- Thread starter
- #81
A strange dialog between two people (Root and Chanute) who claimed they had seen Wilbur and Orville flying in 1904
Chanute doubted the January 1, 1905, story of Root, also Chanute himself claimed in 1906 (Scientific American) he had seen the Wrights flying, on October 15, 1904.
Anyway, Chanute did not forget to end his article with the same ironic remark made many times in his letters to the Wrights:
"In addition to the great feat of inventing a practical flying machine the Wright brothers have, in my judgment, performed another improbable feat by keeping knowledge of the construction of a machine, which can only be operated in the open, from the incredulous but Argus-eyed American press." (Octave Chanute, Scientific American, 1906)
══════════════════════════════════════════
In short, while in Dayton, a few years before July 30, 1909, Root met the aviation pioneer and mentor of the two brothers, Octave Chanute, who received from Orville Wright a copy of the January 1, 1905, issue of Gleanings.
O. Chanute read the story and the next day, after finding out from Amos Root himself about his disappointment generated by the little interest his text had elicited, O. Chanute explained to him the people were right not to believe his account and gave him this logical justification:
"your readers all supposed that it was a made-up story. The way in which you talked about Christopher Columbus putting out on the unknown deep and all that, made people believe it was a sort of fairy story, such as we find in our magazines every little while — stories so much mixed up that one can not tell which is fact and which is fiction. The world did not believe you were telling the truth." ("Our Homes", Gleanings, August 15, 1909, pp. 515-518 (p. 516))
Root came with a quite unconvincing answer. In his opinion, the article was marked with the stamp of truth. These are his words:
"Mr. Chanute, I am in the habit of having strangers doubt my statements; but those who are acquainted with me, and know my way of talking, and those who have read my department in our journal for years past, ought to know that I tell the truth. Furthermore, that article has the stamp of truth on it from beginning to end. I mentioned the locality, and the things that happened, in a way that would convince any reasonable person that what I related really occurred."
O. Chanute was not convinced and gave him a polite answer:
"Well, I guess that is so to a great extent; but what you are telling is too wonderful. The world is not yet ready to take it in."
At the end of the dialog, Amos Root emphasised that: Certain people, certain books, and certain articles in the papers have the stamp of truth on them; and this New Testament account of our Lord Jesus Christ has the stamp of truth on every page.
That "certain articles in the papers" is his January 1905 story which has "the stamp of truth on every page" as the Bible.
The big question is why would Octave Chanute have had doubts regarding the veracity of Root's January 1, 1905, article as long as in a letter dated March 31, 1906, and published by the Scientific American in its April 14, 1906, issue, O. Chanute himself claimed he had witnessed a flight of 1,377 feet performed in 23 4-5 seconds, starting from level ground and sweeping over about one-quarter of a circle that was made by Orville Wright on October 15, 1904. In other words, at the time he read the January 1, 1905, article, Chanute had already witnessed a man carrying plane flying, less than one month after Wilbur's flight in a circuit of September 20, 1904. Logically, Chanute would have had all reasons to believe Root's eyewitness account!
The problem is that the credibility of Chanute's March 31, 1906, answer is also quite low as long as, close to the end of the text, he states that the Wright brothers performed two improbable feats, the first consisted in "inventing a practical flying machine", the second in keeping their plane "which could only be operated in the open" far "from the incredulous but Argus-eyed American press". This remark sounds like a joke, an irony. The relevant part of the letter is reproduced below:
"… On the 15th of October, 1904, I witnessed a flight of 1,377 feet performed in 23 4-5 seconds, starting from level ground and sweeping over about one-quarter of a circle, at a speed of 39 miles per hour. The wind blew at some six miles per hour, but in a diagonal direction to the initial course. After the machine had gone some 500 feet and risen some 15 feet, a gust of wind struck under the right-hand side and raised the apparatus to an oblique inclination of 15 to 20 degrees. The operator, who was Orville Wright, endeavored to recover an even transverse keel, was unable to do so while turning to the left, and concluded to alight. This was done in flying before the wind instead of square against it as usual, and the landing was made at a speed of 45 to 50 miles an hour. One side of the machine struck the ground first; it slewed around and was broken, requiring about one week for repairs.
The operator was in no wise hurt. This was flight No. 71 of that year (1904), and on the preceding day Wright brothers had made three flights — one of 4,001 feet for less than a full circuit of the field, one of 4,903 feet covering a full circle, and one of 4,936 feet over rather more than a full circuit, alighting safely. …
In addition to the great feat of inventing a practical flying machine the Wright brothers have, in my judgment, performed another improbable feat by keeping knowledge of the construction of a machine, which can only be operated in the open, from the incredulous but Argus-eyed American press. …
O. CHANUTE.
Chicago, Ill., March 31, 1906."
(Octave Chanute, "Chanute on the Wright Brothers' Achievement in Aerial Navigation", Scientific American, April 14, 1906, col. 1, p. 307)
The question is why would Octave Chanute, author of the book "Progress in Flying Machines" (1894) and well known by the aeronautic community of the time, have told such a lie. The answer is simple. On November 9, 1905, he sent a private letter to the
French aeronaut Captain Ferber recommending he should trust the word of the Wright brothers, who had just claimed a series of spectacular flights. To make the statements of the two inventors more credible he wrote this:
"I have not seen, with my own eyes, anything excepting a short flight of half a kilometer".
Captain Ferber did not keep the text only for himself but had it published in "Les Frères Wright et leur Aéroplane à moteur" (L'Aérophile, December 1905, pp. 265-272, (p. 268)). Therefore, there was no way back for O. Chanute but to keep the story and pretend he had seen one of the brothers flying, otherwise his credibility in front of the technical world of the time would have suffered.
This is the entire text of the letter:
"Chicago, Ill., 9 novembre 1905
Cher capitaine Ferber,
Je viens de recevoir votre lettre du 26 octobre. Je crois que vous pouvez octroyer toute confiance à ce que les Wright vous ont écrit de leurs accomplissements (sic). Je n'ai vu, de mes yeux, qu'une petite envolée d'un demi-kilomètre, mais ils m'ont mandé leurs progrès de semaine en semaine et leurs amis intimes qui ont vu les longs parcours du commencement d'octobre, m'ont confirmé verbalement la semaine dernière, quand j'étais à Dayton, pour voir une envolée projetée de 60 kil. en une heure, qui n'a pu
avoir lieu par raison d'un grand orage. Les Wright se sont inspirés de l'exemple de la France qui a tenu secrets ses progrès de ballons dirigeables depuis 1885. Ils se sont arrangés avec leurs journaux à Dayton. Il y a bien eu une indiscrétion et un article publié, mais sa circulation a été supprimée. Les Wright devaient vous écrire vers le 4 novembre. Agréez, cher monsieur, l'expression de mes sentiments les meilleurs.
(Signé) : O. CHANUTE.
("Les Frères Wright et leur Aéroplane à moteur", L'Aérophile, December, pp. 265-272, (p. 268))"
After all these explanations the August 15, 1909, article of Root about his dialog with O. Chanute, a few years before, can be more easily understood as a conversation between two people who had never seen a man carrying heavier than air machine flying.
Chanute doubted the January 1, 1905, story of Root, also Chanute himself claimed in 1906 (Scientific American) he had seen the Wrights flying, on October 15, 1904.
Anyway, Chanute did not forget to end his article with the same ironic remark made many times in his letters to the Wrights:
"In addition to the great feat of inventing a practical flying machine the Wright brothers have, in my judgment, performed another improbable feat by keeping knowledge of the construction of a machine, which can only be operated in the open, from the incredulous but Argus-eyed American press." (Octave Chanute, Scientific American, 1906)
══════════════════════════════════════════
In short, while in Dayton, a few years before July 30, 1909, Root met the aviation pioneer and mentor of the two brothers, Octave Chanute, who received from Orville Wright a copy of the January 1, 1905, issue of Gleanings.
O. Chanute read the story and the next day, after finding out from Amos Root himself about his disappointment generated by the little interest his text had elicited, O. Chanute explained to him the people were right not to believe his account and gave him this logical justification:
"your readers all supposed that it was a made-up story. The way in which you talked about Christopher Columbus putting out on the unknown deep and all that, made people believe it was a sort of fairy story, such as we find in our magazines every little while — stories so much mixed up that one can not tell which is fact and which is fiction. The world did not believe you were telling the truth." ("Our Homes", Gleanings, August 15, 1909, pp. 515-518 (p. 516))
Root came with a quite unconvincing answer. In his opinion, the article was marked with the stamp of truth. These are his words:
"Mr. Chanute, I am in the habit of having strangers doubt my statements; but those who are acquainted with me, and know my way of talking, and those who have read my department in our journal for years past, ought to know that I tell the truth. Furthermore, that article has the stamp of truth on it from beginning to end. I mentioned the locality, and the things that happened, in a way that would convince any reasonable person that what I related really occurred."
O. Chanute was not convinced and gave him a polite answer:
"Well, I guess that is so to a great extent; but what you are telling is too wonderful. The world is not yet ready to take it in."
At the end of the dialog, Amos Root emphasised that: Certain people, certain books, and certain articles in the papers have the stamp of truth on them; and this New Testament account of our Lord Jesus Christ has the stamp of truth on every page.
That "certain articles in the papers" is his January 1905 story which has "the stamp of truth on every page" as the Bible.
The big question is why would Octave Chanute have had doubts regarding the veracity of Root's January 1, 1905, article as long as in a letter dated March 31, 1906, and published by the Scientific American in its April 14, 1906, issue, O. Chanute himself claimed he had witnessed a flight of 1,377 feet performed in 23 4-5 seconds, starting from level ground and sweeping over about one-quarter of a circle that was made by Orville Wright on October 15, 1904. In other words, at the time he read the January 1, 1905, article, Chanute had already witnessed a man carrying plane flying, less than one month after Wilbur's flight in a circuit of September 20, 1904. Logically, Chanute would have had all reasons to believe Root's eyewitness account!
The problem is that the credibility of Chanute's March 31, 1906, answer is also quite low as long as, close to the end of the text, he states that the Wright brothers performed two improbable feats, the first consisted in "inventing a practical flying machine", the second in keeping their plane "which could only be operated in the open" far "from the incredulous but Argus-eyed American press". This remark sounds like a joke, an irony. The relevant part of the letter is reproduced below:
"… On the 15th of October, 1904, I witnessed a flight of 1,377 feet performed in 23 4-5 seconds, starting from level ground and sweeping over about one-quarter of a circle, at a speed of 39 miles per hour. The wind blew at some six miles per hour, but in a diagonal direction to the initial course. After the machine had gone some 500 feet and risen some 15 feet, a gust of wind struck under the right-hand side and raised the apparatus to an oblique inclination of 15 to 20 degrees. The operator, who was Orville Wright, endeavored to recover an even transverse keel, was unable to do so while turning to the left, and concluded to alight. This was done in flying before the wind instead of square against it as usual, and the landing was made at a speed of 45 to 50 miles an hour. One side of the machine struck the ground first; it slewed around and was broken, requiring about one week for repairs.
The operator was in no wise hurt. This was flight No. 71 of that year (1904), and on the preceding day Wright brothers had made three flights — one of 4,001 feet for less than a full circuit of the field, one of 4,903 feet covering a full circle, and one of 4,936 feet over rather more than a full circuit, alighting safely. …
In addition to the great feat of inventing a practical flying machine the Wright brothers have, in my judgment, performed another improbable feat by keeping knowledge of the construction of a machine, which can only be operated in the open, from the incredulous but Argus-eyed American press. …
O. CHANUTE.
Chicago, Ill., March 31, 1906."
(Octave Chanute, "Chanute on the Wright Brothers' Achievement in Aerial Navigation", Scientific American, April 14, 1906, col. 1, p. 307)
The question is why would Octave Chanute, author of the book "Progress in Flying Machines" (1894) and well known by the aeronautic community of the time, have told such a lie. The answer is simple. On November 9, 1905, he sent a private letter to the
French aeronaut Captain Ferber recommending he should trust the word of the Wright brothers, who had just claimed a series of spectacular flights. To make the statements of the two inventors more credible he wrote this:
"I have not seen, with my own eyes, anything excepting a short flight of half a kilometer".
Captain Ferber did not keep the text only for himself but had it published in "Les Frères Wright et leur Aéroplane à moteur" (L'Aérophile, December 1905, pp. 265-272, (p. 268)). Therefore, there was no way back for O. Chanute but to keep the story and pretend he had seen one of the brothers flying, otherwise his credibility in front of the technical world of the time would have suffered.
This is the entire text of the letter:
"Chicago, Ill., 9 novembre 1905
Cher capitaine Ferber,
Je viens de recevoir votre lettre du 26 octobre. Je crois que vous pouvez octroyer toute confiance à ce que les Wright vous ont écrit de leurs accomplissements (sic). Je n'ai vu, de mes yeux, qu'une petite envolée d'un demi-kilomètre, mais ils m'ont mandé leurs progrès de semaine en semaine et leurs amis intimes qui ont vu les longs parcours du commencement d'octobre, m'ont confirmé verbalement la semaine dernière, quand j'étais à Dayton, pour voir une envolée projetée de 60 kil. en une heure, qui n'a pu
avoir lieu par raison d'un grand orage. Les Wright se sont inspirés de l'exemple de la France qui a tenu secrets ses progrès de ballons dirigeables depuis 1885. Ils se sont arrangés avec leurs journaux à Dayton. Il y a bien eu une indiscrétion et un article publié, mais sa circulation a été supprimée. Les Wright devaient vous écrire vers le 4 novembre. Agréez, cher monsieur, l'expression de mes sentiments les meilleurs.
(Signé) : O. CHANUTE.
("Les Frères Wright et leur Aéroplane à moteur", L'Aérophile, December, pp. 265-272, (p. 268))"
After all these explanations the August 15, 1909, article of Root about his dialog with O. Chanute, a few years before, can be more easily understood as a conversation between two people who had never seen a man carrying heavier than air machine flying.
