Rating: 
Summary: A bizarre reading experience
Review: Reading this book was a bizarre experience. On page 50, Shulman describes the Wrights' first flight and implies that the inventors were so secretive that they did all they could to keep the news from public release. However, the well-known telegram that Orville wrote to his father on the day of the flight ends with the words: "inform press home Christmas." The author's omission of this detail is unfair to the Wrights and undercuts his own credibility. The author complains that it was a long time before the Wrights made any flight in public. But why is that relevant to who "invented" the airplane? A lot of things are invented privately, and announced or demonstrated to the public only after a patent is obtained: modern pharmaceuticals, for example. An artifact is invented when it's invented, not when it's presented to the public. The author chides the Wrights for not having invented the aileron, a hinged control surface that he claims is one of Curtiss's "inventions." But on page 134 the author claims that ailerons were actually invented, and even patented, in 1868 by a British inventor named Boulton. How then is it accurate to list the aileron as Curtiss's "invention"? The author describes ailerons repeatedly as "wing flaps," which they are not. "Wing flaps" is a distinct term that applies to a distinct set of control surfaces that perform an entirely different function. The author argues that ailerons control lateral stability. This is true, but their more important function lies in turning the aircraft, a subject that Shulman demonstrates no good understanding of. These omissions, errors, and misunderstandings undercut the authority of a book that purports to give a revisionist view of the early history of powered flight.
Rating: 
Summary: History Misunderstood
Review: Seth Shulman has written an adequate book about Curtiss, who did contribute significantly to aviation development. It is readable and interesting but very weak in evaluating history. Shulman either misunderstands, or misrepresents, the relative merits of the Wright Bros. and Curtiss. Curtiss was a talented and committed enhancer of the airplane. Orville and Wilbur were geniuses who invented, out of whole cloth, wing warping (and, therefore, control), aviation propellers, the wind tunnel, and the airplane engine (that is, an engine with a high enough power to weight ratio). Give Curtiss his due but, on a scale of 10, the Wright Brothers are a 10 and Glenn is a 7 or 7.5. History rightly (or should I say Wrightly) recognizes the boys from Dayton.
Rating:
Summary: History Misunderstood
Review: Seth Shulman has written an adequate book about Curtiss, who did contribute significantly to aviation development. It is readable and interesting but very weak in evaluating history. Shulman either misunderstands, or misrepresents, the relative merits of the Wright Bros. and Curtiss. Curtiss was a talented and committed enhancer of the airplane. Orville and Wilbur were geniuses who invented, out of whole cloth, wing warping (and, therefore, control), aviation propellers, the wind tunnel, and the airplane engine (that is, an engine with a high enough power to weight ratio). Give Curtiss his due but, on a scale of 10, the Wright Brothers are a 10 and Glenn is a 7 or 7.5. History rightly (or should I say Wrightly) recognizes the boys from Dayton.
Rating: 
Summary: Curtiss vs. Wright
Review: Seth Shulman writes a highly entertaining, enlightening, and well-written biography of the irrepressible Glenn Curtiss in "Unlocking The Sky." Unlike the typical biography, however, which drags out every last boring detail of the subject, Shulman's Unlocking The Sky cuts to the chase, framing Curtiss's life in the context of his early-and most significant-inventive successes, his involvement in the resurrection of the Langley Aerodrome, and his gut-wrenching and years-long legal battle with Orville and Wilbur Wright.
Before consuming Shulman's text I was, like most Americans, sold on the mythical status of the Wrights and their achievement. What little I knew of Curtiss created an image of a creative but conniving Johnny-come-lately in the burgeoning aviation field. When I read and reviewed "The Wright Brothers: A Biography" by Fred C. Kelly, which does an excellent job at presenting the Curtiss vs. Wright patent case in favor of the Wrights, I stated that with their "successful and historic flights at Kitty Hawk in 1903 the Wrights had ushered in a reasoned, scientific approach to the quest for man-flight. They had accomplished the impossible in virtual isolation, without financing or institutional support. They embody the can-do American ideal of independence and ingenuity."
Unfortunately, they also embody the American penchant for litigation. Even as taken with the Wrights as I was then, I did have the foresight in my review to add that while the Wrights "undoubtedly deserve the admiration and gratitude of mankind--Kelly was a personal friend of the Wrights and I'd like to read other viewpoints on the legal aspects of their later battles. Kelly may have been too close to render an objective and balanced picture of them.
This is exactly what Shulman supplies in impressive fashion. Undoubtedly the debate over patent infringement and the pre-Curtiss-reconstruction viability of Langley's aerodrome will go on indefinitely. But Shulman is convincing that Glenn Curtiss is an American worthy of greater renown-perhaps worthier than even the Wrights. Curtiss was certainly a more likable and prolific inventor.
A very minor, subjective beef with the book is something he hints at in the acknowledgements when he thanks his agent, who "strongly encouraged me to experiment with the narrative form." The result is an abruptly shifting narrative style sometimes referring to events historically, and other times in present tense-as if we were watching it occur now. The device served only to throw me out of the story. All in all, though, it's a very enjoyable and highly recommended book. --C.B. Jonnes
Rating:
Summary: One trick pony
Review: Shulman makes a few good points about the business styles of the Wrights (proprietary, monopolistic) vs Curtiss (open access). However, he fails to tell us much about any of the protagonists. Possibly most egregious, he consistently belittles the modifications Curtiss made to the Langley Aeordrome to make it airworthy in an attempt to prove that it was airworthy originally and before the Wright Flyer (thus nullifying much of the power of the Wright patents). However, even the changes that Shulman cites as being "petty" (use of a modern carburetor and changing the location of the tail by 20 (twenty!!) inches) damn his argument and suggests that he does not know much about airplane design and manufacture and aerodynamics. In the end, his lack of knowledge makes his arguments empty Overall, Shulman sets out to prove a point. While he has much to work with (let's face it, Curtiss is someone we would like to have as a friend; the Wrights were simply weird), he blows it by being way too partisan. Save that stuff for Crossfire, Seth.
Rating: 
Summary: The Title Says it All
Review: Shulman's chosen title says it all. This is not about the race to invent the airplane, but Curtiss' battle with the Wrights over patents. Shulman has an axe to grind, but the bias is so clear and strident that after a while the battle between the Wrights and Curtiss seems only an allegory for how many feel about Microsoft. Shulman quotes admiringly Henry Ford, "Patents should be used to protect the inventor, not to hold back progress" without delving into the issue of how to resolve the contradictions between society's desire for progress and the inventor's desire for reward for effort. Skipping over this issue Shulman denigrates the accomplishments of the Wrights. Shulman trumpets Curtiss' rebuilding of the Langley flyer and ability to make it fly. Revisiting history is fine and rebuilding past flying machines is fine also. But, to argue that because Curtiss could get Langley's machine to fly raises Langley to the level of the Wrights is pure mischief. Langley's machine did not fly, as many others did not fly. The Wrights flew and in doing so achieved a singular accomplishment. Overall, a very irritating read for his sloppy history.
Rating: 
Summary: Great read and it helps take you into the social settings
Review: The Wright Brothers did what most of the world said was impossible. Langley, Smithsonian with US funds at his disposal failed to do what a couple of HS educated bike mechanics solved. The author compares them with Rockefeller and Carnegie who never invented anything but stole the idea of others or paid pennies for their ideas. I drove across the Potomac River for 24 years, and never saw "chunks" of ice at the time of year Langley's attempt fell into the drink. Furthermore, if in fact there were chunks of ice, as a military pilot with actual experience I know that time of usefull conciousness in December Potomac waters, even without the ice, is much less than landing on frozen sand dunes. Making the attempt in such weather, with a complicated and untested launcher was just plain stupid. So much for titles, higher education and funding granting common sense to anyone. Curtiss was a great pilot and inventor, why did the author have to bash the Wright's attempt to save their patent. Unlike most inventors, they had some business sense and should not be faulted for knowing that the rest of the world would try to steal their momentous discovery. The Wright's real flying began near Dayton, and was observed by hundreds, if not thousands. Its absurd to claim these flights were "private". The plane was kept from prying eyes while on the ground. The USAF does the same with its experimental aircraft, which may be observed from afar by numerous people. They solved the problem of lateral control which was the concept that was the basis for their court victory. If this discovery was not patentable, then why did it take others so long to solve the problem with other devices which have been invented such as the airleron, the spoiler, etc.
Rating:
Summary: Wright Brother Bashing.
Review: The Wright Brothers did what most of the world said was impossible. Langley, Smithsonian with US funds at his disposal failed to do what a couple of HS educated bike mechanics solved. The author compares them with Rockefeller and Carnegie who never invented anything but stole the idea of others or paid pennies for their ideas. I drove across the Potomac River for 24 years, and never saw "chunks" of ice at the time of year Langley's attempt fell into the drink. Furthermore, if in fact there were chunks of ice, as a military pilot with actual experience I know that time of usefull conciousness in December Potomac waters, even without the ice, is much less than landing on frozen sand dunes. Making the attempt in such weather, with a complicated and untested launcher was just plain stupid. So much for titles, higher education and funding granting common sense to anyone. Curtiss was a great pilot and inventor, why did the author have to bash the Wright's attempt to save their patent. Unlike most inventors, they had some business sense and should not be faulted for knowing that the rest of the world would try to steal their momentous discovery. The Wright's real flying began near Dayton, and was observed by hundreds, if not thousands. Its absurd to claim these flights were "private". The plane was kept from prying eyes while on the ground. The USAF does the same with its experimental aircraft, which may be observed from afar by numerous people. They solved the problem of lateral control which was the concept that was the basis for their court victory. If this discovery was not patentable, then why did it take others so long to solve the problem with other devices which have been invented such as the airleron, the spoiler, etc.
Rating:
Summary: Important Contributions
Review: The Wrights were the first to fly. But that does not diminish Curtiss' achievements. Without aid from the Wrights, he developed a controllable airplane. Furthermore, his method of control (ailerons, rudder and elevator) are in use today, as well as his concept of a seated pilot, using a yoke with push-pull for pitch control. The Wrights were bicyclists and may have understood about controllability, but they never fully understood about power. Curtiss was a motorcycle racer and understood both. He developed aeroengines (for Thomas Baldwin) long before building an aeroplane. And he continued to build aeroplanes long after the Wrights designs were considered far out of date. Yesterday was the Centennial of Flight. We will have to wait until 2008 for the Centennial of the first scientifically administered public flight (and that was the Curtiss flight of the June Bug). As a pilot, I recognize more of Curtiss' innovations in the planes that I fly than those of the Wrights. This book commemorates Curtiss contribution to the development of the airplane.
Rating:
Summary: Important Contributions
Review: The Wrights were the first to fly. But that does not diminish Curtiss' achievements. Without aid from the Wrights, he developed a controllable airplane. Furthermore, his method of control (ailerons, rudder and elevator) are in use today, as well as his concept of a seated pilot, using a yoke with push-pull for pitch control. The Wrights were bicyclists and may have understood about controllability, but they never fully understood about power. Curtiss was a motorcycle racer and understood both. He developed aeroengines (for Thomas Baldwin) long before building an aeroplane. And he continued to build aeroplanes long after the Wrights designs were considered far out of date. Yesterday was the Centennial of Flight. We will have to wait until 2008 for the Centennial of the first scientifically administered public flight (and that was the Curtiss flight of the June Bug). As a pilot, I recognize more of Curtiss' innovations in the planes that I fly than those of the Wrights. This book commemorates Curtiss contribution to the development of the airplane.
|
