Incomplete theory, less than optimum results... It had only been five years since Orville and Wilbur Wright made their famous flight at Kitty Hawk<http://history1900s.about.com/od/firstflight/a/Wright-Brothers.htm>. By 1908, the Wright brothers were traveling across the United States and Europe in order to demonstrate their flying machine. Everything went well until that fateful day in September that began with a cheering crowd of 2,000 and ended with pilot Orville Wright severely injured and passenger Lieutenant Thomas Selfridge dead.
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 3:00 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: > Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> The Wright Brothers had a theory - it was called the theory of lift. >>> >> ***No, they did not. The theories of lift came in the 1920's, well after >> airplanes had been flying and doing their stuff. >> > > Correct. > > > >> They were the first to understand this process, which allowed them to >>> have the success that was missing when flight was attempted without this >>> understanding. >>> >> ***They were the first to understand the need for roll control, then they >> proceeded to conquer what they called "well digging", which was a control >> reversal problem . . . >> > > That plus a whole bunch of other stuff. That was one of the critical, > final breakthroughs. > > They said the most difficult engineering modeling they did was the > propeller. It is a spinning airfoil. Horrendously complicated, with > different parts of the structure moving at different speeds, and air moving > past as the propeller moves forward. They dealt with compression > and turbulence. They modeled actual performance in equations to within 1% > before cutting wood, according to some sources. That is an ASTOUNDING > accomplishment. Imagine understanding a propeller to that extent before > anyone, anywhere in the world made a real one. > > In 1908 they showed up in Europe with an engine far smaller than their > rivals, yet their machines produced twice more thrust than anyone else's, > because they understood how propellers work. No one else did. The others > were farting around with trial and error methods. That is why most of the > others, such as Ferber, ended up crushed in crashed airplanes. > > I agree with Ed that there is not much chance people will learn to control > cold fusion by trial and error. There are too many permutations and > combinations to try. Not enough years left in our lives. Of course I > recognize the need for a theory to overcome this problem. Funding would > also help. > > - Jed > >
