Gustave Whitehead: First in Flight, by Susan O’Dwyer Brinchman (Apex Educational Media, La Mesa, CA, 2015, 432 pages).
Book Review by Dennis Moore
July 23, 2015 (San Diego’s East County) - I was absolutely astounded and flabbergasted after reading Susan Brinchman’s Gustave Whitehead: First in Flight, for all my life and throughout elementary school and into college I had been taught that the Wright brothers, Orville and Wilbur, were the pioneers of modern aviation. In this fascinating and well documented and researched book, Brinchman states: “Paul Jackson, Editor-in-Chief of the century-old Jane’s All the World Aircraft (2013), often referred to as ‘the bible of aviation history’, announced in its Centennial Issue, in March, 2013, that Whitehead was ‘first to fly’, ahead of the Wrights, and was the inventor of the airplane, based on the mountainous evidence accumulated over the previous eight decades.”
This La Mesa, California resident, Brinchman, is uniquely suited to present documentation concerning Gustave Whitehead. She has been intimately involved with Whitehead research for the past five decades; interacted with many of the previous researchers, was present for some interviews with witnesses, and as a native of Fairfield, CT, where these first flights occurred, is familiar with the places Whitehead lived and flew.
The author presents stunning new discoveries, solidifying the case for recognition of Gustave Whitehead as the “True Inventor of the Airplane” and “First in Powered Flight.” Ironically, it comes at a time when a book by David McCullough, The Wright Brothers (Simon & Shuster), is #1 on the New York Times Bestseller’s list. It really makes you wonder if The Wright Brothers were #1 on the New York Times Bestseller’s List, with the revelations and documentation by Brinchman in Gustave Whitehead: First in Flight, what does it say for this book?
The author frames her very compelling book and story as the “Hidden History of Gustave Whitehead & the Wrights”, and reveals in this book little known facts about the first flights of Whitehead and the Wright brothers that will change perceptions about early aviation history, forever. She speaks of conspiracy theories. When I say initially that I was absolutely astounded and flabbergasted after reading Brinchman’s book, the details and research she provides in this book will convince others as well. She categorically states, and with conviction: “Connecticut aviation pioneer Gustave Whitehead invented and flew powered aeroplanes in 1901, over two years before the Wright brothers’ flights at Kitty Hawk.
Gustave Whitehead: First in Flight, is bound to raise a lot of controversy, but Brinchman provides in this book documentation and unimpeachable evidence and eyewitness accounts to counter that. This is a stunning book, that shakes my very core. It reads like a mystery novel, or spy and espionage story by Robert Ludlum. Everything that I had been taught as a child in grammar school and throughout college about the history of aviation and the Wright brothers, has now been turned upon its head. Brinchman has convinced me! There are conspiracies and coverups that one would not expect from something as historic as the evolution of flight.
Brinchman, actually has a vested interest in this book and story, as her father, Major William J. O’Dwyer discovered in 1963 photographs of a Whitehead aeroplane taken on the grounds of the Brooklawn Country Club Fairway, on the border of Fairfield and Bridgeport, Connecticut. For over half a century Brinchman continued the quest of her father, to place Gustave Whitehead in his rightful place, that of First in Flight, before the Wright brothers. It is clear from the history books that Orville and Wilbur Wright made that famous flight at Kitty Hawk, but the author would have you to believe by countless eyewitness accounts and sworn affidavits that Gustave Whitehead made the first flight two years earlier, in 1901.
Proof of the flights by Gustave Whitehead was abundant, even in the 1960’s. Resistance to the information by the Smithsonian was strong and hard to fathom – that is, until “the Contract” with Orville Wright’s heirs was unearthed by Maj. O’Dwyer in 1976, with the assistance of Senator Lowell Weicker, Jr. (later, Governor), of CT, published in “History by Contract” (O’Dwyer and Randolph, 1978). The “Smithsonian-Wright Agreement of 1948”, between the Wright executors and the United States of America, stipulated that the Smithsonian Institution would purchase the original Wright Flyer for $1 and other considerations, but neither the venerable Smithsonian Institution or its near-200 affiliated museums and research facilities could recognize any other airplane or person as “first in flight”, or the Wright Flyer would revert to the heirs. This “Contract” as it came to be called, finally explained the extreme reactions that had been seen to documentation of Whitehead’s successful flights by Smithsonian officials and their agents. This agreement is still in place, legally, today, so says Brinchman. Not until 2014, during the research conducted for this book, however, did it become known that those who crafted the required labels for the Wright Flyer crediting Orville were the same friends of Orville Wright who had worked together for nine years to disparage Whitehead as “first in flight”. We have, unfortunately, received an incomplete and some think, misleading history of first flight and early aviation, so says Brinchman. Thus, the conspiracy theory!
This book is replete with photographs and diagrams documenting the construction and flight of Whitehead’s “first in flight” aerial device, as well as affidavits and numerous eyewitness accounts crediting Gustave Whitehead with being the “first in flight” two years before the Wright brothers. In a telephone interview with the author, she indicated to me that her prime motivation for writing this book was to correct history. Perhaps this comes from her lifetime of being an educator.
Perhaps most revealing in this book is how Gustave Whitehead himself describes that first flight in 1901, as he states: “I never felt such a strange sensation as when the machine first left the ground and started on her flight. I heard nothing but the rumbling of the engine and the flapping of the big wings. I don’t think I saw anything during the first two minutes of the flight, for I was so excited with the sensations I experienced. When the ship had reached a height of about forty or fifty feet I began to wonder how much higher it would go. But just about that time I observed that she was sailing along easily and not raising any higher.”
This is a fascinating story, but more than that, it is an attempt to correct history. This true history of the first years of powered flight is a must-read that leaves no doubt of Whitehead’s accomplishments, changing perceptions about early aviation history, forever. For a signed copy of the book from the author go to www.gustavewhiteheadbook.com.
"Gustave Whitehead: First in Flight" is available on Amazon in print and as an eBook here.
Dennis Moore is the Associate Editor of the East County Magazine in San Diego and the book review editor for SDWriteway, an online newsletter for writers in San Diego that has partnered with the East County Magazine, as well as a freelance contributor to EURweb based out of Los Angeles. Mr. Moore can be contacted at contractsagency@gmail.com or you can follow him on Twitter at: @DennisMoore8.
Comments
False attacks on the Wrights, no proof about Whitehead
Examples of the Wright Legend Defenders
Some of the opinion-based comments here show the reason why a book with full documentation showing the primary source materials supporting the flights of Gustave Whitehead and the steps involved with the creation of the false "first in flight" credit for the Wrights, was necessary. "Gustave Whitehead: First in Flight" answers all these opinion-based critiques with supported facts. As a longtime educator, I know this is necessary when studying anything. The sources of the naysayers, when you trace them back, go right back to the Wrights, who tried to control and profit from world aviation, destroying all contenders. I prove this in my book (which apparently these persons have either not read or will not admit they have seen the documentation within). It is very hard to admit they have been wrong; it is a shock to everyone that the history is wrong and historians we trusted have lied or been mistaken (to put it more kindly). The public deserves the (inconvenient?) truth and they get it, with "Gustave Whitehead: First in Flight".
Sources
History According to the Wrights
More Questions
Octave Chanute on the Wrights
FYI, Ms. Cummings
Great story here if you dig a bit deeper, Mr. Moore
Falsehoods and the Wright claims
Already Addressed
Charming...
Thefacts are facts
Gustave Whitehead said men would fly, strangely
Chris, you bring up many good points! Gustave Whitehead was doubted (as were the Wrights) in his early years, by some, who believed that he was wrong about humans being able to fly as readily as people were then starting to travel by automobile. The documentation in my book shows Mr. Whitehead made statements about his powered flights which witnesses corroborated and the future of flight (then doubted by those who thought it was akin blasphemy against God, "who'd have given man wings if he wished him to fly"). He had help writing to the newspapers, from English speakers, as he'd been in America less than ten years at the time of these writings. There is a mountain of proof for Whitehead's powered flights, which did become routine, the community accepted, and made him famous. You are on the right track!
... And What of This & That ?
... and more
Whitehead's Obituary... strange silence
There is nothing strange except your commments.
How odd...
It certainly does matter...
GUSTAVE WHITEHEAD: FIRST IN FLIGHT
Mr. Gray, this incessant denigration of Gustave Whitehead on your part is bordering on the ridiculous, which makes one wonder what your vested interest is in this matter. Are you a relative of the Wright brothers, or are you employed by an agency such as the Smithsonian that does have a vested interest in propping up the legacy of the Wright brothers? Why don't you just allow history to speak for itself, and for readers to draw their own conclusions? It can get to a point where people will see your actions for exactly what they are.
Vested Interests, again
MESSAGE AND REPLY TO CARROLL F. GRAY
Mr. Gray, I feel compelled to reply to your comment regarding "vested interests" and my "fawning" review. First, I need to put all this in proper perspective.
I am the Associate Editor for the East County Magazine in San Diego and the book review editor for SDWriteway, an online newsletter for writers in San Diego that has partnered with the East County Magazine, as well as a freelance contributor to EURweb based out of Los Angeles, and having written more than 150 book reviews from all genres.
Two of my reviews subsequently resulted in the authors being awarded the NAACP Image Award in Literature, and another review contribuing towards the author having his book reach #1 on Barnes & Noble's Bestseller's list. I have also written for the San Diego Union-Tribune Newspaper, LifeAfter50 Magazine in Pasadena, the Baja Times Newspaper in Rosarito Beach, Mexico and the Baja News in Ensenada, Mexico. I am also an author of a book about Chicago politics.
I have no vested interest in this book or the author, and as a matter of fact, we have never met. I follow the facts as presented to me, by reading the book. It should not be considered "fawning" by starting off my review by stating that I was "absolutely astounded" and "flabbergasted" by the revelations and documentation presented by Susan Brinchman in her book. It was not up to me to research the facts of her story, I am a book reviewer, and that is why I attempt to convey to readers.
I did point out in my review the irony of David McCullough's "The Wright Brothers" being #1 on the New York Times Bestseller's List. Just today, the publisher of this book, Simon & Schuster, indicated to me that I will be receiving tomorrow that book for review in our East County Magazine. I plan to approach that review just as I have with Gustave Whitehead, with an open mind and no "fawning."
I have written a number of high profile reviews, just recently Senator Elizabeth Warren's "A Fighting Chance", which was #1 on New York Times Bestseller's List, and earlier Caitlin Rother's "Lost Girls", which was also #1 on the New York Times Bestseller's List. I am also working on a review of what may very well be a very controversial book, Peter Schweizer's "Clinton Cash: The Untold Story Of How And Why Foreign Governments And Businesses Helped Make Bill And Hillary Rich."
Mr. Gray, I say all this to say, I am much to busy to be "fawning" over an author, or to have a vested interest in anyone. This should be my last comment on this subject, and I trust it will also be your last comment, unless you have some "vested" interest or a hidden agenda. From what I have read of Susan Brinchman's book, and with the considerable documentation that she has provided, she presents a compelling story worthy of readers making up their own mind. This going back and forth with these comments by you, seems rather obsessive.
Comments
Mr. Gray you obviously didn't read the book
Wool over your eyes...
Apples & Oranges
The Orville Wright Attack on Whitehead Still Used Today
I beg to differ with this line of thought. On the one hand, it is claimed that the Wrights were first to fly, pointing out the 1903 supposed (very short) successful flight by Orville with alleged control, that in reality was a failed flight, according to both brothers and their 1911 court expert, William Hammer. Orville's campaign to denigrate Whitehead are still used by Whitehead detractors, to this day. The Smithsonian-Wright contract was designed by those same people who helped Orville fight Whitehead. It is all relevant. The evidence for Whitehead's early flights AND the reasons his rightful recognition did not occur are both in my book because these are both pertinent, as you well know. But some would like the public not to know they've been duped by the government - this time, the Smithsonian. What else have they lied about?
Irrelevant
First in Flight?
The Answer is simple Carole
Clarification
Whitehead was famous for his early flights in 1901-1904
Dear Carole,
You certainly ask a good question, answered with full documentation in my book. Gustave Whitehead became world-famous in 1901 for his successful early powered flights. This continued through at least 1904. Hundreds of newspapers covered his flight experiments during those years, around the world. The Wrights, during that time, were unknowns, not accepted as doing anything substantial. In 1908, when they were heading into their famed patent lawsuits, they unveiled the story of their first flights, and from then on, history became corrupted. Whitehead flew first, but was surpasssed by others later. They can have the credit for what they did later (Glenn Curtiss, the Wrights, and others), but Gustave Whitehead's documented flights must be recognized, ultimately, by the authorities. Right now, Smithsonian sold the credit to Orville Wright's heirs, so they could receive the Wright Flyer for $1 in 1948. That secret contract was pried out of the Smithsonian, which had denied its existence previously, in 1976, by my father, early aviation researcher, William J. O'Dwyer, with the help of his congressman. This is part of the reason you haven't heard of it. Had you lived in 1901, you would have. Good question! www.gustavewhiteheadbook.com
Gustave Whitehead: First in Flight facts threaten status quo
As many teachers (which I am) tell their students, use reliable sources. Anyone can make a website and claim anything they wish, and "blogging" is simply the expression of opinion, which many people increasingly love to do, using the Internet. What is most important, in studying history, is not the opinions of current day, self-proclaimed "experts", otherwise known as "hobby historians", but studying the original documentation - in this case, primary source materials from the Whitehead era. Much effort has occurred to keep this information from the public eye, by vested interests. But now it is available, causing angst amongst those who would maintain the status quo. All evidence available at this date, for crediting Gustave Whitehead as "first in powered flight", is examined in my book, as is the path to the Wrights' first flight credit, leading to an improper representation of history. We all deserve to hear the truth, which is why I took the time to document every fact in my book so the reader can see it. If we are to truly be a democracy, we must demand honesty of our institutions, such as the Smithsonian, which has fallen short, in this case. There has been a nasty campaign over the past century, started by the Wrights to obtain first flight credit necessary to expand their patents and control world aviation, which they worked hard at (and were hated for) worldwide. To overcome this, Orville, after Wilbur's death in 1912, devoted the rest of his life to creating the legend that he had been first in powered flight by using his fame and associates to destroy the claims of any contenders, especially Gustave Whitehead. To this day, this campaign by Orville, now continued by his so-called "disciples", with the help of an abhorrent signed contract to purchase first flight credit from the Smithsonian in return for giving them the Wright Flyer for $1, has robbed us of our right to an accurate history. The fight is about truth being revealed - or even examined! Those who fancy themselves as "early aviation experts" (most often, synonymous with Wright hero-worshipers) have taken it personally. Some are hired to denigrate Whitehead. The head curator of the Smithsonian, for instance (hand-picked, from Dayton, Ohio, the Wrights' hometown, writer of many books furthering the Wright legend) says that the Whitehead claim is "like a disease" that occurs every generation and needs to be stamped out. The Wikipedia article on Gustave Whitehead has been, for years, controlled by these sorts of individuals. A glance at the Talk pages behind that Wikipedia article makes it clear that those writing it are hellbent to keep Whitehead evidence out of the article. This is why Wikipedia cannot be considered a reliable source by reputable schools, because factions can take over and manipulate the information - the Gustave Whitehead article is a sad testimony to this. Greed, the desire for fame, and the resulting legal tricks of the Wrights have stolen the proper place in aviation history for Gustave Whitehead, Glenn Curtiss, and others. The culture of so-called "aviation historians" today does not lend itself to open-mindedness, quite the opposite. The same motivations are at work. My book will provide readers with food for thought, at the very least, and what will come of it, I hope, is improvement in our history books and the way our top history institutions function. This situation is reminiscent of 1633 when the Church condemned Galileo for telling the Vatican that the Earth was not the center of the universe. There was a great hue and cry and knashing of teeth. The venerable Vatican tried to keep the people from hearing what Galileo had to say by forcing him to recant, placing him under house arrest for 8 years, until his death. It took the Church, an institution that thought of itself as supreme - as does the Smithsonian, today - 350 years to admit they were wrong, and Galileo was correct. Today we do the same, human nature is no different - but it is accomplished by bullying and mobbing of so-called "experts", or even worse. We see this technique, currently, in the examination of different opinions in science and technology (especially with regards to safety issues) and we see the same in history. However, over time, the outcry of these frustrated representatives of the status quo will fade into nothingness, and the facts about first flight will now last the centuries, for "Gustave Whitehead: First in Flight" has fully documented why the credit for the first powered flights of mankind should rightly go to Gustave Whitehead. "Gustave Whitehead: First in Flight" is available at www.gustavewhiteheadbook.com and on Amazon. Buy it and see what you think!
Why Has This Not Been Corrected ?
Carroll F. Gray's insistence on denigrating documentation
It is very curious to me as to why this Carroll F. Gray is so insistent on denigrating the research and documentation in this book. It is as if he has some vested interest in the Wright brothers. It also makes me wonder if Gray has even read this book by Brinchman. Why not just let the book stand on its own merit? I kept an open mind when reading this book, and then writing the review. Why can't this Carroll F. Gray allow others to have an open mind while reading this book, and decide for themselves? Why this man would continually inject slights or denigration at the exhaustive material in this book, can only point at having a vested interest in shaping the thoughts and opinions of others. He may not realize it, but he is actually helping the sales of this book.
Sales... & Vested Interests
As an editor I'm free to voice my own opinion, any editor is.
I fail to see how this is relevant. Publishers routinely take pains to avoid taking sides on anything controversial, and it doesn't mean the editor's opinon is wrong or right. On our site we have a routine disclaimer on every reader's editorial stating it does not necesasrily reflect the views of our publication. So what?
While we welcome diverse views here we also don't want badgering of any local author.
For the record, can you please clarify whether you have any vested interest in protecting the Wrights' legacy, or with any organizations, museums, foundations etc. to that effect? It doesn't mean you're wrong of course, but we do like transparency when someone is attempting to push one side of debate as facts.
We've had issues on the site before where someone on the payroll of, say, the wind or tobacco industry would become very aggressive in attempting to debunk arguments made by others, and we do want readers to know if either side has financial ties or is related to any of the people involved.
At any rate, all this controversy makes me want to read Susan's book even more!
The "So What" of this...
Financial Interests - Financial Ties
"opinions and unsupported theories"
This book is fully documented
Though there are those who cannot bear the idea that the Wrights didn't make the first powered flights, the evidence in my book is clear. Mr. Gray's many opinions and unsupported theories to the contrary are just that. Readers, decide for yourselves - for this is a contentious issue. The Smithsonian has assembled a lineup of Whitehead detractors to attack "the Whitehead claim" just as Orville Wright and friends did, in earlier years. What is troubling is that as a result, we have been cheated out of an accurate history, by those who profited along with the Wrights. History will be changed on this topic, without a doubt.
The Whitehead Myth
Pages