|
|
Post by kiwithrottlejockey on Jul 5, 2013 17:33:18 GMT 12
Replica plane on course for lift-offBy ESTHER ASHBY-COVENTRY - The Timaru Herald | 5:00AM - Friday, 05 July 2013 FILMING PROGRESS: Ivan Mudrovcich’s aircraft is the subject of documentary.
— WAYNE JOHNSON/Eye On U Productions Ltd.A REPRODUCTION of South Canterbury inventor Richard Pearse's aircraft of 1903 is raising hopes this one will get off the ground.
Retired Auckland based automotive engineer Ivan Mudrovcich has spent the past nine years recreating the aircraft based on the Pearse patent description and other research.
Pareora part-time engineer Lex Westoby said he thought Mr Mudrovcich was quite ingenious and he expected the flight attempt, planned for October, would be successful.
Mr Westoby spent three years working on a replica engine, based on Pearse's original plans, which was attached to a frame in 2003. But the project was never completed and flight was not attempted.
Mr Westoby said the engine ran well with plenty of thrust and the craft was now at the South Canterbury Aviation Heritage Centre.
He thought whoever piloted Mr Mudrovcich's reproduction would be brave as the technology was from the 1900s and its behaviour once off the ground was unknown.
"You can't use modern-day flying tactics," Mr Westoby said.
Mr Mudrovcich said a retired Air NZ pilot was prepared for the role and safety was a consideration of the planned flight.
Mr Mudrovcich spent a lot of time studying and analysing the language of the era and what was written. Deciphering the patent was one of the biggest challenges.
The first flight attempt last year, to see how much lift it had while on the back of a trailer, broke a wing. The next attempt in about October will be at the Whenuapai Air Force base in Auckland.
Regardless of the outcome, Mr Mudrovcich wants to make public the technical realities and counteract any misinformation.
Since 2008, freelance video cameraman Wayne Johnson has been filming the project for a documentary called Will It Fly? which will be released at Rialto cinemas in Auckland and Dunedin.
Mr Johnson said it was possible the documentary would be shown in Timaru in the future.www.stuff.co.nz/timaru-herald/news/8880927/Replica-plane-on-course-for-lift-off
|
|
|
|
Post by errolmartyn on Jul 5, 2013 18:13:49 GMT 12
Oh Dear, here we go again!
"Mr Mudrovcich wants to make public the technical realities and counteract any misinformation."
Sadly, Mr Mudrovcich in his misguided endeavour to built a replica [sic] of Richard Pearse's machine simply adds to the large volume of misinformation that already exists about Pearse and his first aeroplane.
Those interested in a true, properly researched account could do worse than refer to this writer's chapter eight of Volume One of A Passion For Flight published last year.
It would take a small essay to correct all of Mr Mudrovcich's misinformation and put him straight about 'technical realities', suffice it to say here that:
(a) Pearse stated in 1909 that he did not do anything practical about his aeroplane until 1904. He repeated as much in 1915, 1928 and 1943 - so no celebration possible then of a 1903 flight attempt by Pearse.
(b) Mr Mudrovcich falls into a common error in assuming that drawings in Pearse's 1906-1907 patent represent a 'plan' but these, as in most patents of the time, simply represent a concept, which in Pearse's case changed somewhat over the ensuring years leading up to November 1909 when he finally got around to making his first flight attempt. No plans, drawings or photographs of the aeroplane Pearse actually built are known to have survived. It is therefore nonsense to state that the Mudrovcich machine is a replica: it patently is not and cannot be.
(c) The wing fabric on the Mudrovcich machine is attached to the top of the wing, whereas Pearse attached his fabric to the wing's undersurface . There was no top covering.
Errol
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on May 20, 2019 20:24:22 GMT 12
Does anyone know what has become of this replica since Ivan Mudrovcich died last year?
|
|
|
|
Post by planewriting on May 21, 2019 7:48:34 GMT 12
Interesting discussion on this resurrected thread. Some say Mudrovcich's example is a replica whereas Errol says that is rubbish. What can be said about the other "lookalikes" that have appeared over the years and where are they all?
|
|
|
|
Post by davidd on May 21, 2019 13:25:06 GMT 12
What replicas have been built, along with numerous attempts by artists over the decades have apparently relied (for the most part) on the patent drawing and associated detailed written description and explanation. Very few have used the information from at least one surviving eyewitness (this was many decades later), plus at least one contemporary news item, that an elliptical wing planform was utilised by Pearse on his aeroplane as actually completed. It is quite possible that this airframe underwent modifications both during construction, as well as after completion, if an experimental machine can ever be considered definitive. Some of the features of the patent specification were almost certainly NOT incorporated in the completed aircraft, particularly the stability features, which apparently were supposed to complement what existing "conventional" controls were also discussed in the patent, but which would undoubtedly have resulted in a death trap should they have been incorporated. I suppose we have to give Pearse some credit for recognising that particular feature as a serious design error, although he never mentioned it in later comments on his aircraft. Automatic stability devices were not uncommonly discussed in the earliest days of aviation, but most were entirely impractical and extremely crude in concept, and would not have done anything to advance the unsteady progress of very early aviation.
David D
|
|
|
|
Post by pjw4118 on May 21, 2019 17:14:51 GMT 12
An aside , but the area in MOTATs ADH vacated by the FAA display is to be used for a NZ Pioneers of flight display including Pearse's later machine which has been held for many years by MOTAT .
|
|
|
|
Post by McFly on Jul 19, 2024 12:24:34 GMT 12
New Zealand aviation: Classic Flyers in Tauranga takes ownership of full-sized reproduction of Richard Pearse’s 1903 aircraft ( link)  
Tauranga’s aviation museum will become the permanent home to a replica of what’s believed to be the world’s oldest powered flying aircraft.
Classic Flyers has taken possession of the full-sized reproduction of New Zealand inventor Richard Pearse’s 1903 aircraft that was among the first to fly. It was painstakingly reconstructed over 15 years by late Auckland engineer Ivan Mudrovcich but has been in storage since his death in 2018. “For aviation enthusiasts in New Zealand, this is a very unique display and we’re pleased to have it at Classic Flyers,” Classic Flyers chief executive Andrew Gormlie said. “It’s one of the earliest aircraft and potentially flew a year before the Wright brothers in the US.”
Mudrovcich’s son, Ivan, and grandson, Joseph, both worked with him on what is now considered a family legacy. “I thought it was my dad’s best idea,” Ivan said. “I was rapt. It’s the biggest project he ever took on. “It absorbed 15 years of his life through researching and building. I’m an aircraft engineer, so I helped out where I could, and we have photos of Joseph getting involved from when he was 2 years old.”
Both the original built by Pearse and the replica have managed short “hops” off the ground, but whether the aircraft officially flew or not wasn’t the debate as far as Ivan was concerned. “The significance is that Pearse was a Kiwi pioneer at the same time as the Wright brothers, so he was up there among the first. “I put him in the same category as Burt Munro and John Britten. “Dad’s intention was to build the aircraft and allow others to come to their own conclusions. It’s been lying in Mum’s shed so we like that it will now be on show.”
The replica with its 12m wingspan will take pride of place hanging from the roof of Classic Flyers, so that it’s visible from the event room. “We can now tell the story of Richard Pearse,” Gormlie said. “He’s the one who originally invented it around 1900 at Temuka, near Christchurch. “He may have been the first guy that flew in the world but irrespective, he was still doing a series of test flights as early as any of the aviation pioneers around the planet so it’s pretty cool.”
|
|
|
|
Post by errolmartyn on Jul 19, 2024 14:56:08 GMT 12
New Zealand aviation: Classic Flyers in Tauranga takes ownership of full-sized reproduction of Richard Pearse’s 1903 aircraft ( link) Tauranga’s aviation museum will become the permanent home to a replica of what’s believed to be the world’s oldest powered flying aircraft.
Classic Flyers has taken possession of the full-sized reproduction of New Zealand inventor Richard Pearse’s 1903 aircraft that was among the first to fly. It was painstakingly reconstructed over 15 years by late Auckland engineer Ivan Mudrovcich but has been in storage since his death in 2018. “For aviation enthusiasts in New Zealand, this is a very unique display and we’re pleased to have it at Classic Flyers,” Classic Flyers chief executive Andrew Gormlie said. “It’s one of the earliest aircraft and potentially flew a year before the Wright brothers in the US.”
Mudrovcich’s son, Ivan, and grandson, Joseph, both worked with him on what is now considered a family legacy. “I thought it was my dad’s best idea,” Ivan said. “I was rapt. It’s the biggest project he ever took on. “It absorbed 15 years of his life through researching and building. I’m an aircraft engineer, so I helped out where I could, and we have photos of Joseph getting involved from when he was 2 years old.”
Both the original built by Pearse and the replica have managed short “hops” off the ground, but whether the aircraft officially flew or not wasn’t the debate as far as Ivan was concerned. “The significance is that Pearse was a Kiwi pioneer at the same time as the Wright brothers, so he was up there among the first. “I put him in the same category as Burt Munro and John Britten. “Dad’s intention was to build the aircraft and allow others to come to their own conclusions. It’s been lying in Mum’s shed so we like that it will now be on show.”
The replica with its 12m wingspan will take pride of place hanging from the roof of Classic Flyers, so that it’s visible from the event room. “We can now tell the story of Richard Pearse,” Gormlie said. “He’s the one who originally invented it around 1900 at Temuka, near Christchurch. “He may have been the first guy that flew in the world but irrespective, he was still doing a series of test flights as early as any of the aviation pioneers around the planet so it’s pretty cool.”
This is, in a word, EMBARRASSING! Not just for the Museum and New Zealand but is a gross distortion of the history or early flight. Richard Pearse did not attempt to fly during or before the Wright Brothers; in fact not until November 1909 did he make any such attempt (and failed). No drawings, photographs or detailed specifications of what Pearse built at the time survive, so it is incorrect to describe the Mudrovich machine as a replica or even a reproduction. I had number of email discussions about this with Ivan Mudrovcich but it became obvious to me that he was a gentleman who built what he 'imagined' Pearse had constructed. For those interested in historical accuracy, I recommend they read Chapter 8 of the first volume of my A Passion For Flight and/or the Timaru Post's reporter interview with Pearse on 16 November 1909 that was published next day by the paper and quoted verbatim therein (and also repeated in my book). Errol |
|
|
|
Post by brucie on Jul 19, 2024 18:09:47 GMT 12
New Zealand aviation: Classic Flyers in Tauranga takes ownership of full-sized reproduction of Richard Pearse’s 1903 aircraft ( link) Tauranga’s aviation museum will become the permanent home to a replica of what’s believed to be the world’s oldest powered flying aircraft.
Classic Flyers has taken possession of the full-sized reproduction of New Zealand inventor Richard Pearse’s 1903 aircraft that was among the first to fly. It was painstakingly reconstructed over 15 years by late Auckland engineer Ivan Mudrovcich but has been in storage since his death in 2018. “For aviation enthusiasts in New Zealand, this is a very unique display and we’re pleased to have it at Classic Flyers,” Classic Flyers chief executive Andrew Gormlie said. “It’s one of the earliest aircraft and potentially flew a year before the Wright brothers in the US.”
Mudrovcich’s son, Ivan, and grandson, Joseph, both worked with him on what is now considered a family legacy. “I thought it was my dad’s best idea,” Ivan said. “I was rapt. It’s the biggest project he ever took on. “It absorbed 15 years of his life through researching and building. I’m an aircraft engineer, so I helped out where I could, and we have photos of Joseph getting involved from when he was 2 years old.”
Both the original built by Pearse and the replica have managed short “hops” off the ground, but whether the aircraft officially flew or not wasn’t the debate as far as Ivan was concerned. “The significance is that Pearse was a Kiwi pioneer at the same time as the Wright brothers, so he was up there among the first. “I put him in the same category as Burt Munro and John Britten. “Dad’s intention was to build the aircraft and allow others to come to their own conclusions. It’s been lying in Mum’s shed so we like that it will now be on show.”
The replica with its 12m wingspan will take pride of place hanging from the roof of Classic Flyers, so that it’s visible from the event room. “We can now tell the story of Richard Pearse,” Gormlie said. “He’s the one who originally invented it around 1900 at Temuka, near Christchurch. “He may have been the first guy that flew in the world but irrespective, he was still doing a series of test flights as early as any of the aviation pioneers around the planet so it’s pretty cool.”
This is, in a word, EMBARRASSING! Not just for the Museum and New Zealand but is a gross distortion of the history or early flight. Richard Pearse did not attempt to fly during or before the Wright Brothers; in fact not until November 1909 did he making any such attempt (and failed). No drawings, photographs or detailed specifications of what Pearse built at the time survive, so it is incorrect to describe the Mudrovich machine as a replica or even a reproduction. I had number of email discussions about this with Ivan Mudrovcich but it became obvious to me that he was a gentleman who built what he 'imagined' Pearse had constructed. For those interested in historical accuracy, I recommend they read Chapter 8 of the first volume of my A Passion For Flight and/or the Timaru Post's reporter interview with Pearse on 16 November 1909 that was published next day by the paper and quoted verbatim therein (and also repeated in my book). Errol |
|
|
|
Post by brucie on Jul 19, 2024 18:13:51 GMT 12
This is, in a word, EMBARRASSING! Not just for the Museum and New Zealand but is a gross distortion of the history or early flight. Richard Pearse did not attempt to fly during or before the Wright Brothers; in fact not until November 1909 did he making any such attempt (and failed). No drawings, photographs or detailed specifications of what Pearse built at the time survive, so it is incorrect to describe the Mudrovich machine as a replica or even a reproduction. I had number of email discussions about this with Ivan Mudrovcich but it became obvious to me that he was a gentleman who built what he 'imagined' Pearse had constructed. For those interested in historical accuracy, I recommend they read Chapter 8 of the first volume of my A Passion For Flight and/or the Timaru Post's reporter interview with Pearse on 16 November 1909 that was published next day by the paper and quoted verbatim therein (and also repeated in my book). Errol |
|
|
|
Post by brucie on Jul 19, 2024 18:36:48 GMT 12
In the 30 Nov 1909 report,
"I did not attempt anything practical with the idea until 1904".
Absolutely! Pearse's words definitely, he then goes onto say,
"But I succeeded sufficiently to realize that there is a future before the flying machine, and to send me on the course which is now within a week or two of complete success."
Two statements, nothing practical until 1904, but he had succeeded sufficiently to realize that there was a future in the flying machine.
His early experiments were not, and he considered them not a practical solution to flight.
Consider the Wright Brothers early flights, which required a catapult system to get their machine in the air. Not a practical solution.
Pearse goes on to say,
"As you can imagine after 5 years labour without a return and expenditure of about £300 in raw material, I can not afford to take any risks with my machine".
5 years labor, and still not a practical machine !
He had perseverance!
Did Pearse fly before the Wright Brothers?
No, he admits nothing "practical".
But was he experimenting around the same time?
Yes, at least from 1904, as he states in the 1909 report.
As Errol states, there are no drawings, photographs or detailed specifications that have survived.
All we have is the 1906 patent, 1909 report, Pearse's writings, Warne Pearse's recollections, the relics recovered from the local tip.
Not much to go on, but the basis for the "reproduction ".
|
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Jul 20, 2024 12:12:57 GMT 12
Surprised to have NOT seen on this thread, Pearse's comments on his attempts to get his early aircraft airborne. These were (paraphrased from memory) that as soon as he reached a speed which he may have presumed was sufficient for flight, his aircraft attempted to fly sideways, completely out of control, and he realized that all his efforts to date had been in vain. His entire design we can presume was deeply flawed, partially because the resulting aircraft was so large and unwieldy that nothing could be done to correct its extreme deficiencies, probably because of his aerodynamic controls about which we can say very little as, apart from the patent drawing (filed 2 years BEFORE test flying began) no real, detailed information on the aircraft in 1909 seems to have survived. Only a totally new, and much smaller aircraft could, in his opinion, rectify the situation. I think he was pretty discouraged at this point. If Pearse's actual words on this particular topic as published HAVE been published here before, I apologise. Anybody reading them could not continue to believe the complete fiction that Pearse actually flew in 1904, in any sense of that word, nor any other time for that matter. He NEVER claimed to have REALLY flown, at ANY time. Why does this long-dead, but very clever and likeable man still seem to mesmerise so many people into thinking he flew before the Wrights - he in fact argued the contrary, to no avail it would seem.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Red Baron on Jul 20, 2024 12:48:39 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by FlyingKiwi on Jul 20, 2024 15:26:30 GMT 12
There is history, and there is Pearse achieving powered and controlled flight before the Wright Brothers. These two things are mutually incompatible. Hopefully the aeroplane is exhibited as a modern homebuilt approximation of an aeroplane from the pre-WWI era of aviation, and not as an accurate depiction of something predating the Wrights...
|
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Jul 20, 2024 15:36:53 GMT 12
Thank you, Flyingkiwi.
|
|
|
|
Post by brucie on Jul 21, 2024 8:06:55 GMT 12
The "reproduction " is based strongly on the 1906 Patent. As has been discussed previously in this forum, 1899 patent law required the invention to be produced before the patent, so we have the aircraft pre 1906. Read the patent, and look at the aircraft, everything that is described, from the "articulated" elevator, not hinged, the "wing rudders" and the bulging wing trusses of 3 ft is present. Nothing was "imagined " by Mr Mudrovcich. The engine as described, two cylinder,double acting with a cross
head has also been reproduced. The cylinders a direct copy, down to the number of rivits !, of the cylinder recovered from the tip
Absolutely no doubt that the wing is extremely unstable, and control would be limited if not non existant. Definitely not a "practical" aircraft. Nevertheless,Pearse as he noted in the 1909 report, the last five years,had been experimenting, short hops, stalling, and crashing on top of gorse hedges! The 1909 aircraft as witnessed and described in the report, is a development of this earlier aircraft, with the later four cylinder engine and 900 sq ft wing , as compared to this 800 sq ft.But by this time, technology had left him behind, and soon after he abandoned the project. Take it for what it is, a fascinating insight into an early New Zealanders attempt to fly.
|
|
|
|
Post by planecrazy on Jul 21, 2024 11:51:39 GMT 12
Take it for what it is, a fascinating insight into an early New Zealanders attempt to fly. Agreed, the fact that he was out in the plains away from support, no one to bounce things off, his neighbours and even his family thinking he was "mad Pearse," is the fascinating thing. He made his own engine a horizontally apposed two cylinder, also made a powered bicycle, a music machine among other crazy stuff for the times, he had a great imaginative mind. The mere fact that the thing even got off the ground is amazing, I don't want to take anything away from the Wrights and what they achieved, they did launch down a greased rail into wind and flew straight. Pearse had very high standards, wanted to take off and return to his start point, had tricycle undercart with wheels not skids, three access control not wing warping. He achieved a lot considering his location and resources. Horizontally apposed engines, tricycle undercart and three access controls are the norm these days, all of which Pearse incorporated over one hundred years ago! I for one feel a bit of patriotism and the underdog getting up, wonder if this plays into the whole people wanting to believe in the beating the Wrights to the air myth as well? |
|
|
|
Post by brucie on Jul 21, 2024 12:54:35 GMT 12
I agree with all your points, well said. I do have a copy of a hand written letter by Pearse, written after the construction of his Converter Plane, in which he also describes his earlier experiments in 1903/1904, I will post on this forum at a later date.
|
|
|
|
Post by errolmartyn on Jul 28, 2024 12:25:35 GMT 12
I do have a copy of a hand written letter by Pearse, written after the construction of his Converter Plane, in which he also describes his earlier experiments in 1903/1904, I will post on this forum at a later date. (Brucie, 21 Jul 24)
No sign yet of the letter, but meanwhile . . .
Read the patent, and look at the aircraft, everything that is described, from the "articulated" elevator, not hinged, the "wing rudders" and the bulging wing trusses of 3 ft is present. (Brucie, 21 Jul 24)
Well, not quite ‘everything’, it seems, as Pearse in the Complete Specification of his 1906-1907 patent includes, for instance, a description of his propeller:
". . . The form of propellor [sic] that is preferred, consists of a pair of canvas sails s each one of which is stretched across between the ends of a pair of arms t extending from the shaft. . . ." (Figure 2 of the patent includes a drawing of the propeller.)
The Mudrovcich machine, in contrast, features a four-bladed propeller with metal blades.
Errol
|
|
|
|
Post by brucie on Jul 29, 2024 6:17:59 GMT 12
I do have a copy of a hand written letter by Pearse, written after the construction of his Converter Plane, in which he also describes his earlier experiments in 1903/1904, I will post on this forum at a later date. (Brucie, 21 Jul 24) No sign yet of the letter, but meanwhile . . . Read the patent, and look at the aircraft, everything that is described, from the "articulated" elevator, not hinged, the "wing rudders" and the bulging wing trusses of 3 ft is present. (Brucie, 21 Jul 24) Well, not quite ‘everything’, it seems, as Pearse in the Complete Specification of his 1906-1907 patent includes, for instance, a description of his propeller: ". . . The form of propellor [sic] that is preferred, consists of a pair of canvas sails s each one of which is stretched across between the ends of a pair of arms t extending from the shaft. . . ." (Figure 2 of the patent includes a drawing of the propeller.) The Mudrovcich machine, in contrast, features a four-bladed propeller with metal blades. Errol |
|
