Myths about the Wright Brothers

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

"They were considered cranks because everyone knew that flying was impossible." Untrue....[LANA: take rest of text from print sidebar]

"They were simple bicycle mechanics who got lucky." Untrue. Although self-taught, they added "felicitous strokes of inventive talent" (to borrow a phrase from Sir Peter Medawar) to technical skill and rigorous research and development.

"They cheated¿their flyers didn¿t take off under their own power." Untrue. Their 1903 flyer took off unaided¿although it used a launch track and a wheeled carriage instead of attached wheels and a runway. Later versions used a catapult as a launching aid. This argument is true only by narrowly defining an airplane as a machine that takes off with attached wheels.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


"They weren¿t the first to fly." True. They were the first to fly a powered, heavier-than-air machine in controlled, sustained flight; "it flew forward without losing speed and landed at a point as high as that from which it started." [can cut from here] The first heavier-than-air flight was a short glide made in 1849 by an unnamed boy in Englishman George Cayley's glider. The first powered flight was by Jules Henri Giffard, who flew a balloon propelled by a steam engine over the city of Paris in 1852.

"They were 20 years ahead of anyone else." Untrue. The runner-up in the race to fly, Alberto Santos-Dumont, worked independently of them and made his first flight only three years after the Wrights did.

"They gave the world the airplane." Untrue. They invented it, then kept it under wraps until they could sell it. Alberto Santos-Dumont, on the other hand, refused to patent his inventions and gave away his results for free. --D.S.

Back to "The Equivocal Success of the Wright Brothers"

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe