[dropcap]R[/dropcap]ecently, the state of Connecticut has decided that the Wright Brothers were not the first people to fly in a heavier-than-air machine. Instead, German-native Gustave Whitehead, who lived in Connecticut, was the first to fly.
For almost 110 years, Orville and Wilbur Wright have been recognized as the first to fly a motorized aircraft. We have been taught that on that windy Thursday, Dec. 17, 1903, two brothers from Ohio launched their glider on the sand-laden ground of Kitty Hawk (known today as Kill Devil Hills) and sustained ground clearance for 12 seconds while covering 120 feet.
A local man, John T. Daniels, captured photographic evidence of the Brothers’ flight. In it, you can clearly see the glider in flight. A bronze sculpture of Daniels depicting his contribution to history is one of the many attractions at the Wright Brothers National Memorial.
Yet, in June, Connecticut lawmakers hurriedly passed a pork-filled piece of legislation, that included among other things an item declaring “Ballroom Polka” as the state Polka dance and one naming Whitehead as the first to fly. Legislators say they became convinced of Whitehead’s accomplishment when aviation historian John Brown produced a mysterious photograph that he claims was taken in 1901 showing Whitehead’s “Condor No. 21” in flight.
This grainy, blurry photograph bears a striking resemblance to a 1905 photograph of John J. Montgomery’s glider “The California.” Carroll F. Gray, who maintains the FlyingMachines.org website, provides a plethora of evidence against this photgraph having anyting to do with Whitehead or his alledged flight in 1901. His site also includes Brown’s attempts to justify the photograph’s authenticity.
It’s also worth noting that Brown is one of the researchers for Gustave-Whitehead.com and he’s credited with convincing “Jane’s All the World’s Aircraft,” one of the nation’s leading aviation publications, that Whithead earned the first-in-flight title before the Wright Brothers. Brown is also pushing the Smithsonian Institute to recognize Whitehead. He claims the Smithsonian has ignored the evidence because of a 1948 contract with the heirs of the Wright Brothers. Brown says he has more than 400 old newspaper articles of which more than 100 include descriptions of powered flights by Whitehead prior to 1903.
As the 110th anniversary of the first powered flight is upon us, we question how historians and aviation experts could have been so wrong for so long. Perhaps we should follow the money.
What does the state of Connecticut have to gain by legally denouncing the Wright Brothers as first-in-flight aviators?
Nearly a half million people visit Wright Brothers National Memorial, the national park dedicated to first flight, each year. Without a doubt, the attraction contributes to the tourist dollars spent on the Outer Banks as those same visitors are the one who make hotel and rental house reservations, gift and restaurant purchases from local businesses.
The same could be said for Ohio, where thousands annually learn about the early years of Orville and Wilbur Wright by visiting Dayton’s aviation history park. Last week, a Republican congressman from Ohio announced he’s asking the National Park Service to include in its 2015 budget funds to buy the Wright Company Factory buildings, the first facilities in the U.S. specifically designed for the manufacture of airplanes.
How much money does Connecticut stand to gain by rewriting history remains to be seen. Certainly, Whitehead’s impact on aviation history has value without the title “Father of Aviation.” Is that title worth what it would cost to rewrite history?
As we look out of the north-facing-windows in our school and see the 60-foot, granite monument that serves as a reminder of the Wright Brothers first flight on Dec. 17, 1903, we urge the Connecticut Legislature to reconsider its decision. Economics aside, it’s historically the Wright thing to do.
Send comments to smithza0711@daretolearn.org
