Vuia in the foto?

Yes you're right. my mistake. I read between the lines and i was refering to a glider built by Wright brothers in 1902, but in this case is out of subject.

The wright plane never took off, it was practicly THROWN in to the air.
Heaving 2 propelors he increased the range. It was the first glider whit engines!

Looks like propaganda is as good these days as it was in thouse days....

"Gravity did the rest and while a rush down the slope was going on the navigator started a small gasoline engine in the floor of the car.
By a system of pulleys and cogs this engine put in motion a six-bladed propeller directly beneath it and another extended horizontally to the rear.
The first is used to maintain the elevation and the other to propell the machine.
Instead of losing elevation when the end of the platform was reached, the machine continued its flight undisturbed and as the under propeller increased its revolutions the machine gradually pointed upward....."

http://www.worldwar2.ro/forum/index.php?sh...indpost&p=50294

A glider with engines is an .... airplane. At the time the problem was not with the means of putting the engined glider in the air, but to find a way to maintain its elevation. That is why the talk about the "heavier than air" machine managing to keep itself in the air.

take care

Imperialist is (w)right. It was an actual engine-powered airplane.

Gen. Dénes

This post has been edited by Dénes on August 12, 2006 08:00 pm

Whose propaganda?
Radu

Probably is refering to fact that some peoples is "the first" ,or "have right" because have the "bigger mouth", and in this case is americans propaganda. I think for some is too much to believe that peoples from small and poor countries is able to build new stuff, or be "the first" in something. In my opinion, the Wright brothers plane was just an "aerodina", a fly object heavy than the air, but not a real airplane. An airplane must take off and landing only with his on-board means, as another members of forum said, the wright airplan was launched with a catapult device, and depending on this, have no wheels or something,and i think was at the half distance betwen Lilenthall "aerodina" and next airplanes types (Vuia, Santos Dumont, and others), who will become the corect concept in the future development of aircrafts. And about the photo, i dont see why not be Vuia there.

What the...?

I will not entertain this kind of speculation.

If you are willing to dismiss the importance of the Wright Borthers' flight just to entertain some paranoid concept of persecution, feel free to do so, but excuse me if I do not want to join you in that.

If on the other hand you have any evidence to substantiate your point, please share it with the world. By the way, "that is what we were taught in school" is not evidence. I remember when we were in school we were taught that Romania never attacked any other country... Errr, Stalingrad? Ah well, that never happened, that is just "propaganda" mon cher!

Radu

First, i dont have any "paranoid concept of persecution" , and dont want to dismiss the Wright brothers flights. I just say that their airplanes was not complete.Look at that photo you provided. The airplane dont have any wheels, was launched with a catapult device, dont take off by himself. And about "we never atack any country" propaganda style, that is not a "Made in Romania" thing. Everyone try to make himself a "better" image, for his own peoples and for others to see, and believe. I will give you another example from aviation "world". Everyones was struck by american program who take a man on the moon, and was impressed by american technology and science, but who know at that time that ex nazis like von Braun and his team researches was behind that succes.

Udar,
let us compare the Wright brothers airplane with Vuia's plane.
If you look carefully at the Wright brother's plane, http://www.thewrightbrothers.org/fivefirstflights.html it has a pair of wings, rudder, elevators and aileron control (by flexing the wingtips) Those are the controls of a PLANE. The Wright brothers are also famous for inventing the wind tunnel. Why did they build the first wind tunnel ever? To explore the physics of lift and aerodynamics. Those guys knew what they were doing, much more than anyone else at the time.

Vuia's "plane" has just a wing that looks like an umbrella and a rudder. http://www.roadabletimes.com/roadables-modular_vuia.html note the absence of all flight controls.

Which one looks more like aplane to you?

The argument that "Vuia's plane had wheels while the Wright brother's plane did not have any wheels and was launched from a catapult" is without a shadow of a doubt the most bizarre argument I ever heard.
By the same logic (or lack of it), an Arado 196, which had no wheels and was launched from a catapult was not a plane! Believe me, it takes more than wheels to make a plane!

Look, I have no problem with Vuia's achievements. I have no doubt that he was the first Romanian ever to fly, but I doubt that he was the first man ever to fly! There is too much evidence to prove the contrary and not enough evidence to substantiate it.

My two cents.
Radu

This post has been edited by Radub on August 14, 2006 03:56 pm

First, about no flight controlls on Vuia plane. You are far from truth, and the photo is not share all about plane. If you "google" a little on romanian sources, you will see that plane have a helm (0.6 mp) in the back, who help him for direction. The helm can be used for orizontal control, and for vertical one exist a rotation device, with a help of a pinion, who turn the helm on vertical position. For control the plane at land and in fly, exist a steering wheel, like the cars one, and another one for vertical control. Another thing, angle of incidence of wings can be modified and even set in time of flight, with a wire steel sistem. About Wright brothers plane, as i say, was not a finished plane. The comparation with a hydroplane like Arado 196 can be done, and cannot. The problem with Arado was that he cant take off normally because has no space for this, was on a ship, and when landing, landing on the sea, this is the reason because have no wheels. The Wrights plane not have because he cant take off normaly, but with a catapult sistem. And about first man who ever fly, i cant remeber his name, but live quite long time before Vuia and Wright brothers, and use an aerostat, a flying apart lighter than air. We must agree what is exactly an airplane. There is many aircrafts who fly, with mans on boards, but is different (space shuttles, rockets, helicopters etc.). About Vuia, i say, like others, that was the first who take off, fly, and landing with a plane using just the onboard means of this aircraft. And i hope my "bizzare"(i see you change the previous words) arguments will not inflame you to much this time, even you like so much the Wright brothers. And sorry for my english, probably i tell you better in romanian my arguments.

Hi Udar,
This has gone a bit off-topic, and even though I am the one who steered the discussion that way, I will stop making any further comments about it.
I think I made my points very clearly.

All I can say is that this discussion has taken a distinct air of surreality that I cannot possibly participate in.

For me, the identity of the first man to fly is a matter of FACT. For others (not everyone, fortunately), that is a matter of OPINION. If you can possibly make a distinction between the two, you are on the right path to an open mind.

Radu

PS I am not inflamed, but rather amused.

I think you are a little soft-headed, or you must sometimes to take off yours "horse glasses" and see the all picture, not just what you are focused. Arguments like <wtf> and believes that others is just crazy peoples who use propagandistic lies is not real ones. About the first mans who ever fly, sorry for you, but was 2 french guys, into a baloon made by Montgolfier brothers, in nov.1783 (interesting thing, the first flyng object used in war was such a baloon, in battle of Fleurus-1794,as observation point, and used such even in time of WW 1). But to come back to topic, and your question, who is the real plane, i will tell you that further development of aviation give you the answher. 99% of actual planes use the power of their own engine to take off, fly, and landing, have a landing gear on pneumatic wheels (even Wrights adopted a Vuia type landing gear for their later models) and is monoplanes (even today is builded planes with "parasol" wings started by Vuia). Come on, in the presentation they make in France, in 1908, the Wrights used the fall of a 800 kg!!! heavy weight from a pilon to help their plane to take off. I dont think this was the way the aviation go on, and this was just 2 years before the first fly of an aircraft equiped with a jet engine (Coanda). This is the reason i said that Wrights plane was an incomplete one, who make just partial mechanical flyght. And to not acuse me again that i use propaganda, i will give you some extracts from "Jurnal of the Aeronautical Society" from London, in his march number, 1956 (50 years celebration of Vuia flight ) :-< At 18 march 1906 is aniversary of the first mechanical fly, aprox. 12 m, done at Montesson, close to Paris, by romanian Traian Vuia>. And another, from the book "Wings in history: Air museums from Europe":- <At 18.03.1906, in Vuia no.1 (Traian Vuia) was the first person who take off from the earth level based only to power of the engine of an aircraft unatached of nothing". The autor of the book, Judene Divon worked at National Air and Space Museum from Smithonian Institution since his opening (1976). I dont know if for you this persons is "on the right path", but you said a good thing, lets stop this endless discusion, is obviously you are a fan of Wrights, i am one of Vuia, and ones of us ignore some things.

Udar,
I am a fan of Wright brothers? Im a not really, but if I were, what is the crime in that? They were the first to successully fly in a self propelled winged aircraft .

Do you think you are the first Romanain that I had this discussion with? Believe me, the brainwashing efforts that were put in to perpetuating this myth would take one of the best deprogrammers in the world to eliminate. Maybe you should remove your blinkers!

The fact that the Wright brothers used a catapult to take off is irrelevant - many aircraft still use that today on aircraft carriers. Assisted take-off is still a part of aviation today. Vuia never got rid of assisted take-off, believe me! All I know is the fact that the Wright brothers FLEW on 17 december 1903 . That is FLIGHT, FLYING, BEING AIRBORNE, SOARING, SLIPPING THE BONDS. Call it what you want, they were the first to do it in a self-propelled winged aircraft. The rest such as take off, landing gear, are just improvements on the concept that they came up with.
As an aside however, I doubt it very much that anyone would have come up with, according to your description, a rudder "that can be turned into an elevator with the help of a pinion" (just goes to show how much you know about aviation )

Coanda is off topic here, but I will indulge you.
He did not fly in a jet plane and did not invent the jet engine either . And if you think hard, you will realise that you knew that all along. If that does not come to you easily, well, here is a hint:
Had Coanda invented the jet engine in 1910, Battle of Britain would have been fought by jet planes !

That is all I had to say about this and no further trolling and baiting will ever bring me back into this pointless discussion!

Radu

This post has been edited by Radub on August 17, 2006 02:04 pm

Radu, it is not a crime to be some one fan. But you seems that choose just what is usefull for you, not the entire. The Wrights was not first man who ever fly, and they was not the first who fly with a plane in modern conception. You are still a little in dark, and you confuse the hidroplanes, or aircraft who take off from a carrier, with Wright plane. First take off like this (with a help of a catapulte)because dont have enough space. The Wright plane take off like this because he cannot in other way. Why you think they rennounced at that thing , an try to make one who take off by himself ? That first plane was just an attempt, a step furhter to the actual planes. About your opinion, about first fly (there must be included here a complete fly, from take off to landing) of a self propelled winged aircraft, i think you are a little in fog here. As i tell you, and this is the opinion of much more and important peoples (as they that i present in my previous reply), the first authentic mechanical fly "tail to nail", was done by Vuia plane. But i see that you carefully ignore theyr words. If you insist that <assisted take off> is the reason that Vuia is not considered, and, as you say, Vuia dont have at all any fly controlls ?, i dont know who knows much about aviation. Even the international admission, at that time and after is a prouve, but you seems to ignore that facts. About Coanda ,yes, there is other discussion (btw, i die for couriousity, what plane ann engine invented and use Coanda ? you seems to be quite informed ), and, as i say in my previous post, i hope that endless discussion will stop, because someones simply cannt see the real facts.