The Wrights' 1903 Launch: It's All Downhill from Here

Further implications of the impossible perspective visible in the famous “First Flight” photograph.

Ed.note: In this essay, a "Truth" valued editor knocks the ball out of the park.

“The machine was launched from a monorail track. . . This track was laid in a slight depression, which a few days before had been covered by water. We chose this spot because the action of the water had leveled it so nearly flat that little preparation of the ground was necessary in order to lay the track. The starting end of the track lay a few inches below the end from which the machine lifted into the air." 1

Generations of Wright historians have read the above description of the experiments of December 17, 1903 and, unhesitatingly moved on to the next paragraph, which describes the launch trolley. A more appropriate next action might be to exclaim, “What — in the name of sanity — did they think they were playing at?”

 

Most certainly, as the iconic First Flight photograph (above) undeniably shows, the launch rail appears to be “in a slight depression,” for the center is lower than both ends; in other words, it is concave, as the red line indicates.

Green and yellow dotted lines project the line of the rail towards the horizon. Green assumes near and far ends of the rail are at the same height; yellow corresponds to Orville’s statement that the far end is slightly raised. In fact, the difference between the two is negligible.

However, as an earlier blog has demonstrated, there is strong evidence that the launch is being made from the side of a hill, and not on the level, as the Wrights always stated (so that they could claim the first such airplane flight for themselves). To recap: the perspective (of Wilbur’s body against the horizon) is wrong; ground features show the surface falling away beyond the far end of the rail; and two Life Saver helpers, although named as witnesses by the Wrights, agree that they carried the Flyer up a hill for its launches that day.

Consider, further, this picture ( below), used before to illustrate perspective from the Wright Brothers National Memorial, ( US National Park Service).

This time, the reader’s attention is drawn to the replica launch rail set in the ground. Note how a forward projection (red line) hugs the flat ground until it meets the horizon. Now compare that with the First Flight picture, in which projections of the 1903 rail accentuate the falling away of the ground. As all the other photographic evidence shows, the launch rail is part-way up a hill — so a line of theoretical projection travels through the air, and not along the ground.

But that is not all. If it is believed that the rail is on level ground, then its concave shape serves no useful purpose — quite the contrary. Granted, there is a little free “assistance” in the form of a downward roll at the start of the take-off run, but beyond half way the rail angle is up hill, and so it begins to retard the airplane and take back its initial speed advantage. Then, another disadvantage makes itself obvious: In favorable conditions (a wind exceeding 20 MPH) the Flyer will leave the rail at the three-quarter mark, at which point the rail is still rising, thereby reducing the actual altitude of the airplane at precisely the time it is trying to rid itself of Earth’s surly bonds.

 Level, or slightly up hill, the concave launch rail makes no sense at all.

What, however, if it is on the side of a hill? It has already been shown in the previous blog, by reference to the “laws” of perspective, that the rail is pointing downhill. According the Orville’s diary, the natural slope of Kill Devil Hill is a fraction short of 9 degrees. A concave launch rail (in a dip) further increases the gravitational bonus by a degree or so for the first half of the take-off run, then reduces (but by no means eliminates) the downward benefit during the second half.

  What it does do, during this second part of the run, is to sling the airplane away from the hill in the same manner — but by no means on the same scale — as the “ski jump” fitted to some modern aircraft carriers as a catapult substitute.

Concave runway, Chinese style. A J-15 fighter takes off from CNS Liaoning, employing an upturned end to its run

  The altered angle of the second half of the Wrights’ rail does something else beneficial: It suddenly increases the wings’ angle of attack (relative to the oncoming headwind) boosting the upward force they generate. Here, a degree or two makes a big difference, but it is applied only after the airplane has gathered some speed. (Building that increased angle into the frame of the airplane would slow it down during the early stages of the take-off run.) And further, the continuation of the down slope beyond the far end of the rail gives an under-powered airplane some extra grace in which to establish flying speed.

   
On a down slope, a concave launch rail makes a great deal of sense — albeit at the expense of negating any claim to an unassisted take-off from the flat. The cross-sectional drawing (above), which can only be to approximate scale, shows an intelligent use of a concave launch rail.

       Library of Congress (LOC) photograph 00613 (below) depicts the concave hillside launch being employed for the December 14, 1903 “false start,” so confirming that the Wrights appreciated its inherent advantages.  

A view of the  hillside slope of the Wrights' alleged December 14 launch attempt.

Of course, traditional historians will deny there was any such thing as a downward roll for the first part of the launch and then a leveling-out of the track to increase the wings’ lift for take-off.  If they will not accept the present blogger’s word for it, then might the testimony of a respected professional man be more convincing? A man of The Cloth? A bishop, even? Bishop Wright, for example?

In a letter to the Brothers’ friend, Carl Dienstbach, written on December 22, 1903 the Bishop describes the airplane running downhill towards a level section of track and then launching from that. “To get under headway they laid a single-rail track straight down the hill, but began flight from the level.”2

[A] All available topographic, photographic evidence; all relevant witness statements; the testimony of a bishop who happens to be the experimenters’ father; and the application of logic and the principle of incremental experimentation, declare unequivocally that the same “downhill run” technique as on the 14th was employed for the December 17 “flights”.

 [B] The Wrights assert they transitioned straight to totally flat (even slightly uphill) take-offs on the 17th, and immediately achieved complete success.

One of the above two sentences is untrue. Which is it?

______________________________________________________________________

1. Orville Wright, How We Invented the Airplane, ed. Fred C. Kelly (1953) 21

2. Marvin Wilks MacFarland, Papers of Wilbur & Orville Wright, page 399