On 30/04/15 15:10, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 30/04/15 12:08, Simon Brown wrote:
Viable flying machines are a serious breakthrough.

No they are not,. They *were* perhaps a serious breakthrough, but
really all the breakthrough was in fact the petrol internal combustion
engine. Once that existed aircraft were inevitable.

Yes, because of the power to weight ratio - something that fluffy bunny
halfwits cannot comprehend. From time to time, also, one hears of
people imagining we might put steam engines in cars. It doesn't occur
to them to wonder why steam engines are so large.

they aren't. I saw a mamod steam engine smaller than a shoe box...:-)


For powered flight, it also just required a bit of imagination to
realise that one had to copy gliding birds rather than birds flapping
their wings. AISB, people probably knew that such things were possible
in principle at least 100 years before the Wright Brothers. The trouble
with Mr Brown is that he seems to think that no one considered flying
machines and suddenly the Wright Brothers had this lightbulb moment and
next thing you knew, there was a working example.


Well that's how people who have never invented or designed anything
think it happens


Whereas in fact people had been trying, on and off, for years.


And damn near succeeded. Langley's steam powered models were actually
capable of flight if he hadn't just thrown them off the top of a houseboat.

If there is one thing to note about the Wright brothers plane, its that
within 4 years planes started to look like planes have looked ever
since. It was an aerodynamic abortion. And flew despite that, not
because of it.



--
Everything you read in newspapers is absolutely true, except for the
rare story of which you happen to have first-hand knowledge. €“ Erwin Knoll