Discussion:
Military Aviation, by Clement Ader (1909)
(too old to reply)
Jack Linthicum
2009-08-27 17:55:08 UTC
Permalink
I just received my copy of an Air Force translation of this seminal
book, written in 1909, which describes, amongst other things, the
aircraft carrier, depth charges and anti-aircraft artillery.

The logic is enlightening. Here is a man who flew his own heavier than
aircraft 50 meters and 100 meters in 1882. He reasons that targets may
be too far from a home base so an aircraft carrier is the logical
answer. He describes a totally smooth deck, raised high enough so the
waves don't effect the airplanes, storage below this flight deck of
the airplanes, an elevator large enough to carry an airplane with
folded wings to the flight deck, at least one aircraft always held
ready for immediate take off in case of a surprise attack. And so
forth.

He sees all air ops done with the carrier moving at speed, even the
very slow planes of 1909 would use all of the landing surface at a
dead stop. He talks of "bulwarks", some form of padded solid barrier
to catch aircraft that go beyond the landing area. He envisions plane
guards, launches running fore and aft to recover pilots who fall from
the sky.

He envisions 100 kg and 200 kg bombs for use against the enemy fleet.
He even states that the aiming point should be below the waterline.
The same with shells. His depth charges seem to have no target in 1909
but certainly did in 1914-8.

A fun book, available for as little as $1.99 from Alibris

There are chapters (he calls them "notes") on aviation subjects:
airplanes, bases, vertical artillery, air lanes, schools, and
strategy. He misses a few rounds but basically describes military
aviation and its naval future pretty well.

http://www.alibris.com/booksearch?binding=&mtype=&keyword=Clement+Ader+Military+Aviation&hs.x=0&hs.y=0&hs=Submit
BlackBeard
2009-08-27 19:14:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jack Linthicum
I just received my copy of an Air Force translation of this seminal
book, written in 1909, which describes, amongst other things, the
aircraft carrier, depth charges and anti-aircraft artillery.
The logic is enlightening. Here is a man who flew his own heavier than
aircraft 50 meters and 100 meters in 1882. He reasons that targets may
be too far from a home base so an aircraft carrier is the logical
answer. He describes a totally smooth deck, raised high enough so the
waves don't effect the airplanes, storage below this flight deck of
the airplanes, an elevator large enough to carry an airplane with
folded wings to the flight deck, at least one aircraft always held
ready for immediate take off in case of a surprise attack. And so
forth.
He sees all air ops done with the carrier moving at speed, even the
very slow planes of 1909 would use all of the landing surface at a
dead stop. He talks of "bulwarks", some form of padded solid barrier
to catch aircraft that go beyond the landing area. He envisions plane
guards, launches running fore and aft to recover pilots who fall from
the sky.
He envisions 100 kg and 200 kg bombs for use against the enemy fleet.
He even states that the aiming point should be below the waterline.
The same with shells. His depth charges seem to have no target in 1909
but certainly did in 1914-8.
A fun book, available for as little as $1.99 from Alibris
airplanes, bases, vertical artillery, air lanes, schools, and
strategy. He misses a few rounds but basically describes military
aviation and its naval future pretty well.
http://www.alibris.com/booksearch?binding=&mtype=&keyword=Clement+Ade...
Does he mention really big wristwatches and white silk scarves?
;)

BB
Jack Linthicum
2009-08-27 19:40:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by BlackBeard
Post by Jack Linthicum
I just received my copy of an Air Force translation of this seminal
book, written in 1909, which describes, amongst other things, the
aircraft carrier, depth charges and anti-aircraft artillery.
The logic is enlightening. Here is a man who flew his own heavier than
aircraft 50 meters and 100 meters in 1882. He reasons that targets may
be too far from a home base so an aircraft carrier is the logical
answer. He describes a totally smooth deck, raised high enough so the
waves don't effect the airplanes, storage below this flight deck of
the airplanes, an elevator large enough to carry an airplane with
folded wings to the flight deck, at least one aircraft always held
ready for immediate take off in case of a surprise attack. And so
forth.
He sees all air ops done with the carrier moving at speed, even the
very slow planes of 1909 would use all of the landing surface at a
dead stop. He talks of "bulwarks", some form of padded solid barrier
to catch aircraft that go beyond the landing area. He envisions plane
guards, launches running fore and aft to recover pilots who fall from
the sky.
He envisions 100 kg and 200 kg bombs for use against the enemy fleet.
He even states that the aiming point should be below the waterline.
The same with shells. His depth charges seem to have no target in 1909
but certainly did in 1914-8.
A fun book, available for as little as $1.99 from Alibris
airplanes, bases, vertical artillery, air lanes, schools, and
strategy. He misses a few rounds but basically describes military
aviation and its naval future pretty well.
http://www.alibris.com/booksearch?binding=&mtype=&keyword=Clement+Ade...
Does he mention really big wristwatches and white silk scarves?
;)
BB
No, but he expects some of his airplanes to have wings that flap. Like
the one on this cover http://www.amazon.com/Military-Aviation-Clement-Ader/dp/158566118X

But weren't wristwatches for fags until WWI?

"..we can count on aviation having its wild aviators, its flying
fools.These will be a scourge capable of producing all sorts of
unseemliness, and perhaps damage, and will be condemned and abhorred
in advance by friends of the new arm and of the sport alike"

BTW: J.D. Martin now pitching for Washington on WGN. Says he was born
in Ridgecrest.
Jack Linthicum
2009-08-27 20:21:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jack Linthicum
Post by BlackBeard
Post by Jack Linthicum
I just received my copy of an Air Force translation of this seminal
book, written in 1909, which describes, amongst other things, the
aircraft carrier, depth charges and anti-aircraft artillery.
The logic is enlightening. Here is a man who flew his own heavier than
aircraft 50 meters and 100 meters in 1882. He reasons that targets may
be too far from a home base so an aircraft carrier is the logical
answer. He describes a totally smooth deck, raised high enough so the
waves don't effect the airplanes, storage below this flight deck of
the airplanes, an elevator large enough to carry an airplane with
folded wings to the flight deck, at least one aircraft always held
ready for immediate take off in case of a surprise attack. And so
forth.
He sees all air ops done with the carrier moving at speed, even the
very slow planes of 1909 would use all of the landing surface at a
dead stop. He talks of "bulwarks", some form of padded solid barrier
to catch aircraft that go beyond the landing area. He envisions plane
guards, launches running fore and aft to recover pilots who fall from
the sky.
He envisions 100 kg and 200 kg bombs for use against the enemy fleet.
He even states that the aiming point should be below the waterline.
The same with shells. His depth charges seem to have no target in 1909
but certainly did in 1914-8.
A fun book, available for as little as $1.99 from Alibris
airplanes, bases, vertical artillery, air lanes, schools, and
strategy. He misses a few rounds but basically describes military
aviation and its naval future pretty well.
http://www.alibris.com/booksearch?binding=&mtype=&keyword=Clement+Ade...
Does he mention really big wristwatches and white silk scarves?
;)
BB
No, but he expects some of his airplanes to have wings that flap. Like
the one on this coverhttp://www.amazon.com/Military-Aviation-Clement-Ader/dp/158566118X
But weren't wristwatches for fags until WWI?
"..we can count on aviation having its wild aviators, its flying
fools.These will be a scourge capable of producing all sorts of
unseemliness, and perhaps damage, and will be condemned and abhorred
in advance by friends of the new arm and of the sport alike"
BTW: J.D. Martin now pitching for Washington on WGN. Says he was born
in Ridgecrest.
Should add two points on Ader's actual aircraft: the pilot couldn't
see out and may not have had any controls.
Daniel
2009-08-27 21:24:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jack Linthicum
Should add two points on Ader's actual aircraft: the pilot couldn't
see out and may not have had any controls.
The pilot could watch through side openings. As for the controls on
the 1897 iteration of his machine, we'll say they remain untested to
this day (bats may disagree):

Loading Image...

Here's the actual piece as it hangs from the ceiling of the Museum des
Arts et Metiers in Paris (a smallish yet very nice museum of
technology):

Loading Image...
Jack Linthicum
2009-08-27 21:33:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Daniel
Post by Jack Linthicum
Should add two points on Ader's actual aircraft: the pilot couldn't
see out and may not have had any controls.
The pilot could watch through side openings. As for the controls on
the 1897 iteration of his machine, we'll say they remain untested to
http://www.ctie.monash.edu.au/hargrave/images/eole_construction1_500.jpg
Here's the actual piece as it hangs from the ceiling of the Museum des
Arts et Metiers in Paris (a smallish yet very nice museum of
http://www.ctie.monash.edu.au/hargrave/images/avion3cnam4_500.jpg
On his first run his assistant said there are no tire tracks for about
50 meters you must have been airborne. The French cagily make Adel
"the first man to take off in a heavier than air flight".
Daniel
2009-08-27 21:49:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jack Linthicum
Post by Daniel
Post by Jack Linthicum
Should add two points on Ader's actual aircraft: the pilot couldn't
see out and may not have had any controls.
The pilot could watch through side openings. As for the controls on
the 1897 iteration of his machine, we'll say they remain untested to
http://www.ctie.monash.edu.au/hargrave/images/eole_construction1_500.jpg
Here's the actual piece as it hangs from the ceiling of the Museum des
Arts et Metiers in Paris (a smallish yet very nice museum of
http://www.ctie.monash.edu.au/hargrave/images/avion3cnam4_500.jpg
On his first run his assistant said there are no tire tracks for about
50 meters you must have been airborne. The French cagily make Adel
"the first man to take off in a heavier than air flight".
Yes, and claims of hundred meters hops as well, made by Ader himself
and attending military officers, which would be hard to discard. Yet
the Wright Brothers swiftly moved across the pond and brilliantly and
repeatedly demoed in public what *controlled* flight ought to be. So
in all fairness, nobody really disputes their claim, they are as
respected as Lindbergh is.

PS/ Ever since the day Man first flew in a heavier than air, France
has two celebration dates: twice the opportunity to party :-)
k***@cix.compulink.co.uk
2009-08-28 07:08:20 UTC
Permalink
In article
Post by Daniel
nobody really disputes their claim, they are as
respected as Lindbergh is.
And everybody forgets Alcott and Brown who managed the first non stop
trans Atlantic flight in an open cockpit. Caveat that is from memory and
like I said everybody forgets.

Ken Young
Alan Dicey
2009-08-28 08:53:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by k***@cix.compulink.co.uk
And everybody forgets Alcott and Brown who managed the first non stop
trans Atlantic flight in an open cockpit. Caveat that is from memory and
like I said everybody forgets.
Alcock and Brown. Not everybody forgets.

http://www.aviation-history.com/airmen/alcock.htm
http://www.century-of-flight.net/Aviation%20history/daredevils/Atlantic%202.htm
Daniel
2009-08-28 09:44:47 UTC
Permalink
Alcock and Brown.  Not everybody forgets.
I wrongly assumed those earlier crossings were made with refueling
stops, but no, they made it non-stop in 1919. Now I wonder why they
don't get more credit for it (a voice keeps telling me Brits are no
good in marketing :-)

Thanks for that second link, great easy read (read "Potez biplane",
not Poletz for the '25 attempt, Coli died in the '27 attempt).
Jack Linthicum
2009-08-28 10:13:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Daniel
Alcock and Brown.  Not everybody forgets.
I wrongly assumed those earlier crossings were made with refueling
stops, but no, they made it non-stop in 1919. Now I wonder why they
don't get more credit for it (a voice keeps telling me Brits are no
good in marketing :-)
Thanks for that second link, great easy read (read "Potez biplane",
not Poletz for the '25 attempt, Coli died in the '27 attempt).
Fame, the prize was for New York-Paris not Newfoundland-Ireland. There
was a race to do even that with several other planes, including the
U.S. Navy NCs (to bring this into pure naval). Allcott and Brown got
10k pounds for their trip. About $44,000 in then dollars but probably
nearer $400,000. Lindbergh's Orteig Prize was $25,000.

http://hubpages.com/hub/U_S_Navy_NC_4_First_Plane_to_Cross_the_Atlantic_Ocean
Alan Dicey
2009-08-28 13:20:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Daniel
Post by Alan Dicey
Alcock and Brown. Not everybody forgets.
I wrongly assumed those earlier crossings were made with refueling
stops, but no, they made it non-stop in 1919. Now I wonder why they
don't get more credit for it (a voice keeps telling me Brits are no
good in marketing :-)
A replica of the Alcock and Brown Vimy repeated the crossing in 2005.

http://www.vimy.org/
Jack Linthicum
2009-08-28 13:31:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Dicey
Post by Daniel
Alcock and Brown.  Not everybody forgets.
I wrongly assumed those earlier crossings were made with refueling
stops, but no, they made it non-stop in 1919. Now I wonder why they
don't get more credit for it (a voice keeps telling me Brits are no
good in marketing :-)
A replica of the Alcock and Brown Vimy repeated the crossing in 2005.
http://www.vimy.org/
Original engines?
Daniel
2009-08-28 13:36:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jack Linthicum
Post by Alan Dicey
Post by Daniel
Alcock and Brown.  Not everybody forgets.
I wrongly assumed those earlier crossings were made with refueling
stops, but no, they made it non-stop in 1919. Now I wonder why they
don't get more credit for it (a voice keeps telling me Brits are no
good in marketing :-)
A replica of the Alcock and Brown Vimy repeated the crossing in 2005.
http://www.vimy.org/
Original engines?
was about to ask same, and what would have happened had they lost just
one out of 4?
Jim H.
2009-08-28 13:55:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Daniel
Post by Jack Linthicum
Post by Alan Dicey
Post by Daniel
Alcock and Brown.  Not everybody forgets.
I wrongly assumed those earlier crossings were made with refueling
stops, but no, they made it non-stop in 1919. Now I wonder why they
don't get more credit for it (a voice keeps telling me Brits are no
good in marketing :-)
A replica of the Alcock and Brown Vimy repeated the crossing in 2005.
http://www.vimy.org/
Original engines?
was about to ask same, and what would have happened had they lost just
one out of 4?
The text of the Vimy.org repro's web site says it used a pair of Chevy
454's...7.4L? Modern big block V-8's, camo'd to look like the
originals.

Jim H.
Peter Skelton
2009-08-28 13:55:43 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 06:36:29 -0700 (PDT), Daniel
Post by Daniel
Post by Jack Linthicum
Post by Alan Dicey
Post by Daniel
Alcock and Brown.  Not everybody forgets.
I wrongly assumed those earlier crossings were made with refueling
stops, but no, they made it non-stop in 1919. Now I wonder why they
don't get more credit for it (a voice keeps telling me Brits are no
good in marketing :-)
A replica of the Alcock and Brown Vimy repeated the crossing in 2005.
http://www.vimy.org/
Original engines?
was about to ask same, and what would have happened had they lost just
one out of 4?
Presumably they'd have fired the fitting crew, it being a twin &
all.


Peter Skelton
Andrew Robert Breen
2009-08-28 14:02:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Daniel
Post by Jack Linthicum
Post by Alan Dicey
Post by Daniel
Alcock and Brown.  Not everybody forgets.
I wrongly assumed those earlier crossings were made with refueling
stops, but no, they made it non-stop in 1919. Now I wonder why they
don't get more credit for it (a voice keeps telling me Brits are no
good in marketing :-)
A replica of the Alcock and Brown Vimy repeated the crossing in 2005.
http://www.vimy.org/
Original engines?
was about to ask same, and what would have happened had they lost just
one out of 4?
Same as if they lost one out of two (the Vimy is/was a twin). It descends
slowly but surely..
--
Andy Breen ~ Not speaking on behalf of the University of Wales, Aberystwyth
Feng Shui: an ancient oriental art for extracting
money from the gullible (Martin Sinclair)
Andrew Robert Breen
2009-08-28 14:02:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jack Linthicum
Post by Alan Dicey
Post by Daniel
Alcock and Brown.  Not everybody forgets.
I wrongly assumed those earlier crossings were made with refueling
stops, but no, they made it non-stop in 1919. Now I wonder why they
don't get more credit for it (a voice keeps telling me Brits are no
good in marketing :-)
A replica of the Alcock and Brown Vimy repeated the crossing in 2005.
http://www.vimy.org/
Original engines?
No - adapted modern car engines. BMW and Chevrolet engines were both tried
at one time or another in the replica, and none of them were found fully
satisfactory. From articles I've read on the Vimy replica, inc. comments from the
pilots, there seemed to be a strong feeling that they'd have been better off
using RR Eagles - if only they could have found a stock of zero-hour Eagles
(which was pretty unlikely...).
--
Andy Breen ~ Not speaking on behalf of the University of Wales, Aberystwyth
Feng Shui: an ancient oriental art for extracting
money from the gullible (Martin Sinclair)
dott.Piergiorgio
2009-08-29 12:56:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andrew Robert Breen
No - adapted modern car engines. BMW and Chevrolet engines were both tried
at one time or another in the replica, and none of them were found fully
satisfactory. From articles I've read on the Vimy replica, inc. comments from the
pilots, there seemed to be a strong feeling that they'd have been better off
using RR Eagles - if only they could have found a stock of zero-hour Eagles
(which was pretty unlikely...).
If one want to redo a "crazy man in flying machine" feat, and isn'
crazy, the most paramount anachronism one should do is the use of modern
and, more important, much more reliable engine(s)....

Aside that not few early aero engines has only two throttle setting: 0%
and 100%...

Best regards from Italy,
Dott. Piergiorgio.
Alan Dicey
2009-08-28 14:15:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jack Linthicum
Post by Alan Dicey
Post by Daniel
Post by Alan Dicey
Alcock and Brown. Not everybody forgets.
I wrongly assumed those earlier crossings were made with refueling
stops, but no, they made it non-stop in 1919. Now I wonder why they
don't get more credit for it (a voice keeps telling me Brits are no
good in marketing :-)
A replica of the Alcock and Brown Vimy repeated the crossing in 2005.
http://www.vimy.org/
Original engines?
No, BMW M73 V12's. Slightly less power (320 vs 360 hp) as standard than
the original Rolls-Royce Eagles, but considerably better reliability
(necessary for flight certification, I'd imagine) and better fuel
consumption too, I'd guess: the Eagle is a 20 litre engine, the BMW 5.4
litres :-).

It's a replica but not a duplicate.
Keith Willshaw
2009-08-28 14:41:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Dicey
Post by Jack Linthicum
Post by Alan Dicey
Post by Daniel
Post by Alan Dicey
Alcock and Brown. Not everybody forgets.
I wrongly assumed those earlier crossings were made with refueling
stops, but no, they made it non-stop in 1919. Now I wonder why they
don't get more credit for it (a voice keeps telling me Brits are no
good in marketing :-)
A replica of the Alcock and Brown Vimy repeated the crossing in 2005.
http://www.vimy.org/
Original engines?
No, BMW M73 V12's. Slightly less power (320 vs 360 hp) as standard than
the original Rolls-Royce Eagles, but considerably better reliability
(necessary for flight certification, I'd imagine) and better fuel
consumption too, I'd guess: the Eagle is a 20 litre engine, the BMW 5.4
litres :-).
It's a replica but not a duplicate.
The web site says ORENDA OE 600's

http://www.vimy.org/vimyinfo/buildingthevimy/statistics.html

Keith
Alan Dicey
2009-08-28 15:07:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Keith Willshaw
Post by Alan Dicey
Post by Jack Linthicum
Post by Alan Dicey
Post by Daniel
Post by Alan Dicey
Alcock and Brown. Not everybody forgets.
I wrongly assumed those earlier crossings were made with refueling
stops, but no, they made it non-stop in 1919. Now I wonder why they
don't get more credit for it (a voice keeps telling me Brits are no
good in marketing :-)
A replica of the Alcock and Brown Vimy repeated the crossing in 2005.
http://www.vimy.org/
Original engines?
No, BMW M73 V12's. Slightly less power (320 vs 360 hp) as standard than
the original Rolls-Royce Eagles, but considerably better reliability
(necessary for flight certification, I'd imagine) and better fuel
consumption too, I'd guess: the Eagle is a 20 litre engine, the BMW 5.4
litres :-).
It's a replica but not a duplicate.
The web site says ORENDA OE 600's
http://www.vimy.org/vimyinfo/buildingthevimy/statistics.html
Keith
Ah, they must have been installed in 2001 after BMW decided that the
likelyhood of US product liability lawsuits was too great for them to
risk. The England-Australia and England- South Africa flights were made
with the BMW engines.
Keith Willshaw
2009-08-28 15:14:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Dicey
Post by Keith Willshaw
Post by Alan Dicey
Post by Jack Linthicum
Post by Alan Dicey
Post by Daniel
Post by Alan Dicey
Alcock and Brown. Not everybody forgets.
I wrongly assumed those earlier crossings were made with refueling
stops, but no, they made it non-stop in 1919. Now I wonder why they
don't get more credit for it (a voice keeps telling me Brits are no
good in marketing :-)
A replica of the Alcock and Brown Vimy repeated the crossing in 2005.
http://www.vimy.org/
Original engines?
No, BMW M73 V12's. Slightly less power (320 vs 360 hp) as standard than
the original Rolls-Royce Eagles, but considerably better reliability
(necessary for flight certification, I'd imagine) and better fuel
consumption too, I'd guess: the Eagle is a 20 litre engine, the BMW 5.4
litres :-).
It's a replica but not a duplicate.
The web site says ORENDA OE 600's
http://www.vimy.org/vimyinfo/buildingthevimy/statistics.html
Keith
Ah, they must have been installed in 2001 after BMW decided that the
likelyhood of US product liability lawsuits was too great for them to
risk. The England-Australia and England- South Africa flights were made
with the BMW engines.
I dug a little further and found a link that explains its

http://www.vimy.org/newsandevents/projectupdates/18July01.html

<Quote>

The Vicker's Vimy replica has been grounded in Mesa, AZ because of legal
action initiated by BMW Corporation of Munich, Germany

...
The Vimy is powered by a pair of BMW M73 V12 engines. Although the replica
has successfully flown many flight hours from England to Cape Town, South
Africa with these engines, BMW Corporation does not want the aircraft to fly
with BMW engines in the United States because of potential product liability
lawsuits.

Even though the Vimy passed a surprise FAA airworthiness inspection
requested by BMW attorneys in Santa Monica, CA on July 13th, a Los Angeles,
CA judge issued an order yesterday to ground the aircraft.

</Quote>

What a bunch of a**holes (IMHO)

Keith
Keith Willshaw
2009-08-28 14:39:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jack Linthicum
Post by Alan Dicey
A replica of the Alcock and Brown Vimy repeated the crossing in 2005.
http://www.vimy.org/
Original engines?
Modern ORENDA OE 600 engines IRC

Keith
Jack Linthicum
2009-08-28 14:48:20 UTC
Permalink
On Aug 28, 10:39 am, "Keith Willshaw"
Post by Keith Willshaw
Post by Jack Linthicum
Post by Alan Dicey
A replica of the Alcock and Brown Vimy repeated the crossing in 2005.
http://www.vimy.org/
Original engines?
Modern ORENDA OE 600 engines IRC
Keith
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2006/09/05/208848/trace-to-restart-orenda-oe-600-v8-piston-engine-production.html

http://www.atlanticcanadaaviation.com/newslet/summer2005/summer2005.pdf

page 6
Daniel
2009-08-28 15:53:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Keith Willshaw
Modern ORENDA OE 600 engines IRC
Keith
Seems so, but could be anything as the temporary certificate lists
unknown engine:
http://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/NNum_Results.aspx?NNumbertxt=N71MY

Having that engine would probably allow single-engine operation
though, it's double the output.
They were only slightly less nuts than the original pioneers.
BlackBeard
2009-08-27 20:36:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jack Linthicum
BTW: J.D. Martin now pitching for Washington on WGN. Says he was born
in Ridgecrest.
Yep, a graduate of our local HS. I know some members of his family,
they are a large one. His Dad coached little league for a decade or
so. A couple of his uncles are avid golfers that I got to know quite
well, and I coached his cousin Julie- she was one of my daughter's
best friends. The majority of the family are stand-out athletes.
His second cousin is the base historian that I have shared the
occasional beverage or cigar with for the last 22 years or so. But
I've never actually spoken with JD himself.

BB
Jack Linthicum
2009-08-27 20:43:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by BlackBeard
Post by Jack Linthicum
BTW: J.D. Martin now pitching for Washington on WGN. Says he was born
in Ridgecrest.
Yep, a graduate of our local HS. I know some members of his family,
they are a large one.  His Dad coached little league for a decade or
so.  A couple of his uncles are avid golfers that I got to know quite
well, and I coached his cousin Julie- she was one of my daughter's
best friends.  The majority of the family are stand-out athletes.
 His second cousin is the base historian that I have shared the
occasional beverage or cigar with for the last 22 years or so. But
I've never actually spoken with JD himself.
BB
The Burroughs Burros, IIRC. One of my Dad's Hi-Y boys (c. 1943) was
principal for a few years. Bill Moore.
BlackBeard
2009-08-27 22:20:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jack Linthicum
Post by BlackBeard
Post by Jack Linthicum
BTW: J.D. Martin now pitching for Washington on WGN. Says he was born
in Ridgecrest.
Yep, a graduate of our local HS. I know some members of his family,
they are a large one.  His Dad coached little league for a decade or
so.  A couple of his uncles are avid golfers that I got to know quite
well, and I coached his cousin Julie- she was one of my daughter's
best friends.  The majority of the family are stand-out athletes.
 His second cousin is the base historian that I have shared the
occasional beverage or cigar with for the last 22 years or so. But
I've never actually spoken with JD himself.
BB
The Burroughs Burros, IIRC. One of my Dad's Hi-Y boys (c. 1943) was
principal for a few years. Bill Moore.
Correct, it's where I coach softball. It was established in 1945.
Was he married to Belva Moore? If so his name is well recognized
around town. If he is come other Bill Moore then I'm lost. He is not
listed as a previous principal.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_E_Burroughs_High_School

BB
Jack Linthicum
2009-08-27 22:40:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jack Linthicum
Post by BlackBeard
Post by Jack Linthicum
BTW: J.D. Martin now pitching for Washington on WGN. Says he was born
in Ridgecrest.
Yep, a graduate of our local HS. I know some members of his family,
they are a large one.  His Dad coached little league for a decade or
so.  A couple of his uncles are avid golfers that I got to know quite
well, and I coached his cousin Julie- she was one of my daughter's
best friends.  The majority of the family are stand-out athletes.
 His second cousin is the base historian that I have shared the
occasional beverage or cigar with for the last 22 years or so. But
I've never actually spoken with JD himself.
BB
The Burroughs Burros, IIRC. One of my Dad's Hi-Y boys (c. 1943) was
principal for a few years. Bill Moore.
Correct, it's where I coach softball.  It was established in 1945.
Was he married to Belva Moore?  If so his name is well recognized
around town.  If he is come other Bill Moore then I'm lost.  He is not
listed as a previous principal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_E_Burroughs_High_School
BB
That's what we were told. He was a 6 4 plus center on Whittier
College's team in the late 1940s. I may be mistaken about the
principal bit. A lot of the China Lake staff at that time had
graduated from my parents' college, Southwestern of Kansas. They had
an annual picnic that scattered news in both directions.

The Whittier College Hall of Fame

Class of 1991
George Hightomer '78 -- Basketball
R. Patrick Mathews '81 -- Swimming
William Moore '49 -- Basketball
Nani Nielsen '81 -- Volleyball, Swimming
Josie Pettross (Candela) '81 -- Cross Country, Track & Field
BlackBeard
2009-08-28 01:10:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jack Linthicum
Post by Jack Linthicum
Post by BlackBeard
Post by Jack Linthicum
BTW: J.D. Martin now pitching for Washington on WGN. Says he was born
in Ridgecrest.
Yep, a graduate of our local HS. I know some members of his family,
they are a large one.  His Dad coached little league for a decade or
so.  A couple of his uncles are avid golfers that I got to know quite
well, and I coached his cousin Julie- she was one of my daughter's
best friends.  The majority of the family are stand-out athletes.
 His second cousin is the base historian that I have shared the
occasional beverage or cigar with for the last 22 years or so. But
I've never actually spoken with JD himself.
BB
The Burroughs Burros, IIRC. One of my Dad's Hi-Y boys (c. 1943) was
principal for a few years. Bill Moore.
Correct, it's where I coach softball.  It was established in 1945.
Was he married to Belva Moore?  If so his name is well recognized
around town.  If he is come other Bill Moore then I'm lost.  He is not
listed as a previous principal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_E_Burroughs_High_School
BB
That's what we were told. He was a 6 4 plus center on Whittier
College's team in the late 1940s. I may be mistaken about the
principal bit. A lot of the China Lake staff at that time had
graduated from my parents' college, Southwestern of Kansas. They had
an annual picnic that scattered news in both directions.
The Whittier College Hall of Fame
Class of 1991
George Hightomer '78 -- Basketball
R. Patrick Mathews '81 -- Swimming
William Moore '49 -- Basketball
Nani Nielsen '81 -- Volleyball, Swimming
Josie Pettross (Candela) '81 -- Cross Country, Track & Field
Wife says Bill was the basketball coach at Burroughs for many years.
(She grew up here.)
SWK had their era, UNM and New Mexico State had a long run. When I
got here UM- Rolla and KU were heavily recruited.
The last ten years or so we've harvested a lot of Texas schools, UT
and A&M. Cal Tech has always been fertile ground because of the close
association (undergrads and grad-students working on connected
projects through our research dept.) It seems to go in waves- about
5-8 years ago most of the guys retiring were all from New Mexico.

BB
Dennis
2009-08-28 04:01:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jack Linthicum
The logic is enlightening. Here is a man who flew his own heavier
than aircraft 50 meters and 100 meters in 1882.
If this were true, it would seem that he preceded the Wright
brothers by about 20 years!

From French Wiki:

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cl%C3%A9ment_Ader

The following tests by Ader were performed at the military camp of
Satory, which had established a circular area of 450 m in diameter in
order to make a formal demonstration.

On October 12, 1897, Ader made a first round of the circuit aboard his
Avion III. Several times he felt the aircraft leave the ground, then
make contact again.

Two days later, when the wind was strong, Clement Ader launched his
machine in front of two officials of the Ministry of War who said after
the demonstration: "But it was easy to establish from the trace of the
wheels that the aircraft had frequently raised the rear and the rear
wheel forming the rudder had not been constantly on the ground. ... The
two members of the committee saw it suddenly leave the track, describing
a half-conversion, lean on its side and finally stand still "(it seems
that, the wheels lacking enough grip because of the lift, the pilot lost
directional control of his machine, which then left the track and
overturned in the wind).

To the question "... did the aircraft tend to rise when it was launched
at a certain speed? The answer is" ... proof .. was not established in
the two experiments were carried out on the field "[9]. It can be
concluded that on October 14, 1897, the Frenchman Clement Ader might have
made a motorized takeoff - but not a controlled heavier than air flight.
The Department of War continued to fund Ader, who was forced to halt
construction of his prototype (the Aeolus had cost 200 000 francs at the
time, or nearly 8 million euros).
Ray O'Hara
2009-08-28 06:43:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dennis
Post by Jack Linthicum
The logic is enlightening. Here is a man who flew his own heavier
than aircraft 50 meters and 100 meters in 1882.
If this were true, it would seem that he preceded the Wright
brothers by about 20 years!
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cl%C3%A9ment_Ader
The following tests by Ader were performed at the military camp of
Satory, which had established a circular area of 450 m in diameter in
order to make a formal demonstration.
On October 12, 1897, Ader made a first round of the circuit aboard his
Avion III. Several times he felt the aircraft leave the ground, then
make contact again.
Two days later, when the wind was strong, Clement Ader launched his
machine in front of two officials of the Ministry of War who said after
the demonstration: "But it was easy to establish from the trace of the
wheels that the aircraft had frequently raised the rear and the rear
wheel forming the rudder had not been constantly on the ground. ... The
two members of the committee saw it suddenly leave the track, describing
a half-conversion, lean on its side and finally stand still "(it seems
that, the wheels lacking enough grip because of the lift, the pilot lost
directional control of his machine, which then left the track and
overturned in the wind).
To the question "... did the aircraft tend to rise when it was launched
at a certain speed? The answer is" ... proof .. was not established in
the two experiments were carried out on the field "[9]. It can be
concluded that on October 14, 1897, the Frenchman Clement Ader might have
made a motorized takeoff - but not a controlled heavier than air flight.
The Department of War continued to fund Ader, who was forced to halt
construction of his prototype (the Aeolus had cost 200 000 francs at the
time, or nearly 8 million euros).
did the wrights know about him and did they gain any usefel info from his
attempts, if yes then he helped the game along.
Daniel
2009-08-28 08:37:52 UTC
Permalink
 To the question "... did the aircraft tend to rise when it was launched
at a certain speed? The answer is" ... proof .. was not established in
the two experiments were carried out on the field "[9]. It can be
concluded that on October 14, 1897, the Frenchman Clement Ader might have
made a motorized takeoff - but not a controlled heavier than air flight.
The Department of War continued to fund Ader, who was forced to halt
construction of his prototype (the Aeolus had cost 200 000 francs at the
time, or nearly 8 million euros).
Right, so the crash occurred on the 14th and trials started on the
12th...
Anyways, there's one piece of equipment sitting next to the preserved
Eole and that's the Cugnot self propelled vehicle of 1769 using a
Papin steam engine. The power train is worth a close look at. You'll
also see a bunch of lab equipment including Lavoisier's. A whole
collection of incredible stuff there and the most stimulating visit
you could do in Paris.
Peter Skelton
2009-08-27 23:12:39 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 12:14:01 -0700 (PDT), BlackBeard
Post by BlackBeard
Post by Jack Linthicum
I just received my copy of an Air Force translation of this seminal
book, written in 1909, which describes, amongst other things, the
aircraft carrier, depth charges and anti-aircraft artillery.
The logic is enlightening. Here is a man who flew his own heavier than
aircraft 50 meters and 100 meters in 1882. He reasons that targets may
be too far from a home base so an aircraft carrier is the logical
answer. He describes a totally smooth deck, raised high enough so the
waves don't effect the airplanes, storage below this flight deck of
the airplanes, an elevator large enough to carry an airplane with
folded wings to the flight deck, at least one aircraft always held
ready for immediate take off in case of a surprise attack. And so
forth.
He sees all air ops done with the carrier moving at speed, even the
very slow planes of 1909 would use all of the landing surface at a
dead stop. He talks of "bulwarks", some form of padded solid barrier
to catch aircraft that go beyond the landing area. He envisions plane
guards, launches running fore and aft to recover pilots who fall from
the sky.
He envisions 100 kg and 200 kg bombs for use against the enemy fleet.
He even states that the aiming point should be below the waterline.
The same with shells. His depth charges seem to have no target in 1909
but certainly did in 1914-8.
A fun book, available for as little as $1.99 from Alibris
airplanes, bases, vertical artillery, air lanes, schools, and
strategy. He misses a few rounds but basically describes military
aviation and its naval future pretty well.
http://www.alibris.com/booksearch?binding=&mtype=&keyword=Clement+Ade...
Does he mention really big wristwatches and white silk scarves?
;)
Wrist watches were developed to meet the needs of trench warfare
in WWI.

Peter Skelton
BlackBeard
2009-08-28 00:58:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Skelton
On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 12:14:01 -0700 (PDT), BlackBeard
Post by BlackBeard
Post by Jack Linthicum
I just received my copy of an Air Force translation of this seminal
book, written in 1909, which describes, amongst other things, the
aircraft carrier, depth charges and anti-aircraft artillery.
The logic is enlightening. Here is a man who flew his own heavier than
aircraft 50 meters and 100 meters in 1882. He reasons that targets may
be too far from a home base so an aircraft carrier is the logical
answer. He describes a totally smooth deck, raised high enough so the
waves don't effect the airplanes, storage below this flight deck of
the airplanes, an elevator large enough to carry an airplane with
folded wings to the flight deck, at least one aircraft always held
ready for immediate take off in case of a surprise attack. And so
forth.
He sees all air ops done with the carrier moving at speed, even the
very slow planes of 1909 would use all of the landing surface at a
dead stop. He talks of "bulwarks", some form of padded solid barrier
to catch aircraft that go beyond the landing area. He envisions plane
guards, launches running fore and aft to recover pilots who fall from
the sky.
He envisions 100 kg and 200 kg bombs for use against the enemy fleet.
He even states that the aiming point should be below the waterline.
The same with shells. His depth charges seem to have no target in 1909
but certainly did in 1914-8.
A fun book, available for as little as $1.99 from Alibris
airplanes, bases, vertical artillery, air lanes, schools, and
strategy. He misses a few rounds but basically describes military
aviation and its naval future pretty well.
http://www.alibris.com/booksearch?binding=&mtype=&keyword=Clement+Ade...
Does he mention really big wristwatches and white silk scarves?
;)
Wrist watches were developed to meet the needs of trench warfare
in WWI.
Peter Skelton
Apparently no one here remembers the old pilot joke. :(

BB
Peter Stickney
2009-09-07 06:00:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Skelton
On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 12:14:01 -0700 (PDT), BlackBeard
Post by BlackBeard
Post by Jack Linthicum
I just received my copy of an Air Force translation of this seminal
book, written in 1909, which describes, amongst other things, the
aircraft carrier, depth charges and anti-aircraft artillery.
The logic is enlightening. Here is a man who flew his own heavier than
aircraft 50 meters and 100 meters in 1882. He reasons that targets may
be too far from a home base so an aircraft carrier is the logical
answer. He describes a totally smooth deck, raised high enough so the
waves don't effect the airplanes, storage below this flight deck of
the airplanes, an elevator large enough to carry an airplane with
folded wings to the flight deck, at least one aircraft always held
ready for immediate take off in case of a surprise attack. And so
forth.
He sees all air ops done with the carrier moving at speed, even the
very slow planes of 1909 would use all of the landing surface at a
dead stop. He talks of "bulwarks", some form of padded solid barrier
to catch aircraft that go beyond the landing area. He envisions plane
guards, launches running fore and aft to recover pilots who fall from
the sky.
He envisions 100 kg and 200 kg bombs for use against the enemy fleet.
He even states that the aiming point should be below the waterline.
The same with shells. His depth charges seem to have no target in 1909
but certainly did in 1914-8.
A fun book, available for as little as $1.99 from Alibris
airplanes, bases, vertical artillery, air lanes, schools, and
strategy. He misses a few rounds but basically describes military
aviation and its naval future pretty well.
http://www.alibris.com/booksearch?binding=&mtype=&keyword=Clement+Ade...
Does he mention really big wristwatches and white silk scarves?
;)
Wrist watches were developed to meet the needs of trench warfare
in WWI.
IIRC, according to some French jeweler's advert a few years back, the
founder of their firm had created the wrist watch for Alberto Santos-Dumont
us use while puttering over Paris in his dirigible at the turn of the
previous century.
--
Pete Stickney
The better the Four Wheel Drive, the further out you get stuck.
Kerryn Offord
2009-09-07 07:12:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Stickney
Post by Peter Skelton
On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 12:14:01 -0700 (PDT), BlackBeard
<SNIP>
Post by BlackBeard
Post by Jack Linthicum
http://www.alibris.com/booksearch?binding=&mtype=&keyword=Clement+Ade...
Does he mention really big wristwatches and white silk scarves?
;)
Wrist watches were developed to meet the needs of trench warfare
in WWI.
IIRC, according to some French jeweler's advert a few years back, the
founder of their firm had created the wrist watch for Alberto Santos-Dumont
us use while puttering over Paris in his dirigible at the turn of the
previous century.
Actually earlier..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberto_Santos-Dumont
Wristwatch

The wristwatch had already been invented by Patek Philippe, decades
earlier, but Santos Dumont played an important role in popularizing its
use by men in the early 20th century. Before him they were generally
worn only by women (as jewels), as men favoured pocket watches.

In 1904, while celebrating his winning of the Deutsch Prize at Maxim's
Restaurant in [Paris], Santos Dumont complained to his friend Louis
Cartier about the difficulty of checking his pocket watch to time his
performance during flight. Santos Dumont then asked Cartier to come up
with an alternative that would allow him to keep both hands on the
controls. Cartier went to work on the problem and the result was a watch
with a leather band and a small buckle, to be worn on the wrist.[4]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patek_Philippe_&_Co.
In 1868, Patek Philippe made their first wristwatch.

Ray O'Hara
2009-08-27 22:12:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jack Linthicum
I just received my copy of an Air Force translation of this seminal
book, written in 1909, which describes, amongst other things, the
aircraft carrier, depth charges and anti-aircraft artillery.
Clement Adler

Clement Adler was born in France in 1841. He became an engineer in
Toulouse and took a keen interest in aviation. He studied the flight of
birds and bats built small model flying machines. In 1872 he began
experimenting with a flapping wing machine. However, it failed because a man
did not have the strength to operate it.

Adler was also an inventor who worked on the development of the telephone.
At the 1881 Paris Expedition of Electricity he demonstrated stereophonic
sound transmission by telephone. Later that year he patented his invention.

In 1886 Adler began building a monoplane powered by a steam engine. It was
bat-shaped and had heavily cambered wings of 45.9 feet (14 m) span. The
Ecole was flown by Adler near Gretz on 9th October, 1890. It rose about 6
inches off the ground and travelled about 165 feet (50.29 m).

The French War Ministry was impressed by Adler's achievement and
commissioned him to produce a new plane. It took him five years to build the
Avion III. Like the Ecole it had bat-shaped wings that had a span of 52.5
feet (16 m). Powered by two steam engines it had two tractor propellers.

The Avion III underwent a secret test at the Sartory Military Base on 12th
October, 1897. The engines were too heavy and too weak to lift the machine
off the ground. However, Adler falsely claimed that he had flown about 1,000
feet (300 m). It was not until 1910 that the French War Ministry admitted
that Adler had been lying about the achievements of the Avion III.

Clement Adler died in 1925.





6 inches isn't flying its ground effects.





but the rest about the Carriers sounds interesting. in the way Jules Verne
is interesting. men whose Ideas were well in advance of their days
technology
Daniel
2009-08-27 23:19:37 UTC
Permalink
hum... did some checking and the military witnesses never claimed he
did fly on that 12th October 1897, rather, they reported the crash of
a self propelled ground effect machine ending the trials. Still a
World Premiere worth celebration I guess.

His steam engine had a very high power/weight ratio, and his craft was
the Eole (god of the winds), not the Ecole (school)...
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...