1910 Coanda 1 First Jet Aircraft

Gannet

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
42
Reaction score
8
On page 21 of http://www.phys.ttu.edu/~cmyles/Phys5306/Talks/2004/Fluid%20Dynamics.ppt it states the following:
"Coanda-1910 - a revolutionary aircraft in many ways. First and foremost, it is now being recognized as the first jet engine aircraft, making its first and only flight on 16 December, 1910. Coanda's aircraft was the first to have no propeller. This was 30 years prior to Heinkel, Campini, and Whittle who have been considered the "fathers" of jet flight. Missing financial support, Coanda did not pursue further development of his "reactive" aircraft
The engine was the real innovation, and it is lost to the aircraft industry that development was not further pursued in 1910."

Also http://www.paperwarbirds.com/html/pages/Coanda.htm states:
"Just seven years after the first flight by the Wright Brothers,Henri Coanda flew the first jet powered aircraft."

What Alternate History would have been experienced if they continued to pursue development of the Coanda Jet Engine back in 1910?
 

Attachments

  • Coanda (1910) First Jet Aircraft.jpg
    Coanda (1910) First Jet Aircraft.jpg
    48.6 KB · Views: 147

Lauge

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
434
Reaction score
20
Gannet said:
What Alternate History would have been experienced if they continued to pursue development of the Coanda Jet Engine back in 1910?

See e.g. "Indiana Jones and the Sky Pirates" by Martin Caidin.

Regards & all,

Thomas L. Nielsen
Luxembourg
 

Stargazer2006

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,225
Reaction score
804
I am speechless.

I knew that Coanda's contribution to aviation had been largely underestimated, but I had no idea it was that great.

Thanks for opening my eyes to such a decisive piece of aircraft development history!
 

Matej

Multiuniversal creator
Joined
Feb 13, 2006
Messages
2,613
Reaction score
199
Website
www.hitechweb.genezis.eu
Okay, you were impressend and now I am cooling you down to reality...

Coanda 1910 was not the first jet engine aircraft. The model of this type of "reactive propulsion" was first published in Berlin in 1907. With the huge financial support from his father, and with the technical help of his friends from Ecole Supérieur Aéronautique in Paris, Henri Coanda started to build the real prototype of his plane. Huge financial support meant that he was able to afford chrome-nickel steel for all the fuselage including wings and tail surfaces, covered with the thin mahogany plywood. Only the X shaped tail was covered by the canvas.

The plane was powered by a water cooled four piston Clerget engine with the power of 37 kw (50 hp), that transmitted its torque to the ducted axifugal blower. The regulation of the amount of the air was done from forward (!) by the iris deflector. Compressed air flown inside the ducted tunnel, heated and accelerated by the engine's radiator and engine's exhaust gasses. Completed plane was exhibited in second Paris aerosalon in 1910. This kind of propulsion was futuristic, but still very primitive. Coanda estimated the static thrust somewhere near 2,15 kN, but it was never achieved. In fact, he was not able even to move the plane on the runway despite the engine running at its full power!

The fake information about the flight and such is the product of the Romanian's propaganda during the Ceausescu's regime, mostly during the 60s. With the aim to manufacture another and another primacy, their "publicists" claimed, that this plane flown at least once, that it had internal combustion chamber, foldable landing gear, fuel tanks inside the wing and another guff. But when you take a closer look at it, it is hardly believable that the piston engine, mahogany plywood and the most important - pilot's head - were able to sustain high-speed hot gasses from such a engine.

Henri Coanda did a great work for in the aviation, but it is related to his research in theoretical aerodynamics, rather than this plane.
 

Lauge

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
434
Reaction score
20
Matej said:
Okay, you were impressend and now I am cooling you down to reality...

Coanda 1910 was not the first jet engine aircraft. The model of this type of "reactive propulsion" was first published in Berlin in 1907. With the huge financial support from his father, and with the technical help of his friends from Ecole Supérieur Aéronautique in Paris, Henri Coanda started to build the real prototype of his plane. Huge financial support meant that he was able to afford chrome-nickel steel for all the fuselage including wings and tail surfaces, covered with the thin mahogany plywood. Only the X shaped tail was covered by the canvas.

The plane was powered by a water cooled four piston Clerget engine with the power of 37 kw (50 hp), that transmitted its torque to the ducted axifugal blower. The regulation of the amount of the air was done from forward (!) by the iris deflector. Compressed air flown inside the ducted tunnel, heated and accelerated by the engine's radiator and engine's exhaust gasses. Completed plane was exhibited in second Paris aerosalon in 1910. This kind of propulsion was futuristic, but still very primitive. Coanda estimated the static thrust somewhere near 2,15 kN, but it was never achieved. In fact, he was not able even to move the plane on the runway despite the engine running at its full power!

The fake information about the flight and such is the product of the Romanian's propaganda during the Ceausescu's regime, mostly during the 60s. With the aim to manufacture another and another primacy, their "publicists" claimed, that this plane flown at least once, that it had internal combustion chamber, foldable landing gear, fuel tanks inside the wing and another guff. But when you take a closer look at it, it is hardly believable that the piston engine, mahogany plywood and the most important - pilot's head - were able to sustain high-speed hot gasses from such a engine.

Henri Coanda did a great work for in the aviation, but it is related to his research in theoretical aerodynamics, rather than this plane.

Here's a couple of sources in favour of Henri Coanda's aircraft being the "first jet aircraft" (apart from those in the original post). Note that neither of these sources claim that Coanda's aircraft actually flew:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henri_Coand%C4%83
http://www.discoverychannel.co.uk/flight/pioneers_of_flight/henri_coanda/index.shtml

What, if I may ask, are the sources in favour of the position that "The fake information about the flight and such is the product of the Romanian's propaganda during the Ceausescu's regime" ?

Lastly, I believe the proper term for Coanda's engine (irrespective of whether it achieved flight) is a "motorjet", since a separate (piston) engine is used to power the compressor.

Regards & all,

Thomas L. Nielsen
Luxembourg
 

Gannet

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
42
Reaction score
8
Matej said:
Okay, you were impressend and now I am cooling you down to reality...

The fake information about the flight and such is the product of the Romanian's propaganda during the Ceausescu's regime, mostly during the 60s. With the aim to manufacture another and another primacy, their "publicists" claimed, that this plane flown at least once, that it had internal combustion chamber, foldable landing gear, fuel tanks inside the wing and another guff. But when you take a closer look at it, it is hardly believable that the piston engine, mahogany plywood and the most important - pilot's head - were able to sustain high-speed hot gasses from such a engine.

Thanks Matej for your reply could you provide the source for the quoted statement above?

Found this statement at http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp?aircraft_id=682

"In terms of its "jet" powerplant, the Coanda 1910 featured a system unlike that as found in later turbojet developments. The Coanda operated with a type of "thermojet" technology in mind - in general terms it was a combination of piston engine and jet engine power - relying on internal combustion and not a gas-powered turbine common to turbojets. The traditional combustion engine provided power to a compressor to generate compressed air. The compressed air was then mixed with fuel, ignited and forcibly extracted from special chambers mounted on either side of the fuselage. The resulting force of the expelled reaction was to provide forward momentum for the aircraft.

The Coanda 1910 achieved a single short flight in an accidental sort of way. While ground testing the engine with Henri Coanda at the controls, the powerplant forced the plane airborne for a short time. As Henri himself was not a pilot by trade, he quickly lost control of the aircraft and crashed to the ground throwing him clear of the burning wreckage (though not without slight injuries). Despite the loss of the machine, Henri noted an effect occurring with the expelled gases and how they seemed to conform to the sides of his aircraft. This observation alone would lead Henri to research that would span decades more in what would eventually culminate in the "Coanda Effect" being named in his honor."
 

Attachments

  • Coanda (1910) First Jet Aircraft Front View.jpg
    Coanda (1910) First Jet Aircraft Front View.jpg
    44.1 KB · Views: 127

Matej

Multiuniversal creator
Joined
Feb 13, 2006
Messages
2,613
Reaction score
199
Website
www.hitechweb.genezis.eu
Yes, there was some research on the subject and the result was published in L+K 15-16/2001, page 107. There is the nice test to confirm it - try to find sources about the Coanda 1910 published before the - lets say - 1950. If they say that it really flown, then I will be proved wrong. But I don't believe it ever happen in that case. The engine was not able to move the aircraft on the ground, so its impossible that it was able to propel it in the air.

Here's a couple of sources in favour of Henri Coanda's aircraft being the "first jet aircraft"

I think that the Wikipedia and Discovery Channel can hardly be honored with the status "reliable source". If you say Romanian national library, respectively documents in it or Ecole Supérieur Aéronautique archives, it will be much better argument. I think that now we have the similar topic as we had with the Horten/Gotha Go-229 claimed (by Discovery Channel BTW) to be the first stealthy fighter designed that way by purpose.

I can understand why it happend, because western "sources" usually don't have direct access to the primary sources of the (eastern) information, so they must depend on the official statements, articles published in the general press and so. And during the Ceausescu's regime propaganda's lie about the first flight was the statement from the official sources, which is usually good enough to believe it. Usually, but not this time. As I wrote before - try to find the sources about the Coanda 1910 published before the 1950 and you will see.

And regarding the jet engine, it depends on how broadminded you define the jet engine. If you use the most broad definition: "A jet engine is a reaction engine that discharges a fast moving jet of fluid to generate thrust in accordance with Newton's laws of motion." than it can accommodate also the Termojet. But in that case that definition must by applied also on the rockets that were used much earlier than the Termojet. I used to use the much rational definition: "Jet engine is the internal combustion duct engine, which typically consists of an engine with a rotating air compressor powered by a turbine, with the leftover power providing thrust via a propelling nozzle.", which cant be used to define the Termojet.
 

Gannet

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
42
Reaction score
8
Found this You-Tube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDaUbsWNXvI which I believe shows a newspaper article about the aircraft at the Paris Second International Aeronautical Exhibition. I do not know how to get screen shot of a You Tube Video to have a closer look.

Personally I found it very interesting in the above video that it was how the flame plume from the engine flowed over the wing surface that brought the "Coanda Effect" to his attention. Like Newton's Apple.

I have done internet searches for both Coanda and Thermojet and found nothing that claimed it is a "fake"

Also, what is "L+K"?
 

Matej

Multiuniversal creator
Joined
Feb 13, 2006
Messages
2,613
Reaction score
199
Website
www.hitechweb.genezis.eu
I will try to access the primary sources of the mentioned research and if I be allowed to, I will post them here. The video you posted is without the doubts interesting, but keep in mind that there is not any evidence at all, just claims and once again it is the Discovery Channel.

L+K (meaning Letectvo + Kosmonautika = Aviation and Cosmonautics) is one of the most reputable aviation magazines in the middle Europe with more than 70 years of history.
 

hole in the ground

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Aug 6, 2008
Messages
238
Reaction score
12
Here it is in 1910 flight. No mention of flying ability. But shown after it was 'destroyed in a crash'?
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1910/1910%20-%200883.html?search=coanda

flight 14 oct 1960 p.619
Coanda's 1910 Jet Experiments
GEOFFREY DORMAN
T raffic
A/fIGHT I suggest Mr Servian looks at pages 220-221 of my m new book, where he will find the Coanda case discussedin detail. The extraordinary claim was not made until 1956; and the Coanda sesquiplane, which was shown i n the Paris Salon of 1910, was disinterred from its obscurity.
I won't bore M r Servian with the many details here, but he will see what a delightful claim it is when I tell him that the "turbo- propulseur" (driven at 4,000 r.p.m. by a 50 h.p. Clerget) was mounted around the nose of the aircraft and was intended to blow back a ll round the fuselage, including round the pilot a s he sat erect in his cockpit (begoggled, one hopes). If this innocent air (and plain air was allit was ever meant to hurl back) was turned into a burning jet, it would have been the most inelegant way of committing suicide ever devised.
The whole claim is naughty nonsense, as M r Servian will see from the material I have set out i n the book. There was never any idea of injecting fuel; the machine never flew; it was never destroyed on test; and Flight noted that it was soon sold to a Monsieur Weyman.
The claim said that after the disastrous crash (which never happened) Coanda wished t o begin a "second aircraft," but "his funds were exhausted." Within a year h e was gaily exhibiting (inOctober1911)a brand new propeller-driven machine at th Reims Concours Militaire, and then went on to a distinguished career in aviation.
 
J

joncarrfarrelly

Guest
"Suction Turbines" in Popular Mechanics March 1911, a Russian sleigh and the Coanda aircraft.
Note, no mention of 'combustion chambers'. Ditto the Flight article of 1910.

http://books.google.com/books?id=At4DAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA359&dq=popular%20mechanics%20coanda&lr=&as_brr=3&pg=PA359#v=onepage&q=&f=false

Jon
 
J

joncarrfarrelly

Guest
Coanda "propeller" patent filed May 29, 1911. Patent granted July 28, 1914.
Absolutely no mention of combustion chambers.
The usage of the terms jet, turbine and reaction have probably led to the later confusion as to the nature of his device.

http://www.google.com/patents?id=e9VOAAAAEBAJ&zoom=4&dq=henri%20coanda&pg=PA1#v=onepage&q=henri%20coanda&f=false
 

Archibald

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
6,613
Reaction score
5,335
So it was just a ducted propeller connected to a piston engine ?
 

Matej

Multiuniversal creator
Joined
Feb 13, 2006
Messages
2,613
Reaction score
199
Website
www.hitechweb.genezis.eu
Yes, it was. They believed that they can accelerate the air inside the duct by heating it by the engine's radiator and exhaust gasses, but it didn't work as expected.
 

Retrofit

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
612
Reaction score
155
One photo of the aircraft replica of the reply 8' video.
This replica is presented by the Muzeul Miltar National, Bucharest.
 

Attachments

  • Coanda.JPG
    Coanda.JPG
    158.2 KB · Views: 93

prolific1

ACCESS: Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2008
Messages
449
Reaction score
4
Website
lost-aviation.blogspot.com
As is so often the case, failed experiments can drive real innovation. No one has yet provided credible evidence to support the Coanda having actually flown, however it may have proven itself to be "food for thought" to others who would later master the truest application of this technology. Da Vinci designed many wild creations that mostly were nonfunctional (aerial screw) yet may have inspired genuine developments in the field of aviation and the like.
Though I view the Coanda claims more coolly than others - I do find his legacy fascinating.
 

prolific1

ACCESS: Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2008
Messages
449
Reaction score
4
Website
lost-aviation.blogspot.com
Shades of the 1940 Caproni Campini N.1.

Fascinating. I didn't realize their was such a field of propulsion development as Thermojets.

No one is saying that the Coanda didn't do much for the aviation. But the fact itself cant be accepted as the excuse for the disinformation about his 1910 craft.

Agreed. I have found that a particular issue concerning Axis Power aviation developments. Many folks are trying to rewrite history with a litany of "recently discovered" designs that predate modern ideas by decades. More often than not it is indeed fantasy - if not propaganda.
 
J

joncarrfarrelly

Guest
A simple ducted propeller would probably have worked better.

From looking at his patent it appears that Coanda took the idea of the fluid-driven turbine,
such as is used in hydro-electric power generation for example, and thought he could turn it around
to drive the fluid.

While it probably would indeed work in water (or other dense fluid), given enough input horsepower,
it does not appear that it could ever accelerate air enough to produce usable thrust. It could conceivably
be used as the compressor stage in a turbo-jet, however, to my eye it looks like the design would be
self-limiting in terms of airflow.
 

Archibald

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
6,613
Reaction score
5,335
Retrofit said:
One photo of the aircraft replica of the reply 8' video.
This replica is presented by the Muzeul Miltar National, Bucharest.

Looking at the replica and the famous 1910 photo something always puzzled me: with the jet forward and the pilot behind... well, poor pilot would have been burned alive.
Now I have the answer to tmy qyestion.
It was not a jet, so less risk for the pilot ;). Well, no risk at all in fact, with the plane not flying at all ;D
 

Stargazer2006

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,225
Reaction score
804
prolific1 said:
Many folks are trying to rewrite history with a litany of "recently discovered" designs that predate modern ideas by decades. More often than not it is indeed fantasy - if not propaganda.

Indeed. And if Coanda's discovery had been a proper jet engine, it is unlikely that Heinkel or Whittle would have gone down in history as the true pioneers of that technology...
 

nemesisthebest

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Nov 15, 2009
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Your allegations to mitigate the Coanda's invention genius ,made by infringing your own
rules only motivated by your pathetic need to rewrite the history in your imperialistic favour,give me the right to replay in the following manner.(Sorry for inconvenints,I know the true is painful,hope you will not ban my comments.)
Is the English a foreign language for you ? Are you blind or mental handicapate ,guys ?
Or the imperialist politics of your sponsors leads you to such pejorative allegations on Romanian Coanda genius ?Or are you (Matheus)not English blood but Attila's nephews from Hungary ?
Just read the US Coanda's reactive engine Patent. You don't understand your own language anymore ?

To enhance the merrit of his co-national Caproni,an frog-eater guy wrote the Coanda's centrifugal compressor was just a ducted propeller or worse, a suction fan.An axiale propeller or fan is never obstructed by a frontal disc or have the blades hidden between two parallel discs.Are you not able to recognize a centrifugal rotor ? Is very clear the description and the picture about a centrifugal compressor ,which of course compress the air.

Secondly ,the compressed air is preheated by the hot cooling water and overheated by the
very hot exhaust gases of the IC engine in order to expand into the profiled nozzles to accelerate and produce thrust.This is the basic principle of any reactive ,jet engine. He also
first uses in the patent description the word "jet" to name the processed air flow.The IC engines mechanical efficiency of that time were so poor ,about 10%, that, the expelled heat thru cooling water and hot exhaust gases was very high, riching about 90% of the total heat
produced by fuel burning.Is very understandable why Coanda was believing that, recovering
this hugh heat by puting it to heat the compressed gases would give more power than the
usualle propellers.If he put or not injectors , that is not so important, the only fact to
compress the air and then to heat it in order to be ejected to produce thrust is more than enough to define a reactive (jet) engine applied to power a plane.That is nacked true that really hurts you because is a Romanian,not an English or Juif and (so shame!) was 30 years
(a man life!) before your Whitle managed his toy.The first jet plaine was made, unfortunately for you, by a Romanian !

Thirdly,he sold his reactive plane to your co-national ,but not the plane itself ,just papers.
So he wanted to test the engine just taxi to appreciate the gained thrust .After crush he
used parts of the wrack to build another plane.

Fourth,if the ejected air flow was just pure air from the "ducted fan" as the Calibans say ,
how could Coanda notice the flames of the jets curving and licking onto the metal curved volets toward the playwood of the structure (instead to flow stright ,far from cockpit,as he
was especting)? Is the pure air so colored to be seen ? On this observation followed a large
number of patents for "Coanda effect" and its applications.

Fifth,he never was generous funded, the litle money he has .came from his parents heritage,
never was sustained with governmental or military funds ,as 30 years later the German and
your co-national had.

Sixth,Coanda patent mentioned the heat transfer thru the compressed air ducts walls ,for
use them as heating elements though did not used combustion chamber word.A ducted fan
don't need thermic elements...or ? Any way at that time there were no high-temperature steel to build a combustion chamber or turbine's blade att all.There were very primitive technologic times.

Seventh,Ceausescu era begann in 1965 ;in '50ies ,when the Coanda priority as father of jet
flight was recognized in West, we ,the peoples of East ,sold by your pervert godfather Churchill at Yalta to the bolshevics for fifty years, in that times we were under sovietic occupation and we were learnt that all major inventions were made by Russian scientists and was forbidden to mention any Romanian value .Our fighters (IAR) factory in Brasov,partially distroied by your & allies bombs was turned into a tractors factory and us forbbiden to build airplanes .Those were your "gifts" for the Romanian people. And now you dare to lie so unfair as the cold war would be not ended yet.So your comments on this issue are false and untrue and maladive.

Eighth , I suppose you'll never ever recognize the world priority of Romanian engineer Traian Vuia who planed, build and flew the first airplane without any ground ancillaries
in March 1906 at Issy les Moulineaux near Paris !(The Wright brother used some catapults
to take off !) I also suppose you never ever recognize that an other Brittish company wanted to buy the patent of another Romanian engineer Aurel Vlaicu of his airplane Vlaicu II which won the Aspern (near Viena) air fighters competition in 1912 ? Or that one of my ancestors "sold "(by cheating)to the Vickers the idea of multiple pulver charges gun for few gold pounds ?
Or Romanian Gogu Constantinescu invention of hydraulic synchronisation of the machine gun shooting thru the propeller's blades..(sonicity).I suppose you will never ever recognize anything good or best of my people but always you will be ready to "buy" or to steal from us...not just material but also our honour.

Ninth,the perfid Albion was always the same ,fighting the Europeans on the site of the enamies like Otomans e.g.,until nowdays ,when the iron whore was against the Germans
reunification etc...Allways pervert..as the Diana's killers ,the crown family ...or Tony Blair
the lier who invented the "imminently" irakian danger to attend the most unfair war ever
seen just to steal the "Babylon's oil rivers",etc.

Tenth, but not the last, I hope to see all your "democratic" English world under at least
50 years of rule of bolshevismus...maybe Chinese kind...I hope
 

Jemiba

Moderator
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,342
Reaction score
1,500
nemesisthebest,

although you may have a some insight into Coandas invention and patents (you haven't really
proven in your post), that doesn't give you the right to insult other members ! This thread tries
to discuss the history and importance of Coandas invention and it should be clear, that such a
discussion can raise different opinions. That's quite typical and in a good democratic tradition,
I think, it's the best to give you at least one week for calming down.

(The user nemesisthebest is banned )
 

mz

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
676
Reaction score
19
Whoa, that was over the top. But yes, just watch some BBC documentaries on inventions and they stretch quite a lot to present most things as being of British origin...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0Mofuj-naM

It's perhaps natural to highlight your own countrymen. Probably happens in museums and schoolbooks or even other books as well. But more enlightened people having some more in-depth interest in things living inside a certain society should understand that their local data might have some bias in it, and should seek other sources as well... Otherwise it'll just degenerate into a he said, she said argument.

Haven't read the Coanda patents myself...
 

Stargazer2006

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,225
Reaction score
804
mz said:
Whoa, that was over the top. But yes, just watch some BBC documentaries on inventions and they stretch quite a lot to present most things as being of British origin...

Ha ha. I recently said something similar on the What If forum and got into a bit of a trouble from it... but it's true: when you read English magazines and books or watch British program(me)s, often you get the feeling that they virtually invented everything! And that nothing much was tried outside the boundaries of the British Commonwealth... This is not to undermine the genius of British engineers and politicians in history, who made some invaluable contributions to knowledge and progress on a global scale... but it surely can get tiresome.

As to whether it is a "natural" thing to put forward the advances done by one's own countrymen, I do not quite concur... This "frog-eater" is like many of his fellow countrymen, who, soccer fans excepted perhaps, are not exactly unconditional flag-wavers. For a long time we have come to realize that we are no longer the great kingdom/empire that once extended over the world (a realization that the British still have trouble coming to terms with I think). We are sad that many great Frenchmen did not meet with success here and made it big elsewhere (most notably the U.S.), and surely we are happy when something great comes from our country (who wouldn't) but on the whole I think many, many Frenchmen have grown from the nationalistic attitude that nemesisthebest has been flinging in our face for several posts now. I didn't even care to read his diatribe because I'm not interested in the arguments of someone who starts a debate or a would-be demonstration by undermining, ridiculing or insulting others, including those that were not originally involved.
 

flateric

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
9,247
Reaction score
1,660
well, as we say here, 'Russia is a motherland of elephants'...every country wants to claim priority in technology breakthroughs (that never were) - like it was with Mozhaysky steam-driven airplane.
Well, we have many other firsts that are not questioned by world community to be proud of.

Nobody claims that Romania didn't born genious people, but a manner that nemesisthebest uses for discussion, with it's stupid rage and xenofobia, says that it sometimes born idiots and com-patriots. If you don't like foreigners, you'd better choose other forum, because all we here from Argentina to Tokyo, from Vancouver to Capetown, democrats and republicans and whatever else, somehow live together for three years with people banned from forum that I can count with fingers on one hand.

List of first flying airplane predenters are long, and finding any hard evidence without time machine in 21st century is practically impossible, so it will be endless discussion - and why Vuia would have priority, say, to Whitehead?
 

Matej

Multiuniversal creator
Joined
Feb 13, 2006
Messages
2,613
Reaction score
199
Website
www.hitechweb.genezis.eu
I agree that there is some sort of the patriotism in some countries, but SPF is truly the international forum with a lot of people from all around the world, so you will not have any real chance to use it here when you don't have enough supporting evidence.

Post from nemesisthebest doesn't deserve the comment. Anybody can argue of any fact or its interpretation here, but the primitive personal insultations means prompt intermediate ban. If it occurs second time, it will mean ban forever!

Tenth, but not the last, I hope to see all your "democratic" English world under at least
50 years of rule of bolshevismus...maybe Chinese kind...I hope

Funny that last three days (in Slovakia BTW) we celebrate the 20th anniversary of the victory over the communism. Words like this every time remember me, why it was and still is so important.

Now lets get back to the Coanda's 1910 plane.
 

Archibald

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
6,613
Reaction score
5,335
an frog-eater guy wrote the Coanda's centrifugal compressor was just a ducted propeller or worse, a suction fan

Lilly Allen wrote a great song for people like you. You know. ::)
 

hole in the ground

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Aug 6, 2008
Messages
238
Reaction score
12
Re, the replica, how accurate is it? Is it just a shell or does it have an accurate engine? If so where did they get the drawings/information for it? Is there anyone on the forum who lives close enough to reasonably go and have a look?
 

nemesisthebest

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Nov 15, 2009
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Matej said:
Okay, now if somebody has something related to Coanda's 1910 plane, please post it. If not, please don't do.
I apologize again for the hard vocabulary but I was very upset reading the Coanda defamation.
I am living in Bucharest and yesterday I visited the two places where Coanda is exhibited. The
Military Museum and the Aviation Museum both under Defence Departament management.
The great surprise came finding out that "a huge archive of Coanda's original pictures, blueprints
documents and letters" partially untouched is awaiting to be researched and I started the procedure for research permission.I will write a true story book based only on documents .
Another news :next year for the century aniversary of the first jet flight, a 1:1 replica of the
Coanda 1910 is made with the intention to be flown !
Next time I will poste few original pictures and texts !
 

Matej

Multiuniversal creator
Joined
Feb 13, 2006
Messages
2,613
Reaction score
199
Website
www.hitechweb.genezis.eu
Now, that is the right approach. If you have the access to the original documentation, publish it. Nobody here have the patent for the truth, but the claims must be based on the available facts, not solely on the opinions. So I am looking forward, what you will be able to find.
 

hole in the ground

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Aug 6, 2008
Messages
238
Reaction score
12
nemesisthebest said:
Matej said:
Okay, now if somebody has something related to Coanda's 1910 plane, please post it. If not, please don't do.
I apologize again for the hard vocabulary but I was very upset reading the Coanda defamation.
I am living in Bucharest and yesterday I visited the two places where Coanda is exhibited. The
Military Museum and the Aviation Museum both under Defence Departament management.
The great surprise came finding out that "a huge archive of Coanda's original pictures, blueprints
documents and letters" partially untouched is awaiting to be researched and I started the procedure for research permission.I will write a true story book based only on documents .
Another news :next year for the century aniversary of the first jet flight, a 1:1 replica of the
Coanda 1910 is made with the intention to be flown !
Next time I will poste few original pictures and texts !

Excellent :)
Have the people who are proposing the replica posted any information online? Surely with less than a year they must be well advanced in their project!
 
Top