http://www.nasa.gov/exploration/thi smonth/this_month_septem

>>1521027
Oh look, more revisionist lies.

File: smug finn.jpg (54KB, 452x570px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 452x570px

>>1521060
>I know better than NASA

it's nice that paris got to see its first powered flight. three years after the wright brothers did it in america too.

>>1521069
i think so too. it's heartwarming in a way, especially because of how rough they've always had it.

>>1521069
>"guys we can totally fly!"
>one year later they finally make a demonstration
>the plane doesn't even take off
>"guys come back it works now!"
>plane still doesn't take off
>another year later
>"guys it totally works now but we can't show anyone because reasons but it totally works trust us!"

Meanwhile the first airplane flies in Paris, the same place where almost all other aviation progress happened for the 30 years before and after.

>>1521093
The Wright brothers probably did more damage than good in America by suing everyone else who tried to build planes. It's literally the only thing they did for the rest of their careers, lawsuits over patents. Thank God they couldn't do that outside US borders.

>>1521093
>>1521141
that's enough, philippe

>>1521148
>can't even get your Brazilian names straight

LaQueesha pls.

>>1521027
August 07 2016, I successfully completed the first official bowel movement in history.

What's all this ruckus about planes I've been seeing lately?

>>1521182
could be a coincidence. but also, the FBI has software that scours the internet for trends in discussion, chatter, words, phrases, content, discussion and other "buzz" to predict global sentiments, political movements, and terrorist attacks.

probably unrelated

>>1521192
>>1521182
Or, you know, the fact Americans lost their shit because the Olympics opening ceremony included a flight by the 14-bis, the first ever fully working airplane.

>>1521195
>first ever fully working airplane
This argument is based around the wright brothers being shitheads and refusing to show off their aircraft to a large extent.

The wright fliers flew straight, they had genuine control and they didn't dive into the ground like the other aircraft before them.

Although the 14-bis was the first functioning aircraft to fly IN EUROPE, and it was the first flight recorded properly by unofficial parties, the wright fliers did fly first.

>>1521320
The trouble is there's no evidence at all of the Wright brothers achieving sustained or controlled flight prior to their public demonstrations of 1908. We only know they managed hops, like other inventors already did before, not that they could steer their planes or fly for long distances, and they themselves admitted to using a catapult. For more all we have before 1908 is unproven claims, failed demonstrations, and secrecy, and the Wrights were near unanimously considered hacks.

Then their 1908 showing was so impressive that everyone, especially in France, went to the other extreme, and realising that they weren't complete hacks assumed that they must have been telling the truth from the start. But one doesn't prove the other.

>>1521093
>>1521027
The 14-bis used a giant balloon to get off the ground.

Daily reminder that America's achievements only seem impressive because they declare that everything before and after "doesn't count".

>first manned, unpowered flight (gas balloon): France
>first manned, powered flight (airship): France
>first manned, fully controllable aircraft (airship): France
>first manned descent with a parachute: France
>first rigorous study of aeronautics: Britain
>first manned glider flight: Britain
>first manned, controllable, powered heavier than air flight: America
>first manned, controllable, powered heavier than air aircraft to take off without assistance: France
>first international flight: France
>first international heavier than air flight: France
>first commercial airline: Germany
>first non-stop transatlantic flight: Britain
>first four engine airplane: Russia
>first jet plane: Germany
>first supersonic transport: Britain / France

File: 1461671626510.jpg (97KB, 696x462px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 696x462px

>>1521428
yuros are so cute

>>1521394
Incorrect. Santos-Dumont's previous designs had been non-rigid airships, and during initial testing he did suspend the 14-bis from an airship envelope to simulate flight conditions, however the flight demonstration for which it is recognized occurred independently, without being attached to the balloon.

>>1521363
>We only know they managed hops, like other inventors already did before, not that they could steer their planes or fly for long distances
Wut. We have evidence from hundreds of people that the Wrights flew 30 laps around a fucking field in 1905 without stopping

>>1521195
Did they?

>>1521093
>the first non-american airplane flies in Paris
ftfy :)

the rest of your rant is pure butthurt.

>>1521394
That's completely wrong.

>>1521615
Do we really though? Do we really?

>>1521685
It's literally what happened.

>>1521320
And Richard Pearse flew 9 months before the wright brothers did. Just accept it, they get the credit because their work had the most influence, which is fair enough, but they werent the first

>>1522412
Stop with the meme inventors. Pearse achieved an uncontrolled unsustained hop, the same as plenty of other inventors before. The first to achieve that was Felix du Temple in 1876, if this was considered flight then he would be the first one.

The question is who made the first controlled and sustained flight.

>>1522428
1874*

>>1522358
We do.

File: b9c32eb7c299906d0d0ee85711ff9edb[1].jpg (30KB, 427x300px)

30KB, 427x300px

>implying mesoamerica didn't invent powered flight centuries before the western world

>>1521615
If there is so much overwhelming proofs then why does even NASA credit Santos-Dumont?

>>1523100

They don't. They credit them for the flight in Paris.

http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/imagegallery/image_feature_976.html

>On December 17, 1903, two brothers from Dayton, Ohio, named Wilbur and Orville Wright, were successful in flying an airplane they built. Their powered aircraft flew for 12 seconds above the sand dunes of Kitty Hawk, North Carolina, making them the first men to pilot a heavier-than-air machine that took off on its own power, remained under control, and sustained flight.

>>1522516
Then present that evidence.

>>1523250
>12 seconds
>sustained
lmao

>>1523250
>http://wrightstories.com/eyewitness-account-of-first-flight-by-john-daniels/
"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"

>A fucking hill

File: Plane_rear_w_crew.jpg (871KB, 2000x1571px) Image search: [Google]

871KB, 2000x1571px

And yet unlike the 14-Bis, both the Wright brothers and Gustave Whitehead demonstrated powered *controllable* flight at altitudes higher than several inches.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitehead_No._21

>According to Whitehead and a reporter supposedly at the event, the monoplane's longest flight was 60 meters (200 feet) above ground for 800 meters (0.5 miles). These claims are contested. Whitehead did not keep a log book or document his work.

>In an article in the August 18, 1901 issue of the Bridgeport Sunday Herald the reporter states he witnessed a night test of the plane, at first unpiloted but loaded with sand bags, and later with Whitehead at the controls.

>Whitehead's supporters say that he made four flights that day, which resulted in conflicting accounts from different witnesses. The conflicts have been used by opponents of the claims to question whether any flights took place.

>Before his reported 14 August flight, Whitehead was quoted in a 26 July article in the Minneapolis Journal, credited to the New York Sun, in which he described the first two trial flights of his machine on 3 May. Andrew Cellie and Daniel Varovi were mentioned as his financial backers and assisted in the trial flights. The machine was unmanned and carried 220 pounds of sand as ballast and flew to an altitude of 40 to 50 feet for an 1/8 of a mile 650 feet (200 m). According to Whitehead, the machine flew a distance of 1/2 mile 2,600 feet (790 m) during its second test flight for one and one-half minutes before crashing into a tree. He also explained his desire to keep the location of any future experiments hidden to avoid drawing a crowd who might make a "snap-shot verdict of failure".

>>1524241
>literally just a guy telling stories

>>1524738
A guy telling stories in the age before news cameras were commonplace. We have photographs as well, but no moving pictures. It's as credible as Du Mont's claims and they count as primary sources for the sake of academic historiography. You can deny it all you like, but the Wright's flew before Du Mont.

>>1522361
No it isn't, you're just making up assmad lies because you are an asshurt frog.

>>1525447
>It's as credible as Du Mont's claims
Are you retarded?

Santos-Dumont flew in front of a crowd in the middle of Paris with FAI record-keepers and the press present. He didn't just give a fucking interview going "yeah dude I can totally fly".

>>1526825
Are you retarded? The Wright's flew in front of a crowd of a few hundred with the press there three years earlier.

>>1526874
lmao that was two years earlier, and they made two demonstrations but failed to even take off either of those times.

Pathetic.

File: 14-bis_no_campo_de_Bagatelle._Julho_1906_-Museu_Casa_Natal_de_Santos_Dumont-Cropped.jpg (616KB, 2105x1506px) Image search: [Google]

616KB, 2105x1506px

>>1526825
>The first attempt achieved a 5-second flight of about 40 m (130 ft) around 40 cm off the ground, and the second two brief flights of 40 and 50 m (160 ft).
>40cm

"flew"