2 Glazier |
| Posted: Tue Dec 16, 2003 7:54 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Hi Painius My mind is always roaming. I think the great innovation for
the airplane was putting in toilets. That's all the shuttle deeded was
airplane toilets and a strong vacuum hose They would save millions of
bucks. What happened to all the pretty stewardess. I think the French
came out with a plane that could fly across the English channel,and it
looked more like an airplane. Now that you have to be at the airport
two hours before flight time,and when you return it is very hard for
some one to pick you up I drive when the distance is less than 800
miles. Bert |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Bill Sheppard |
| Posted: Tue Dec 16, 2003 9:17 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Bill Sheppard |
| Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2003 6:14 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Painius wrote,
Quote: A hunnert years!
Gawd, where we'd be without these two
bicycle-repair dudes?!
Yeah, but it was sad that the Centennial re-enactment on 17 Dec. fizzled
due to bad weather. The replica had already flown successfully before
the 17th, though. oc |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Painius |
| Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2003 10:28 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"G=EMC^2 Glazier" <herbertglazier@webtv.net> wrote in message...
news:13266-3FDF46E0-536@storefull-2352.public.lawson.webtv.net...
Quote:
Hi Painius My mind is always roaming. I think the great innovation for
the airplane was putting in toilets. That's all the shuttle deeded was
airplane toilets and a strong vacuum hose They would save millions of
bucks. What happened to all the pretty stewardess. I think the French
came out with a plane that could fly across the English channel,and it
looked more like an airplane. Now that you have to be at the airport
two hours before flight time,and when you return it is very hard for
some one to pick you up I drive when the distance is less than 800
miles. Bert
Bert, i *still* see pretty stewardesses when i fly. Of course,
they're called "flight attendants" now. Why is it hard to pick
someone up? You just meet them at the security point.
That's what i do, anyway. I park in the garage and take the
elevator to the 3rd floor where the airsides are. Then we
escalate down to baggage, collect the pieces and head
back up to parking. What's so difficult?
My loving and beautiful wife lost a bag when she came
back from the Philipines in July. When it came in on a
later flight, the airlines hustled it out to our house. So even
then, the difficulty was minimal. Have you had any super
hassles at the airport?
--
happy days and...
starry starry nights!
Painius |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Painius |
| Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2003 10:39 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Bill Sheppard" <oldcoot@webtv.net> wrote in message...
news:12908-3FDF5A3A-438@storefull-2356.public.lawson.webtv.net...
'Lo Bill
A hunnert years!
Gawd, where we'd be without these two bicycle-repair
dudes?!
Takin' a bahlloon to the Moon?
--
happy days and...
starry starry nights!
Painius |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Bill Sheppard |
| Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2003 4:15 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Painius wrote,
Quote: Our boys a few days ago were not
willing to take the risks involved in flying
a rickety box in wind and rain.
Actually they did try a takeoff at the appointed time, but were unable
to get airborne. Watching the video, it looked as if the plane didn't
have sufficient headwind, which is imperative for it to take off. The
reason the Wrights had selected Kitty Hawk was for its consistent steady
winds.
Back in Dayton which lacked the winds, they had to
design a catapult system using a drop-weight to launch their planes.
oc |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Painius |
| Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2003 9:02 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Bill Sheppard" <oldcoot@webtv.net> wrote in message...
news:29068-3FE4756E-24@storefull-3172.bay.webtv.net...
Quote:
Painius wrote,
A hunnert years!
Gawd, where we'd be without these two
bicycle-repair dudes?!
Yeah, but it was sad that the Centennial re-enactment on 17 Dec. fizzled
due to bad weather. The replica had already flown successfully before
the 17th, though. oc
Shows you what a difference a race can make. It's my
understanding that the weather was similar on that fateful
day in Dec., 1903. Our boys a few days ago were not
willing to take the risks involved in flying a rickety box in
wind and rain. Orville and Wilbur were racing against
time and Samuel Langley.
'Twas one of the first laps in the race for space!
--
happy days and...
starry starry nights!
Painius
http://painellsworth.net/ |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
