Wright Flyer.

[JOddino]

It seems to me that the "Consent to Fly Review" should have told them to wait for the right conditions that would allow succes.  But they probably would never get the same conditions because I believe the area has many more objects causing turbulence compared to 1903.  A tough problem.
Jim 
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: RC Steve Sterling 
  To: discussion at nsrca.org 
  Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 8:16 PM
  Subject: RE: Wright Flyer.




  Weather didn't cooperate. In 1903, the Wrights had a 29 mph headwind. In 2003, it was drizzling with little wind that was a tail wind. Makes a real difference!!! No pilot could have flown the original or the replica successfully in those conditions. No fault of the engineers or the pilots-- just fate.

    -----Original Message-----
    From: discussion-request at nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]On Behalf Of JOddino
    Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 5:25 PM
    To: discussion at nsrca.org
    Subject: Re: Wright Flyer.


    I can't believe they wouldn't have a good simulation and therefore know it was going to fly before they spent all the time and effort building it.  Perhaps there is so little margin that if the wind isn't within a very tight tolerance it won't fly.  But they should have known that.
    It seems to me if it had the proper airspeed and angle of attack it would lift off.  I'd love to see a failure analysis performed like we used to do if a missile failed.  Each engineer had to prove his component or subsytem was not the cause.  Guilty until proven innocent.
    Now if you really want to stir things up, what if the conclusion is the original didn't fly?  I wouldn't be surprised if the French are working on proving that right now.
    Jim
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20031219/af35feec/attachment.html