Janes Aircraft - Whitehead as the Father of Flight

Baldeagle · **Posted:** Fri Mar 15, 2013 9:28 pm

...I couldn't resist the horse thing...

And I don't think we expect photos of things that happened before there were cameras...................

As for Whitehead, Tom Crouch at NASM has probably done more research into pioneer aviation than anyone, and I'm happy to take his word, released today:

http://newsdesk.si.edu/releases/did-gus ... t-brothers

http://newsdesk.si.edu/sites/default/fi ... tement.pdf

Again, there were lots of great characters in that era, and some good innovations, but any reasonable study seems to me to show that the Wright Brothers, like 'em or not, were years ahead of anybody else-

-

-

John Dupre · **Posted:** Sun Mar 17, 2013 11:39 am

Thanks, Bald Eagle, I needed that. Whitehead might, just might, have hopped but there is no way he accomplished sustained, controllable flight. If he had why didn't he report and display his success to his backers? As secretive and controlling as the Wrights might have been they understood they could not make claims without proving they could support them.

Cherrybomber13 · **Posted:** Sun Mar 17, 2013 7:59 pm

Question for everyone:
So how does Jane's making this acknowledgement lend to their continued credibility?

Baldeagle · **Posted:** Sun Mar 17, 2013 9:51 pm

Not to be cynical, but it almost seems like a publicity thing. When's the last time anybody talked about Jane's? And now this story is all over the place.

-

TAdan · **Posted:** Mon Mar 18, 2013 1:28 pm

The NASM chimes in on the debate...

http://blogs.airspacemag.com/daily-plan ... the-first/

Cherrybomber13 · **Posted:** Mon Mar 18, 2013 2:28 pm

They simply reprinted the Smithsonian's Press releases

TAdan wrote:

The NASM chimes in on the debate...

http://blogs.airspacemag.com/daily-plan ... the-first/

TAdan · **Posted:** Mon Mar 18, 2013 2:31 pm

Cherrybomber13 wrote:

They simply reprinted the Smithsonian's Press releases

TAdan wrote:

The NASM chimes in on the debate...

http://blogs.airspacemag.com/daily-plan ... the-first/

Thanks Cherrybomber, sorry, I didn't see the earlier links.

Zachary · **Posted:** Mon Mar 18, 2013 2:34 pm

Baldeagle wrote:

Not to be cynical, but it almost seems like a publicity thing. When's the last time anybody talked about Jane's? And now this story is all over the place.
-

Exactly!

I'm not opposed to long-held history being rewritten with factual evidence, but the evidence provided is just not conclusive enough for me to warrant changing my opinion that the Wrights were first.

old iron · **Posted:** Mon Mar 18, 2013 3:23 pm

Quote:

Question for everyone:
So how does Jane's making this acknowledgement lend to their continued credibility?

This is a really good question! While I have not seen the Jane's volume, presumably it is about current (2013?) aircraft of every description. Although volumes from many years ago provide an important historical context, the present volume is not a platform for analysis or revision of ancient history. The staff is I assume chosen for expertise on modern technology, not historical analysis.

Perhaps Baldeagle and I are cynical, but this does seem to be a plea for publicity. From my perspective, it is like a scientist who on little evidence puts out a press release favoriing big-foot or UFOs just to draw attention to himself. Yes that might provide food for thought, but I would also seriously question the credibility of the scientist.

mustanglover · **Posted:** Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:02 am

Fearless Tower wrote:

jmkendall wrote:

As someone else has pointed out; you don't have to have a photo to prove an event. Following the the logic that if there was no photo then it didn't happen then the American Revolution never happened, the War of 1812; The Lewis and Clark Expedition, Custers Last Stand;ect, ect.

Remember not everyone back in the day carried around a camera on their Smart phone. And some people really don't care what other people think. They do it for their own gratification.

Exhibit A - first flight of the DC-3.

Exhibit II - The DC-3 kept flying again and again.

BAJ · **Joined:** Wed Jan 25, 2012 3:14 pm **Posts:** 126

Baldeagle wrote:

...I couldn't resist the horse thing...

And I don't think we expect photos of things that happened before there were cameras...................

As for Whitehead, Tom Crouch at NASM has probably done more research into pioneer aviation than anyone, and I'm happy to take his word, released today:

http://newsdesk.si.edu/releases/did-gus ... t-brothers

http://newsdesk.si.edu/sites/default/fi ... tement.pdf

Again, there were lots of great characters in that era, and some good innovations, but any reasonable study seems to me to show that the Wright Brothers, like 'em or not, were years ahead of anybody else-

-

Certainly its a whimsical delight to hear the Smithsonian putting their weight behind the Wright Brothers being the 1st when for almost 4 decades after the Wrights flew the Smithsonian claimed that Glenn Curtis and the "Langley Aerodrome" was the 1st to fly.

For nearly 15 years from 1928 the original Wright Flyer was actually displayed in Britain at the London Science Museum as the 1st heavier than air aircraft to fly.

And it was only in 1942 that the Smithsonian actually acknowledged the Wrights were first. The Wright Flyer finally being returned from Britain and displayed in the Smithsonian in 1948 as the 1st heavier then air flying machine.

Ah....the dynamics of history

Baldeagle · **Posted:** Wed Mar 20, 2013 8:21 am

Tom Crouch (and the rest of today's NASM) has nothing to do with the Smithsonian of the early 20th century, so while that's a true (and certainly interesting) story, it doesn't seem to me to have much to do with the current debate. "Only in 1942" was, after all, 71 years ago....

-

shrike · **Posted:** Wed Mar 20, 2013 9:23 am

Baldeagle wrote:

"Only in 1942" was, after all, 71 years ago....

-

Or you could say that, for 39 years, when most of the principals were alive and available, they were unwilling to commit to an opinion.

Baldeagle · **Posted:** Wed Mar 20, 2013 9:28 am

But again, what does that have to do with today's debate? Is the suggestion that Tom Crouch and NASM are biased because they are part of the Smithsonian, because 8 decades ago the Smithsonian was biased? (and during that time they certainly were committed to an opinion, just the wrong one)

-

Flying Pencil · **Joined:** Sun May 04, 2008 11:31 am **Posts:** 161

Thinking about this, I am really not surprised at all.

I never heard of Whitehead before this post, but reading the article the facts seem sound.

It is very rare in history for someone to invent something from scratch, most often building from others mistakes or existing theories.

The real issue is the lost history, in this case found.

For sure the WB's did more to advance aviation the others, and even then that first flight was also more a "hop" then sustained flight. Much like the revision of breaking the sound barrier (which still credits Yeager, just acknowledging it had likely happened before with likes of Hoover and possibly accidental by WW2 German jets).

Warbird Information Exchange

Janes Aircraft - Whitehead as the Father of Flight

Who is online