Flight Before the Wright Brothers? The Adventures of Gustave Whitehead

 An inventor by the name of Gustave Whitehead claims to have achieved flight in August 1901. This claim predates the generally acknowledged first-in-flight achievement of Orville and Wilbur Wright in December 1903, by 2 years.

Since then - Historians have worked very hard to try to prove or discredit the claims that Gustave Whitehead was truly ‘first-in-flight’. Are Gustaves claims legitimate?

But, is it true? Did an immigrant and inventor, and a great storyteller, who arrived in the United States in 1894 from Leutershausen, Bavaria, really fly first? It seems two points of view can seem to completely contradict each other. Meaning, if one is true, the other must be false... Right?

Also See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gustave_Whitehead
https://web.archive.org/web/20010217000744/http://airsports.fai.org/jun98/jun9805.html
https://www.wright-brothers.org/History_Wing/History_of_the_Airplane/Who_Was_First/Gustav_Whitehead/Gustav_Whitehead.htm
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/scientific-american-debunks-claim-gustave-whitehead-was-first-in-flight/
https://airandspace.si.edu/stories/editorial/flight-claims-gustave-whitehead 

Transcript

You are listening to An Ounce. Season 6, Episode 18, Flight Before the Wright Brothers? The Adventures of Gustave Whitehead 

An inventor by the name of Gustave Whithead claims to have achieved flight in August of 1901. This claim predates the generally acknowledged first-in-flight achievement of Orville and Wilber Wright in December of 1903, by 2 years. 

But, is it true? Did an immigrant and inventor, and a great story teller, who arrived in the United States in 1894 from Leutershausen, Bavaria, really fly first? 

It Was in Print – So it Must be True 

According to a few articles published at the time, and some printed years later, Gustave Whitehead, and a few witnesses (with their 30-year-old recollection of past events) he did. There is however no lack of descent for Whiteheads claim. And, well, some claim Whitehead could be quite the story teller. Though he was an excellent engineer and mechanic – should his stories be believed? 

The short version of this claim to fame, gleaned from a 1935 article in Popular Aviation, goes thusly – 

(old news reel) Between 1901 and 1902 Gustave flew his Number 21 contraption for a distance of one-half mile in Connecticut. The flight path was claimed to have been along Pine Street in Bridgeport. Number 21 was designed with light ‘bat like’ wings which were supported by light weight ribs and cables. This first Aeroplane was constructed mostly of wood with two engines. One engine to drive the wheels and get the aircraft up to speed, and the second to drive the 2 propellers. It supposed flew only once. 

(Old News Reel) The number 22 flying machine was claimed to have flown twice. The first flight was 2 miles, and the second was 7 miles long. This device had 1 engine, was made primarily of metal. Its flight path was around the Beach and Sound in Bridgeport. 

Unfortunately, there is only one source for the 1935 Popular Aviation article this account came from, no photo’s, and no other documentation – just an interview with Gustave – 30 years after the fact. 

Ok – But What About… 

Looking for something more concurrent with the events in question. OK. 4 days after the fight of the number 21, an article was published in over 80 papers including the Boston Transcript and the New York Herald. But these articles are bit suspect. The Editors placed the story well behind the front pages in sections that carried “Human Interest” stories. 

At the time there was a practice of printing unbelievable articles with fantastical claims – in the regular “legitimate” newspapers. The job of sensational reporting was taken over by the tabloids later on in history, and now by the internet. But, at the time, such articles sold papers. Some believe these particular reports may have been stretched a bit in an attempt to find big money investors. Others consider them outright fantasy. And some just write them off as obvious lies told to garner attention. 

But Gustave Whitehead was known to associate with aviation pioneers like Glen Curtis, Samuel Langly, Ader, Maxim, and Herring. So, he could be telling the truth – or- be just educated enough to know how to fabricate a story. 

In the Papers of the time, no claims of veracity were made (except by the teller of the story, but not the journalist or paper), and the reader was left to decide for themselves to believe the tale – or not. 

Since then - Historians have worked very hard to try to prove or discredit the claims that Gustave Whitehead was truly ‘first-in-flight’. But, there are a few die-hard supporters who (like the flat-earthers) will not be dissuaded in their belief. Are Gustaves claims legitimate? 

What is Flying? 

Seems the argument comes down to 3 things. 

(1) Documentation, photo’s, immediate eyewitness accounts, and other physical evidence. The Wright brother had these- Whithead did not. 

(2) Models of the machines built in recent years. Gustaves had to be re-engineered in order to work without falling apart, and was flown into the air with a tow rope tied to a car – like a kite. The Wright brothers kitty hawk machine, when rebuilt years later, worked as designed. 

(3) The important question of how flight is defined? 

For the experts and historians there are questions, subtleties(sudull ts) in the language of some of the accounts, and missing and changing detail in the accounts in the case of Gustave Whitehead. 

Did he hurtle his Number 21 down pine street in in Bridgeport bouncing – thus getting into the air – kind of – but not really self-sustained and controlled by a pilot flight. (was this flight?) 

Did Whitehead get Number 22 airborne with the help of a tow rope – and fly more like a kite. Or was it completely under its own power. (and was this flight?) 

Did Gustave’s achievements meet his own definition of successful sustained, controlled, and independent flight – but not those of his doubters? 

If flying is defined as fully self-powered, controlled, and continuous flight unbound from the earth – well then, it seems Gustave Whitehead probably didn’t quite get there. 

Are his claims lies – that he contrived complete fiction. The case could be made they are not – that they are instead stretches of truth, or colorful anecdotes. Some of his other designs actually did “fly” like a hang glider. 

So – just as with many arguments – it comes down to semantics – how do you define “it”. What, for the purpose of being First-in-Flight, does Flight mean, anyway? 

Well, just as with any tale, there are many little “ounce-sized nuggets of wisdom” to be uncovered here. But, for now, might I suggest just this one. 

Here’s An Ounce 

…from our brief examination of the claims of Gustave Whitehead. 

It seems two points of view can seem to completely contradict each other. Meaning if one is true, the other must be false. Like – oh my gosh, that water is freezing cold – no it’s not, it’s 33 degrees and still liquid, not freezing - 

But often – it all comes down to definition – intent – how one expresses themselves. And granted, sometimes someone… and sometimes everyone is just wrong, intentionally misleading, or lying. 

But most of the time, if and when both sides of an argument are sincere, there is probably some truth in both… depending on how you decide to define it. 

And, that’s it. An Ounce, submitted for your consideration. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gustave_Whitehead 

https://web.archive.org/web/20010217000744/http://airsports.fai.org/jun98/jun9805.html 

https://www.wright-brothers.org/History_Wing/History_of_the_Airplane/Who_Was_First/Gustav_Whitehead/Gustav_Whitehead.htm 

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/scientific-american-debunks-claim-gustave-whitehead-was-first-in-flight/ 

https://airandspace.si.edu/stories/editorial/flight-claims-gustave-whitehead