List of early flying machines

Listing of pre Wright brothers flying machines and work and a analyzation of debates over early flying machine. Heavier then air flying machines included, as lighter then air machines are subject to much less controversy.

The goal is to examine the properties of flying machines, and to list the claims to allow a proper analyzation of all the early flying machines.

Early attempts at flight are the subject of much debate, both for the often sketchy details of machines and people that have vanished away in time and as a matter of pride for some given group, usually a country. Attempts prior Leonardo da Vinci's drawings are not covered, as the main focus is the attempts at gliders and powered aircraft in the decades before and soon after the Wright Flyer. Ancient flying machines, gliders, or balloons if they existed are not generally known about or recorded at any level of accepted validity.

Along with many inventions developed during the Industrial revolution, such as the steam engine, flying machines followed a slow process of study and analyzation by various people but culminated in a pivotal design. Following this pivotal design, development continues but with the benifit a some new breakthrough or a slighty new direction. Who recieves a award for a specific achievment can be difficult to decide with some developments due to the nature of what was developed, the definition of the award, and veracity of claims. Also, if something was invented independently by different people, conflict can arise as well.

The various benchmarks awarded to flying machines are especially vunerable to all these.

Veracity of claims. For a claim to be accepted some proof must be shown, with the level of evidience often tied to the level of proof. Early flying machines, such those that predated the development of practical photography are often doubted for lack of proof, and ancient machines are almost entirely dismissed for a lack of credibility. Recreations or claims made long after events can add confusion to even the more straightforward cases.

Definition of the title can be especially rough for more general titles falling prey to technical definitions verus common usage, or differences between languages. More general titles can be favored for there greater weight, such as a title like 'Father of flight', but could be greatly debated beacasue of being open to interpretation. On the other hand very specific claims can begin to sound trivial, carry less weight, and in being so specific fall prey to debates over accuracy of the claim. What constitutes the most import criteria for a given award is also a matter of debate in early aircraft. Is the the 'oldest ancestor of modern aircraft' the earliest design, the earliest prototype, one that actually flew? The arbitrary nature of many titles will automatically create controversy if its not defined specifically. For example, debates over tallest building tend to break into debates around what constitues a building and what is the most important measure of such structures height. In the same way some records of flying machines can come down to the exact defintion of what, for example, constitues an airplane.

The nature of what was developed is especially important source of controversy for early flying machines. The source of trouble is the transition between what are considered gliders and what are powered aircraft. Just as objects that displace less water then their weight will sink(see buoyancy), objects that displace less then there weight in air sink also. Balloons and other then air craft 'fly' by displacing more then their weight in air to rise, but a flying machine must supply a upward force some other way to remain aloft. Supplying this force requires energy, which brings us to the benchmarks given to the various flying machines. With gliders this energy comes out of potential energy of there height as they trade the energy 'stored' by their height for lift and forward speed (aside from takeing advanatge of air currents).

In powered flight energy comes from fuel stored aboard (or given to) the machine which is turned into lift in some way. For example, in many aircraft gasoline fuels a internal combustion engine which turns a propeller causing forward motion, which in turn allows the wing to generate lift. Also considered to be imporant is the ability in early flying machines to control where the device goes, very imporant for making the device practically usefull.

Anything that falls can trade height for some forward motion, so what becomes ery important with powered flying machines is turning stored energy into lift. With a wing, turning forward motion into lift requires turning energy into forward motion or with helicopters directly into lift. The end result requires a moving airfoil to generate a upward force. A good breakpoint for powered flight in design would be if it can not lose altitude or speed in level flight by turning energy into lift. Unfortunetly such a device could not take off under its own power(barring numeroous compicated exceptions), and such a benchmark would also depends on the conditions of the air, especially the air density. Of course wind conditions can have a big effect as well, with wind from behind extending range and from the front shortenting it (for both gliders and powered aircraft).

Also, for example, a engine could be used to build up speed (as could going down a hill) and then forward speed could be traded for lift while maintaing level flight. Other difficulties include a airplane that derives some lift from attaching itself to lighter then air objects, thus becomeing a hybrid. Other matters expand to other facets of claims. Since claims are event based, the veracity of a claim is thought to be capable of being tested by making a recreation of the event. Unfortunelty, improvements to a new model can be added or removed, weather condition can vary significantly and even things such as the quality of fuel used can effect a recreation attempt. To make matters worse accurate blueprints are usually difficult to find, and for often the bordline designs small changes can have a big effect. The inablilty to recreate exactly results in most attempts being of dubious value to the ultimate credibility of a claim, but regardless, a succsess or a failure can figure heavily in analyzation of a flying machine.

The end result of all this is that it ends up becoming very complicated giveing definitions at the borderline of flying machines that are gliders and flying machines that are powered aircraft. Disputes over important titles, such as 'first powered heavier then air flight' can descend into the particulars of design. More general titles like 'father of aviation' add another layer of complexity by implying a societal effect and a effect on other machines.

Many of titles given to various claims vary from country to county, and indeed among various references and encylopedias - that all use different criteria when considering the validity of a claim, the meaning of the title used, and all the other issues mentioned above. Various advancements are presented here.

Claims after the Wright brothers have not been added yet, neither has more columns that give more information on a flying machine.

(note: table may be not complete, accuracy not guaranteed)



See also: Aviation history, Incidents in Aviation, Milestones in Aviation

External links: [], []