Truth in Aviation History: A Work in Progress





Our blog, "Truth in Aviation History," has been a work in progress. And it continues to be. When we began our research a number of years ago, we never realized how many errors we would discover. It was like opening a Pandora's Box, chock full of aviation misinformation--provable "mis-history." I first cracked the lid when I began looking for answers to why a person as amazing as Glenn Hammond Curtiss, one of the most important aviation pioneers in history, would have so little mention in the many books I found. I might never have questioned this if he wasn't a cousin. The printed history smacked of a kind of mysterious bias or even collusion. There were shelves full of children's stories focused on the Wright Brothers, making certain that our youth believed the Wrights were the greatest pioneers, mainly because they were "the first to fly." That was accepted by all: writers, historians, pilots, even most engineers. It seemed like a religious orthodoxy planted when people are young and malleable. But like everyone else, I, too, accepted that the Wrights were "the first to fly," or at least, the first able to fly. The adult books and the internet, as well, have promoted and continue to promote the Wright doctrine. But in the vast amounts of material, I have since found myriad claims, spins, explanations, contradictions, and outright lies. Now, armed with facts, as we discover them, we are exposing them on this blog.

Moreover, by studying primary documents and many materials published before the 1940's, I found it was Curtiss who was clearly the greater contributor to the establishment and development of aviation in the United States.



He was the first to make a pre-announced public flight in America in 1908. By 1909, he had won the first ever international aviation competition. He sold the first plane commercially in the U. S. He built the first practical hydroplane, the first amphibian, the first flying boat, and introduced the first dual controls. His was the first plane to land and to take off from a ship--major first steps in establishing naval aviation. His plants manufactured more planes during WWI than probably any other, and his beloved "Jennies" trained the world's pilots. After WWI, his NC-4 (Navy Curtiss-4) was the first to fly across the Atlantic. (Lindbergh's was the first solo non-stop)  Curtiss's accomplishments simply go on and on

The great flight of the NC-4 (Navy Curtiss-4), first across the Atlantic
What did the Wrights do? They hindered the development of aviation in their quest to prove that the world and all its aviators owed them for inventing the first airplane to fly--or the first even able to fly. They claimed that everyone used their patent to control their planes and copied their devices. It's simply not true. It is true, as Wright defenders say, that governments of France, Germany, and others provided far more money for the development of aviation in the early 1900's. But the Wright lawsuits put a great chill on aviation in the United States. Curtiss was about the only aviator who was willing to stand up to them. Who would want to take a grant from the government, if any profit plus enormous developmental costs, would be scooped up by the Wrights' claims? What's more, you would be slandered as nothing more than a "patent infringer"

In truth, Wrights had the glory because they claimed they were the first to fly. They claimed they invented the airplane. Soon, because of fortuitous events in their history, including the application of useful political pressures, greed, an infusion of money, manipulation of the press, and support and proselytizing by their fans, the public began to believe them. In fact, much of  the public even today doesn't understand the mechanics of flight, (or the "secrets," as the Wrights called them) nor did their supporters, nor did the law in the form of patent judges. Convincing the public and the courts wasn't so difficult for the Wrights.

A scholar of the Curtiss history, the late Jack Carpenter, stated that Orville Wright was "loose with the truth." Carpenter devoted much of the latter part of his life wanting to re-establish Curtiss's proper place in history; and wrote the books "Pendulum I" and "Pendulum II." But Carpenter himself didn't see many of history's mis-steps. He believed the Wrights on issues that he shouldn't have accepted. He was also eventually rejected by the Smithsonian establishment, as are questioners today. Questioners' books, as a rule, are currently not promoted or accepted in favor of the Wrights.

My curiosity was piqued by Carpenter's remark about Orville's dishonesty. The observation was my take off point of research. I simply looked for competing statements by the Wrights, or provable facts that were contradicted. Then I started looking for unsupported claims that simply had nothing to back them up. Boy, what I found! Many results of the research are now published in "Truth in Aviation History," and the revelations are coming so fast, I  (we) can't keep up with them. Because it's no longer an "editorial we." I am not alone in this blog. There are other credible scholars, who found enough questions in the Wright history that they too were delving into the claims

The current Smithsonian, as it stands, presents history as a democratic process where people, with a degree in history from a biased university linked to their names, can set up a panel and essentially, vote what they believe happened. Thus, the historical narrative becomes, this is what we say happened. We are in agreement. Therefore, this is indeed what happened. Anything else is "conspiracy theory." Questioners are "outliers." But for fair minded people, interested in the truth (not "alternative facts"), history is going to have to be re-studied and re-written
.
There is no doubt that Orville was indeed "loose with the truth." And so was Wilbur. And much of their dissembling can be proven.

Please read, if you haven't already, the latest post about the perspective of the so called "first flight" photo by one of our most appreciated researchers: "Kitty Hawk, a New Perspective."  Following this post will be a study by the same researcher/historian about the Wrights' track used to launch their plane--with its mysterious concavity in the middle.

 Soon to come will be more studies by Joe Bullmer, an expert aeronautical engineer.
See his first article on this blog in his rebuttal to Tom Crouch about the "fourth flight picture."

Poster of the first international aviation meet, 1909


Look for an article soon coming about the first international aviation meet at Reims, France, poster depicted above..

We are also studying who really sent on the telegram claiming the Wrights had flown on December 17, 1903. Who was it really addressed to? We have proven the famous telegram to the Wright's father as portrayed in all the history books, etc., could not possibly have been sent. Read "The Wrights' Telegram to Father: Fact or Fiction?"

There will be more about Professor Samuel P. Langley, whose lengthy scientific research was trashed by the Wrights along with the reputation of Glenn Curtiss and nearly every other aviation pioneer. It appears we are just beginning. Enjoy!

Special note: One of my readers informed me that the contact email address to this blog wasn't working. Please try truaviationhistory@yahoo.com. Also read the companion blogs about Glenn H. Curtiss plus the tragic true story of the Langley Aerodrome. Every blog is a work in progress. We have a ton of information to post.

___________________________________________________________________________________

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

WRight Perspective - Article Three of Four

Pieces of the Wright Puzzle: What Really Happened December 17, 1903. Part I

The History of the Langley Aerodrome: Truth and Deception