You assert, there was only one witness of Whitehead flying. Actually, there were 17 (14 of them, under oath).
Mr. Brown, thank goodness you provided all that source material for this. Now that you've educated me, can I change my assertion? There were in fact NO witnesses, that's zero with a 'z', to Whitehead's flight.
Before we go through all 17 witnesses and their statements, let's address your favorite phrase: "Sworn under oath!"
Many of us saw Bill Clinton swear he "had never had..." let's say relations "with that woman." And then the dress with the embarrassing evidence appeared. And then the media pointed out the many thousands of people who are in prison for perjury- a.k.a as lying while "sworn under oath!" This serves as evidence that no deity appears to be smiting people for saying things that aren't true. Even, and perhaps especially, when those things are "sworn under oath!"
Here's the overall problem with the witness statements: They can't all be true because they contradict one another. Many of them claim that not only did Whitehead fly but that they co-invented the plane with him. Or that they were on board for that first flight. Or both.
The 1901 Bridgeport Herald article I will go through separately. In this section let's just go through the named individual's statements. I'm not going through them in the order in which Brown presented; I'm going in order of "least ridiculous" to "most ridiculous."
Approximately 1901 or 1902 when I was only ten or twelve years of age, I was present on an occasion when Mr. Whitehead succeeded in flying his machine, propelled by motor on a flight of some distance, at a height of four or five feet from the ground. The machine used by Mr. Whitehead was a monoplane with folding wings. I recall its having been pushed from the yard back of the residence where the Whitehead family then lived, 241 Pine Street, Bridgeport Connecticut, which was opposite my residence at the time. The plane was set in motion in the street in front of the house and when it flew was propelled by an engine. I do not recall what time of year this was, but believe it was in summer or fall. It was at some time when school was not in session, as many other children were present and followed the airplane.
Location of Flight: 241 Pine Street, Bridgeport Connecticut
Date of Flight: 1901 – 1902 (vague)
Now this is the way to li-, er give testimony: Few details, very vague but includes the one necessary salient assertion: "propelled by motor…" It's the lack of details that make it so hard to pick this apart. The only objections I can raise to this one are:
- Wow, that must have been one wide and long street for a plane to have been flown on it. Even the Bridgeport Herald article claims that the airplane was pushed to the street and then driven to an open area. Amazing how no one was worried about the safety of such a thing.
- Where the heck were you and all these other children and all the other people who must have been present when Curtiss's men came to town looking to break the Wright's patents? Why didn't we hear about this for 32 years? Of course, ALL of the "sworn testimony" has this same problem.
I was present in the summer of 1901 or 1902, probably July or August of one of those years, when one of the planes constructed by the late Gustave Whitehead rose from the ground to a height of approximately twelve feet and traveled under its own motor power a distance of approximately thirty feet before it fell to the ground and burst into flames. This plane was a bi-plane and the flight occurred on Pine Street.
Location of Flight: Pine Street
Date of Flight: 1901 – 1902 (vague)
This would be just as good as Gluck's testimony (actually, the fact that they're almost the same word-for-word is a little suspicious in itself). The problem is that he describes a bi-plane, and as Mr. Brown so stiffly corrected me, Whitehead's plane was a monoplane.
And, of course, it has the same two problems as Gluck's statement.
I recall a time, which I think was probably July or August of 1901 or 1902, when this plane was started in flight on the lot between Pine and Cherry Streets. The plane flew at a height of about twelve feet from the ground, I should judge, and traveled the distance to Bostwick Avenue before it came to the ground. I recall the incident very well because I was one of several boys who clung to the back of the plane as it rose into the air and carried us off our feet until we were driven away by some of the men working with Gustave Whitehead.
Location of Flight: Vacant lot between Pine and Cherry
Date of Flight: 1901 – 1902 (vague)
This is the first of the "I was on that first flight with Whitehead" stories. And, unfortunately Ratzenberger dropped mention of the motor. But try to picture this: World's first airplane and it's got several boys clinging to the empennage during its takeoff roll. And they're safely picked up by the plane and fly until shooed away by men on the ground.
I, Michael Werer… do depose and say that I was personally acquainted with the late Gustave Whitehead and was associated (or employed by) with him during his experiments with heavier than air flying machines.
On about Sept or Oct 1901 I was present on the occasion when Mr. Whitehead succeeded in flying his machine, propelled by motor on a flight of about four hundred feet, at about six feet off the ground, for a length of time approximating half minute.
The type of machine used by Mr. Whitehead was a folding wing Monoplane. This flight took place on Tunxis Hill Road near Mountain Grove Cemetery, Bridgeport, Connecticut.
Location of Flight: Tunxis Hill Road near Mountain Grove Cemetery
Date of Flight: Sept – Oct 1901
This one would go to the top in terms of credibility if Brown hadn't included a photo of Werer's deposition. Take a look at this:
I'm no handwriting expert but I do have eyes. Remember, 1934 was before the advent of ball-point pens. People were still using fountain pens with nibs. "Penmanship" in those days meant more than just how well you formed your letters, it was also how well you wielded the pen itself.
Michael Werer's signature is blobby. The lines are thick, the letters poorly formed and defined. This is the penmanship of someone with little schooling. Contrast this with the handwritten description of the aircraft and location of flight: The lines are spidery, the letters crisp and uniform. This is the penmanship of an well-educated man. Matter of fact, to me it really looks like Steve Kelemen's signature matches perfectly that handwriting.
Call me paranoid, but I have to wonder if all those details were filled in by Steve after Werer had already signed. Perhaps even long after, without his knowledge. At this point, there's just no way to know.
There are some other problems with this testimony. Apparently Steve had great penmanship but didn't do so well in math. Four hundred feet in thirty seconds is about 9 MPH. Unless this was a VTOL aircraft, which nobody claims, there had to be about a 25 MPH wind blowing for Whitehead to take off into. Kill Devil Hills in North Carolina is known for such winds. Bridgeport, being shielded from the Atlantic by Long Island, is not.
The machine used was constructed entirely by Whitehead with my assistance, was known as a monoplane having a four cylinder two cycle motor located forward and using two propellers. Ignition was of the make and break type and used Columbia dry batteries. The gas tank was gravity feed and held two gallons of petrol…
Location of Flight: Lordship Manor, Connecticut
Date of Flight: 8/14/1901
This is the second of the "Whitehead and I co-invented the airplane" stories (Werer being the first). Petrol engine? What about the article in L'Acetylene?! What about the Bridgeport Herald's description of a new type of acetylene generator and "secret chemicals?" This can't be right.
…In the construction of motors we experimented with gun powder, but...he finally gave up using it. We also experimented with steam-driven motors. At last we worked on gasoline-driven air-cooled motors, only.
I personally know the facts, as stated in Mr. Whitehead's letter to the Editor of the American Inventor, and published in the issue of April 1, 1902, to be true. I flew in this machine with Mr. Whitehead in the first flight he mentions as having taken place on January 17, 1902…
…It was intended to fly only short distances, but the machine behaved so well that at the first trial it covered nearly two miles over the water of Long Island Sound, and settled into the water without mishap to either machine or operator...
Location of Flight: Not Stated
Date of Flight: 1/17/1902
Ah, yet another "I was on board and made that first flight with Whitehead" story. And, we've got gunpowder, steam, and finally gasoline as fuels. Again, no mention of acetylene. Because, of course, Pruckner was competent enough a mechanic to know such a thing to be ridiculous.
Go take a look at the original photo of the statement. Notice at the bottom that this one is actually notarized. Then notice that the claim "in the first flight he mentions as having taken place on January 17, 1902" is crossed out. I'm suspicious that the notary forced him to back off on that claim and cross it out before he would sign it.
As for the last paragraph, Pruckner is claiming that Whitehead ditched at sea without damaging the aircraft. Really? An untrained pilot on his first flight in an experimental aircraft managed such a feat? Then why did we all make such a big deal out of it when Captain Sully Sullenberger brought his Airbus down safely on the Hudson River in 2009?
Because it's not that easy. Heck, the FAA has a separate pilot's rating for seaplanes- aircraft designed to land on the water. It takes six to ten hours of instruction on top of already having a pilot's license to get the rating. The notion that someone made a perfect water landing on their first ever flight has got to be up there as one the most ridiculous parts of this whole story.
The testimony of John J. Lesko on January 4th, 1936:
Mr. Whitehead flew his folding winged plane in August, 1902 on Fairfield Avenue, and again a little later at Gypsy Spring.
Once Whitehead tested a motor in a boat, but could not stop the engine. The ignition and carburetor pulled loose and there was no way to shut off the motor.
Mr. Whitehead used to make his own motors. He would go to the shop and get a solid block of iron and go home and construct the motor from it.
Location of Flight: Fairfield Avenue
Date of Flight: August 1902
This would have been so much better of a "sworn witness statement" if it had ended at the first paragraph. It doesn't claim Whitehead flew in the plane or that it was a powered flight, but at least it doesn't reflect poorly on the witness.
Paragragh two talks about an engine that continued to run even when the carburetor (source of fuel) and ignition had "pulled loose." That is one magic engine!
Perhaps the magic is derived from the fact that it's machined (or perhaps whittled) out of a solid block of iron.
The testimony of Louis Darvarich on July 19th, 1934:
In approximately April or May, 1899, I was present and flew with Mr. Whitehead on the occasion when he succeeded in flying his machine, propelled by steam motor, on a flight of approximately a half mile distance, at a height of about 20 to 25 feet from the ground. This flight occurred in Pittsburgh, and the type machine used by mr. Whitehead was a monoplane. We were unable to rise high enough to avoid a three-story building in our path and when the machine fell I was scalded severely by the steam, for I had been firing the boiler.
In 1902 I was present on another occasion, this time in Bridgeport, Connecticut, when Mr. Whitehead succeeded in flying his machine, propelled by motor, approximately four or five feet off the ground. The airplane used was a monoplane with folding wings…, which had been constructed in the yard back of the Whitehead residence at 241 Pine Street, Bridgeport, Connecticut. The airplane was pushed into the street from the yard back of the house, and the flight took place in the street. I recall also that Mr. Whitehead constructed a revolving motor of hexagon shape, but do not recall what use was made of it.
Location of Flight: Pittsburgh
Date of Flight: Sometime in 1899
So, the first flight did not occur in 1901 but rather 1899 and in Pittsburgh! Propelled by a steam motor, with a boiler stoked by the witness who was on the plane with Whitehead!
If I were running the "Whitehead flew first" bit I would do everything in my power to suppress that first paragraph. Or I would just never mention Davarich and hope no one else would either.
Let's say someone did manage to suppress the first paragraph. The second fits right in with the others all the way up until we get to the part about the "revolving motor of hexagon shape." Sounds to me like Davarich is claiming Whitehead invented the Gnome rotary engine. Which he didn't.
The witness statements go rapidly downhill from here.
In the statement from Cecil A. Steeves he never even claims that Whitehead flew in a plane, merely that he tested models tied to a stake in his yard.
Thomas Schweikert gives no date and makes no mention of a motor.
Frank Layne of Waterbury, Connecticut, "was interviewed on tape. He was bewildered when asked for an interview, saying, "I know nothing about the technical matters concerning airplanes and I never knew Whitehead, nor anything at all about his aircraft. All I did was watch him fly."
Mr. Layne recalled the date of the flights as being 1901 because he'd just been discharged from Navy Service in Cuba where the battleship Maine had been sunk. He went to Bridgeport as soon as possible to visit friends he hadn't seen during the War. Together they went to Fairfield Beach to watch Whitehead fly."
By this time you might trust me enough to take my word for it: The Maine sank in 1898. The Spanish-American War began and ended that same year.
Notice we've passed beyond the realm of "sworn witness statements!" and into the realm of secondhand notes from other researchers.
Here's the testimony of one John Havery, made in (Brown states) May of 1948. It's apparently obtained from a pair of Whitehead-proponent books:
From "Before the Wrights Flew", p.85:
Report by Mr. K.I.Ghormley of C.D.Hudson publishers:
Re: John Havery, 130 Quail Street, Stratford:
"Talked with this party on the phone , who is now 55 years old and working regularly. Stated positively that he saw Whitehead at least ten feet in the air and that he travelled several hundred feet. This took place on the old circus grounds between Cherry and Bostwick Streets."
From "History by Contract", p.58:
John Havery, 130 Quail Street, Stratford, Connecticut, was 12 years old when he saw Whitehead fly at least 10 feet in the air over a distance of several hundred feet.
Okay, let's do some math here. If John Havery was 55 in 1948 then he was 12 years old in 1905. Then why is this being presented as evidence Whitehead was first?
So, you tell me, are there ANY credible witnesses? When no one can agree on the date, the place, or the description of the aircraft or engine? When the witnesses are actually described as "bewildered" and go on to prove it?
Tune in next time when we finish up this series with the Bridgeport Herald article.
Click here to go on to part 4.
No comments:
Post a Comment