Difference between revisions of "Samuel Pierpont Langley"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (LTA moved page Samuel P. Langley to Samuel Pierpont Langley: Everyone else gets a middle name) |
AvionHerbert (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Langley's trials of [[Aerodrome A]] in 1903 resulted in failure (it broke), resulting in some scandal and pessimism from the project's backers.<ref>[[Hallion, 2003]], pp. 155–156. "After the Arsenal Point fiasco, an understandably chastened Federal government refused to make any further appropriations for the Langley effort, and what little military ardor for heaver-than-air flight as had existed noticeably cooled. The final War Department report on the ''Great Aerodrome'' dishearteningly concluded: 'The claim that an engine-driven man-carrying Aerodrome has been constructed lacks the proof which actual flight alone can give. . . . We are still far from the ultimate goal, and it would seem as if years of constant work and study by experts, together with the expenditure of thousands of dollars, would still be necessary before we can hope to produce an apparatus of practical utility.' Predictably, Congressional response was quick and damning, chiding the War Department for supporting the project and ridiculing Langley for his obsession with flight. Congressman Gilbert Hitchcock of Nebraska stated, 'The only thing [Langley] ever made fly was Government money.'"</ref> | Langley's trials of [[Aerodrome A]] in 1903 resulted in failure (it broke), resulting in some scandal and pessimism from the project's backers.<ref>[[Hallion, 2003]], pp. 155–156. "After the Arsenal Point fiasco, an understandably chastened Federal government refused to make any further appropriations for the Langley effort, and what little military ardor for heaver-than-air flight as had existed noticeably cooled. The final War Department report on the ''Great Aerodrome'' dishearteningly concluded: 'The claim that an engine-driven man-carrying Aerodrome has been constructed lacks the proof which actual flight alone can give. . . . We are still far from the ultimate goal, and it would seem as if years of constant work and study by experts, together with the expenditure of thousands of dollars, would still be necessary before we can hope to produce an apparatus of practical utility.' Predictably, Congressional response was quick and damning, chiding the War Department for supporting the project and ridiculing Langley for his obsession with flight. Congressman Gilbert Hitchcock of Nebraska stated, 'The only thing [Langley] ever made fly was Government money.'"</ref> | ||
| + | |||
| + | [[File:Planeur type Langley|500px|center|caption=Langley Glider]] | ||
=== References === | === References === | ||
Revision as of 13:28, 25 May 2017
Samuel P. Langley (1834-1906) was an astronomer and early aviation experimenter. He made telescopes and observed planets at a young age. After graduating from Boston High School he went to work as a telescope maker and then as an astronomy at Harvard College Observatory, the U.S. Naval Academy, the Western University of Pennsylvania, and Allegheny Observatory. His interests included Sun observations and time standardization, as enabled by astronomy. In 1887 he became secretary of the Smithsonian. From 1887–1895 he worked on successive designs for his heavier-than-air "aerodrome". In 1885 he conducted two successful trials and received a $50,000 grant from the U.S. War Department. However, over the next decade, his machines could not fly reliably.[1][2]
Langley's trials of Aerodrome A in 1903 resulted in failure (it broke), resulting in some scandal and pessimism from the project's backers.[3]
References
- ↑ William E. Baxter, "Samuel P. Langley: Aviation Pioneer", Smithsonian, 1999?
- ↑ "Samuel P. Langley collection", Smithsonain (finding aid).
- ↑ Hallion, 2003, pp. 155–156. "After the Arsenal Point fiasco, an understandably chastened Federal government refused to make any further appropriations for the Langley effort, and what little military ardor for heaver-than-air flight as had existed noticeably cooled. The final War Department report on the Great Aerodrome dishearteningly concluded: 'The claim that an engine-driven man-carrying Aerodrome has been constructed lacks the proof which actual flight alone can give. . . . We are still far from the ultimate goal, and it would seem as if years of constant work and study by experts, together with the expenditure of thousands of dollars, would still be necessary before we can hope to produce an apparatus of practical utility.' Predictably, Congressional response was quick and damning, chiding the War Department for supporting the project and ridiculing Langley for his obsession with flight. Congressman Gilbert Hitchcock of Nebraska stated, 'The only thing [Langley] ever made fly was Government money.'"
