New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1903-12-10
THE LANGLEY FLYING MACHINE.

The second trial OF Professor Langley's aero
drome was more disappointing than the first
On the former occasion the fabric held together
after it was launched. and when IL went into
the water II remained unit This time the air
ship broke in two. The inventor is reported to
have attributed the later failure. as he did the
earlier one, TO defects in the launching mechan-
ism. OF course. something may have been
wrong with the latter, but there was trouble
with the aerOdrome, too The frame was not
properly put together or it was not adequately
stayed. Part Of the fault was clearly with the
construction.
The inability Of the aerodrome to take care
of itself after starting may be due to one of
several causes. The catapult which gave it the
initial push may have been lacking in power
The ships own engines may not have begun
operating soon enough or they may have been
too feeble. 1t is conceivable that the rudders
cid not perform their function, although good
steering is not to be expected without sufi-
Gent velocity in aerial any more than in ma
rine navigation. Whatever be the correct ex-
PLANTATION, though, the flying machine would not
fly. and that is all that most people care to
know.
After all, the principle Of the aeroplane was
not fairly tested in either the October or the
December experiments over the Potomac Con-
fdence in the fundamental idea had been ex-
cited by Professor Langley's earlier ventures
with models, by Chanute's and LilienthaIs nu-
merous short flights from housetops OF sand
banks and by Maxim's unfinished work in
England eight or ten years ago. In fact, every
boys kite which is ballasted so as to keep right
side up and is flown IN an ordinary breeze re-
Veals the lifting power OF the air. 1t is too
soon, therefore, to condemn the aeroplane ut
teriy. Perhaps It may never become availa-
bic, but no such conclusion can be drawn from
the work Of Professor Langley's assistants.
The wetting which Mr.. Manly received could
hardly be regarded as unforeseen or exhibiting
great heroism. One Of the reasons why expert
ments Of this kind are SO often undertaken over
lake or a river is that fall into water is liza
bic to injure the aeronaut less than a fall upon
hard ground. Very likely the apparatus also
survives the ordeal better under such circum-
stances. The risk is greater, to be sure when
there is a premature tumble than when the
navigator alights gently and with premedita-
ton. On the other hand, If a man is a good
swimmer, If there are a number Of boats at
hand II the performance takes place by day
light and II the performer is mentally prepared,
a cold plunge demands no large amount of
courage.
This renewed failure has many lamentable
features. Professor Langley's experiments were
conducted largely at the expense of the gov
eminent. Not only is ii improbable that he will
get any more money from the same source for
the same purpose, bat he will be fortunate If
he escapes severe criticism for the possible lack
Of discretion exercised in past disbursements
Even though these repeated disappOintments
should be traceable to the man to whom he in
trusted the details OF the work, Professor Lang
ley himself will naturally be held RESPONSE
bic for his choice of an agent. Again, quite
aside from the pecuniary phases of the matter,
the reputation Of the country was involved.
Professor Langley is not a crank" He is
scholar, and he is at the head Of one of the
most venerable and eminent scientific institu-
lions Of America. He has probably gone deeper
into the philosophy OF the aeroplane and stud
led the matter longer than any of his compa-
triots Sober minded people felt that, if the
principle was ever TO be successfully applied, it
would be under his auspices. Perhaps Pro-
fessor Langley may think that he is entitled
10 sympathy from the public under all the cir
cumstances, but for the moment any sentiment
of that kind viii doubtless be oyermastered by
q sense of mortified national pride and by a