Wright Flyer makes no sense, should have been the 14-Bis

[๖คፈɬเς Ꮄน∂Ꮛ]

It was a kite on a catapult. It wasn't a plane. Americans want to pretend it was the first ever plane because they want to be best at everything but it's a lie. French-Brazilian inventor Santos-Dumont created the actual first ever plane the 14-Bis which could self-propel itself (Thus classifying it as a plane and not a kite) and yet this aircraft most likely will never see itself come to Microsoft Flight Simulator due to all the attention going to the game from Americans, who have no idea who he was or has ever heard of the 14-Bis. It's a shame, really.

[★Macman★]

Yet ASOBO are FRENCH. The FRENCH are usually rebellious and I have had this from other DEVS before. They simply ignore us and say this...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUeQGm6B8yQ&ab_channel=BenjaminSchneider

[ждун]

Wasn't bis-14 flying couple of years after wreight flyer?

[spoon66]

I am no American fan boy. like many so call first in History some have proven to be incorrect like the Vikings been in America before Columbus.
However I quote the following.
" written and photographic documentation by the Wrights authenticated by historians shows that the 1903 Wright Flyer accomplished takeoffs in a strong headwind without a catapult and made controlled and sustained flight; nearly three years before Santos-Dumont made his first heavier-than-air takeoff"
Until that is proven other than been a fact it will remain the first flight .
I do not understand the inclusion of Howard Hughes Spruce Goose in real life it only made one flight and at that only crawled into the air lucky if it was over 100 feet in the air.
They could have picked any amount of more successful
the Boeing 314 Clipper would have been a better pick if they wanted to stay with US built Aircraft.
If they wanted to go for the biggest commercial fly boat that successfully flew then
Dornier Do X was the biggest ever built 1929.
Though technical data for both these aircraft could be hard to find now.
compared with the Spruce Goose which is still around and interact in a Museum in the USA.
a strange choice though.

[startrekmike]

They added the Wright Flyer for the same reason they added some of the other aircraft. It was present in Flight Simulator 2004 and was intended to be a call-back to that title (as well as part of the overall 40th anniversary celebration).

I will say that I generally agree that Flight Simulator needs more examples of early heavier than air flight. I am not sure I want Asobo to develop such a thing directly since those kind of aircraft REALLY need to be more difficult to fly than Asobo/Microsoft are willing to allow from their own internal projects. What we need is a full assortment of early aircraft that are generally on the same level as Wing42's Bleriot addon.

Also. It is worth nothing that I am from the United States and I actually (believe it or not) did know about Dumont (along with Bleriot, Voisin, and the like). I tend to celebrate the their contribution to aviation more than the Wright brothers if only because the Wright Brothers were more interested in litigation than they were in further developing their aircraft concepts.

Still. It is my understanding that it is still generally accepted that the Wright's 1903 flight still stands even if there is some controversy surrounding it (seemingly based more on national pride than anything else).

[๖คፈɬเς Ꮄน∂Ꮛ]

Originally posted by spoon66:

I am no American fan boy. like many so call first in History some have proven to be incorrect like the Vikings been in America before Columbus.
However I quote the following.
" written and photographic documentation by the Wrights authenticated by historians shows that the 1903 Wright Flyer accomplished takeoffs in a strong headwind without a catapult and made controlled and sustained flight; nearly three years before Santos-Dumont made his first heavier-than-air takeoff"
Until that is proven other than been a fact it will remain the first flight .
I do not understand the inclusion of Howard Hughes Spruce Goose in real life it only made one flight and at that only crawled into the air lucky if it was over 100 feet in the air.
They could have picked any amount of more successful
the Boeing 314 Clipper would have been a better pick if they wanted to stay with US built Aircraft.
If they wanted to go for the biggest commercial fly boat that successfully flew then
Dornier Do X was the biggest ever built 1929.
Though technical data for both these aircraft could be hard to find now.
compared with the Spruce Goose which is still around and interact in a Museum in the USA.
a strange choice though.

Using wind to fly is no different from a glider or kite. It's not self-propelled. Wind does not count. They created the first ever manned-kite aka glider.

[Jackthedragonkiller [Chirch]]

Originally posted by ๖คፈɬเς Ꮄน∂Ꮛ:

Originally posted by spoon66:

I am no American fan boy. like many so call first in History some have proven to be incorrect like the Vikings been in America before Columbus.
However I quote the following.
" written and photographic documentation by the Wrights authenticated by historians shows that the 1903 Wright Flyer accomplished takeoffs in a strong headwind without a catapult and made controlled and sustained flight; nearly three years before Santos-Dumont made his first heavier-than-air takeoff"
Until that is proven other than been a fact it will remain the first flight .
I do not understand the inclusion of Howard Hughes Spruce Goose in real life it only made one flight and at that only crawled into the air lucky if it was over 100 feet in the air.
They could have picked any amount of more successful
the Boeing 314 Clipper would have been a better pick if they wanted to stay with US built Aircraft.
If they wanted to go for the biggest commercial fly boat that successfully flew then
Dornier Do X was the biggest ever built 1929.
Though technical data for both these aircraft could be hard to find now.
compared with the Spruce Goose which is still around and interact in a Museum in the USA.
a strange choice though.

Using wind to fly is no different from a glider or kite. It's not self-propelled. Wind does not count. They created the first ever manned-kite aka glider.

Well how about this, the Wright Flyer 3 was the first aircraft capable of sustained, maneuverable flight. Can't find whether or not it needed a catapult, but it was not a glider. It could fly relatively long distances, change altitude at will, and could turn in the air. That sounds pretty close to a proper airplane.

The Wright Flyer 3 first flew on June 23rd, 1905. Meanwhile, the 14-Bis first flew on October 23rd, 1906, over a year after the Wright Flyer 3.

Even if under your definitions of "Airplane", an American made aircraft would still be considered the first airplane. Besides that, the Wright Flyer and Wright brothers are awarded with flying the first "Heavier Than Air" powered and controlled aircraft. The Wright Flyer was heavier than air, even if it was a glider, had an engine, and had the controls for yaw, pitch, and roll. It's takeoff method doesn't matter, catapult or not, all of the above would still be true. I mean, military jets on aircraft carriers use catapults for takeoff, but they're still considered airplanes.

While I admit, the 14-Bis would be cool to have in MSFS, saying it should under "Americans egotistical, Americans lie, America didn't make first plane" is just not a good reason.

[Dank Williams]

Originally posted by ๖คፈɬเς Ꮄน∂Ꮛ:

It was a kite on a catapult. It wasn't a plane. Americans want to pretend it was the first ever plane because they want to be best at everything but it's a lie. French-Brazilian inventor Santos-Dumont created the actual first ever plane the 14-Bis which could self-propel itself (Thus classifying it as a plane and not a kite) and yet this aircraft most likely will never see itself come to Microsoft Flight Simulator due to all the attention going to the game from Americans, who have no idea who he was or has ever heard of the 14-Bis. It's a shame, really.

Lol you're just mad your guy got beat. Take your L.
European losers never change.

[Schmegg]

Originally posted by ๖คፈɬเς Ꮄน∂Ꮛ:

Originally posted by spoon66:

I am no American fan boy. like many so call first in History some have proven to be incorrect like the Vikings been in America before Columbus.
However I quote the following.
" written and photographic documentation by the Wrights authenticated by historians shows that the 1903 Wright Flyer accomplished takeoffs in a strong headwind without a catapult and made controlled and sustained flight; nearly three years before Santos-Dumont made his first heavier-than-air takeoff"
Until that is proven other than been a fact it will remain the first flight .
I do not understand the inclusion of Howard Hughes Spruce Goose in real life it only made one flight and at that only crawled into the air lucky if it was over 100 feet in the air.
They could have picked any amount of more successful
the Boeing 314 Clipper would have been a better pick if they wanted to stay with US built Aircraft.
If they wanted to go for the biggest commercial fly boat that successfully flew then
Dornier Do X was the biggest ever built 1929.
Though technical data for both these aircraft could be hard to find now.
compared with the Spruce Goose which is still around and interact in a Museum in the USA.
a strange choice though.

Using wind to fly is no different from a glider or kite. It's not self-propelled. Wind does not count. They created the first ever manned-kite aka glider.

A glider is not a kite - and vice-versa.

Your claim is spurious for two reasons.

Firstly, it is generally accepted that the Wright Flyer is an airplane. So you need more than just saying it'snot before the claim can be taken seriously. It's analogous to saying the earth is flat.

Secondly, it's not at all clear if the Wright Flyer would have performed exactly the same without being powered in identical conditions. And, without knowing that with certainty, it's impossible to say that the thrust being provided by the engine had no positive effect.

It's certainly debatable that it was the very first powered flight - but claiming it doesn't count at all is probably going a bit too far.

[๖คፈɬเς Ꮄน∂Ꮛ]

Originally posted by Schmegg:

Originally posted by ๖คፈɬเς Ꮄน∂Ꮛ:

Using wind to fly is no different from a glider or kite. It's not self-propelled. Wind does not count. They created the first ever manned-kite aka glider.

A glider is not a kite - and vice-versa.

Your claim is spurious for two reasons.

Firstly, it is generally accepted that the Wright Flyer is an airplane. So you need more than just saying it'snot before the claim can be taken seriously. It's analogous to saying the earth is flat.

Secondly, it's not at all clear if the Wright Flyer would have performed exactly the same without being powered in identical conditions. And, without knowing that with certainty, it's impossible to say that the thrust being provided by the engine had no positive effect.

It's certainly debatable that it was the very first powered flight - but claiming it doesn't count at all is probably going a bit too far.

I don't care. It's what I believe that it wasn't the first powered flight and I'm allowed to believe that. If other people want to believe the earth is not flat then there's nothing wrong with that either. Flat Earthers need more respect all they're trying to do is search for the truth, even if they're scientifically wrong.

[startrekmike]

Originally posted by ๖คፈɬเς Ꮄน∂Ꮛ:

Originally posted by Schmegg:

A glider is not a kite - and vice-versa.

Your claim is spurious for two reasons.

Firstly, it is generally accepted that the Wright Flyer is an airplane. So you need more than just saying it'snot before the claim can be taken seriously. It's analogous to saying the earth is flat.

Secondly, it's not at all clear if the Wright Flyer would have performed exactly the same without being powered in identical conditions. And, without knowing that with certainty, it's impossible to say that the thrust being provided by the engine had no positive effect.

It's certainly debatable that it was the very first powered flight - but claiming it doesn't count at all is probably going a bit too far.

I don't care. It's what I believe that it wasn't the first powered flight and I'm allowed to believe that. If other people want to believe the earth is not flat then there's nothing wrong with that either. Flat Earthers need more respect all they're trying to do is search for the truth, even if they're scientifically wrong. :thumbspoop:

One searches for truth by seeking out facts, not by forming personal opinions (that are based on nothing) and getting angry when people don't mindlessly agree.

[๖คፈɬเς Ꮄน∂Ꮛ]

Originally posted by startrekmike:

Originally posted by ๖คፈɬเς Ꮄน∂Ꮛ:

I don't care. It's what I believe that it wasn't the first powered flight and I'm allowed to believe that. If other people want to believe the earth is not flat then there's nothing wrong with that either. Flat Earthers need more respect all they're trying to do is search for the truth, even if they're scientifically wrong.

One searches for truth by seeking out facts, not by forming personal opinions (that are based on nothing) and getting angry when people don't mindlessly agree.

One is based on scientific facts that are being overtaken and overshadowed by nu-scientific actors and the other is questioning authority. Even if they're wrong, the attempt and underlying message is honorable. New, unrelated truths will be uncovered by more people than without such a message.

[startrekmike]

Originally posted by ๖คፈɬเς Ꮄน∂Ꮛ:

Originally posted by startrekmike:

One searches for truth by seeking out facts, not by forming personal opinions (that are based on nothing) and getting angry when people don't mindlessly agree.

One is based on scientific facts that are being overtaken and overshadowed by nu-scientific actors and the other is questioning authority. Even if they're wrong, the attempt and underlying message is honorable. New, unrelated truths will be uncovered by more people than without such a message.

Questioning authority is only really useful when it is based on something of substance and not just "I am going to believe this because it makes me feel good!"

[★Macman★]

Yup that's a CATAPULT TAKEOFF
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kjRL-Q-KBc&ab_channel=OldMovieCollector
Which MSFS is missing LOL
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4VVc5wrhV5I&ab_channel=OverKillSimulations

[๖คፈɬเς Ꮄน∂Ꮛ]

Originally posted by startrekmike:

Originally posted by ๖คፈɬเς Ꮄน∂Ꮛ:

One is based on scientific facts that are being overtaken and overshadowed by nu-scientific actors and the other is questioning authority. Even if they're wrong, the attempt and underlying message is honorable. New, unrelated truths will be uncovered by more people than without such a message.

Questioning authority is only really useful when it is based on something of substance and not just "I am going to believe this because it makes me feel good!"

Who says scientific truth is the only truth? Even if you had scientific substance you can be destroyed by authority, look at WWII. Either way this is leading us away from what the original topic was relating to, which is the 14-Bis and Wright Flyer.

[Twelvefield]

You had you answer, my friend, it's simply a callback to FS2004.