A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Policy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Wickramasinge at it again



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 12th 10, 02:06 AM posted to sci.space.history,sci.space.policy
Peter Stickney[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 124
Default Wickramasinge at it again

Pat Flannery wrote:

David Spain wrote:

Can anyone comment what the counterweight dropped from the tower was for?
I assume perhaps the prop thrust was insufficient to overcome the
friction in the discardable ground trolley and so that's how they got it
started?


That's exactly what it was for; the weight served to catapult it down
the track. That was one argument used to argue that this really wasn't
the first airplane flight, as it used an assisted means of take-off.


The only problem with that argument is that the Wrights didn't use the
catapult until they started flying from Huffman Prairie, outside of Dayton.
At Kitty Hawk, they used a simple rail, with a small trolley,
The photographs taken at the time clearly show this.


--
Pete Stickney
Failure is not an option
It comes bundled with the system.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Wickramasinge at it again Pat Flannery History 38 February 16th 10 08:05 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.