>Actually, >>The new version of FS, I'm not too sure if it's well worth >it. I like the modern stuff. The weather looks fairly >awesome, but I feel it's going to be a waste of money. I'm >waiting for the reviews. If the weather turns out like they promote, it _will_ be worth it.I'm an avid FU3 simmer as well as MSFS and until you've experienced the type of dynamic weather modelling that exists in FU3, you just won't know what you have been missing. Here's to hoping that it is as good or better than FU3. If it is, you might enjoy flying those older planes alot more than you do now.-hoo

I am happy:At the time I wright ;) , at least 800 people have heard of Cl

Correct... I should have said 'oldest city'... damn semantics!!"We are a global community today. It's not important which nation does what anymore, but how well we can work together. If you must look back, please don't misrepresent facts to overcome an inferiority complex." --are these your words?I suppose that if you are to talk of what "was" then you might have extended your research to include "L'Anse aux Meadows" perhaps, settled by Vikings in 1000 A.D.?? ;-)

I can't believe that the name Gustave Whitehead hasn't been tossed around in all of this. The Wrights were so afraid that he would be given credit for the "first powered and sustained heavier than air flight" that they struck a deal with the federal government. In order to get the Wright Flyer back into the U.S. and on display, the official stand of the U.S. had to be that the Wrights were first, even though there is sufficient evidence to take the Whithead claim seriously (he first flew in 1901).Tim13

>the Wright Bros. ARE Internationally recognized as >the first to fly a manned, powered craft for a sustained >period of time (vs. a short hop) whilst controlling it.The fact is that there is no "international" consent about this point at all.The ones that said that there is an international consent concerning this issue should rethink their position, because they are the ones that are actually trying to push propaganda.There are more than one country that claims to be the first "to fly a manned, powered aircraft for a sustained period of time".I understand that is normal that each claiming country tries to accommodate the facts in order to create their best version of history...Don't you know that history is written by the hands of the dominants?

While some of their later aircraft used a gravity catapult, the 1903 flyer didn't. The takeoff roll took place with the plane balanced on a cross shaped trolley that used two bicycle hubs as wheels. The plane was accelerated by its bicycle chain driven, counter-rotating props and initialy held level by the other Wright brother. The trolley was left behind on the single rail wood takeoff track when the aircraft lifted off(probably to derail or go off the end).

If you want to take it all the way back, you're going to have to go back to the first person who strapped a kite to his back and jumped off a cliff...

I can understand Henri's feeling here.Orville Wright is too often wrongly stated to be the "first man to fly". Try a search on the internet "First man to fly" and 95% of the results will say it was Orville Wright.However, whenever I come to think about this question, the name "Otto Lileenthal" always springs to mind, as the first man to achieve controlled flight. Otto Lileenthal had been making controlled flights using a glider 10 years before the Wright brothers. I think he made something like 2000 successful flights before he was killed in an accident.The Wright Brothers achievement for me has never been a remarkable one, since it was not based on ingenuity, discovery or invention, but rather on business and design. They were well aware of the countless attempts of other experimental aircraft designs and their short-fallings. This knowledge, and their knowledge of all the technology that existed at the time, and of course money, enabled them to put together something that finally worked.This is something, I think, that USA has been and still is very good at. It's this spirit tha we see in Henry Ford; this spirit that made USA a success I think. But lets not forget the obscure originators and inventors.J

>I can understand Henri's feeling here.>>Orville Wright is too often wrongly stated to be the "first>man to fly". Try a search on the internet "First man to fly">and 95% of the results will say it was Orville Wright.Controlled/powered flight ............ is what they're known for. Anyone with knowlege of history is well aware of this.>The Wright Brothers achievement for me has never been a>remarkable one, since it was not based on ingenuity, discovery>or invention, but rather on business and design. They were>well aware of the countless attempts of other experimental>aircraft designs and their short-fallings. This knowledge, and>their knowledge of all the technology that existed at the>time, and of course money, enabled them to put together>something that finally worked.In other words, they accomplished what others had not. And yes, it certainly WAS based on ingenuity, discovery, and invention. The Wright's had to make numerous revisions to the "then known" calculations of lift & propeller efficiency. It didn't just work with what was known and a few extra dollars.Why do you attempt to explain it away ............as a non-accomplishment?L.Adamson

Without trying to be controversial :). In 1890 Alberto Santos Dumont circled the Eiffel tower in controlled and sustained flight. OK, in a dirigible, which he invented. Yes...a lighter than air craft...again I'm not trying to be controversial, just wanted to add a little info to the thread.Regards,Jay

>I am happy:>At the time I wright ;) , at least 800 people have heard of>Cl

>Controlled/powered flight ............ is what they're knownSaying "the first to achieve controlled/powered flight" is not the same as saying the first to fly. You of all people Larry must appreciate that gliders are the basis of flying, and that's where it began.>for. Anyone with knowlege of history is well aware of this.I have a good knowledge of history thanks, which is why I am able to draw attention to other pioneers.>In other words, they accomplished what others had not.Their airplane certainly performed the first recorded successful powered flight.>Why do you attempt to explain it away ............as a>non-accomplishment?The Wright brothers have their place in history, true, but it seems a pity that they get all the credit all the time, when there are other significant figures and machines in history. I'm not trying to explain it away, I'm just explaining what I've always thought, based on my knowledge of history, as opposed to popular knowledge. Jason

>Saying "the first to achieve controlled/powered flight" is not>the same as saying the first to fly. You of all people Larry>must appreciate that gliders are the basis of flying, and>that's where it began.>And what were gliders good for........... back then? Just some short downhill jaunts and getting your feet off the ground. They proved manned flight was possible, but not useful for getting anywhere. And for many years, gliders still were not capable of getting far. It took new construction methods, materials, and high aspect ratio wings to get sailplanes where they are today. And light weight hang-glider designs didn't appear until the 70's.So yes-------- it was the Wright Brothers who constructed, flew, and documented the first working "airplane" (not glider). One that could actually gain altitude under power. It's been all "uphill" from then!!L.Adamson

Good Morning to all of you,Just wanted to bring some fresh air here as when I saw those nationalistic statements, it seems that we are far from the brave men who pioneered air transport 100 years or more ago !Firstly, I come from Switzerland, a country which did not discovered anything such as planes, cars, boats, space flights, banks (even if we played well on this one..smile), watches (french) or even chocolate (belgium). So how could I be more neutral, smile.........What surprise me in your comments guys, is that those who pioneered air transport had, as a first objective, the strong belief to link people together and to progress for the benefit of the whole mankind...!So who seriously cares if they were Americans, French, English or Germans ? And what about other nations, India, China, Egypt, Mesopotamia ? Are we just leaving on a Western planet ?So let's thank all together Orville, Wilbur, Clement, Otto, Leonardo; Louis, Neil and all those brave guys who had visions for the future of mankind and, indirecly, are enabling us today to enjoy our game with passion.And after all, why not thank as well Microsoft FS team for updating this fantastic game year after year, whatever they write on the box !Cheers to all of youPatrick Geneva

Thanks PatrickBut I just have to say that Nationality was the last thing on my mind when I mentioned Otto Lileenthal. I am British, Otto Lileenthal was German, so if I was Nationalistic then the last thing I'd want to do is give credit to the Germans! Lol!Jason