# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The average passenger airliner costs between $82 and $230 million. Even a single-engine plane costs upwards of $100,000. While airplanes are incredibly expensive, the average new car costs just $36,000. This leads many people to wonder why airplanes are so expensive to make.

TLDR - The high cost of a passenger airliner is partly due to the extensive research and development needed to create the airliner. Building an airplane also requires comprehensive testing. All components, from belts to windows, are tested to ensure they meet safety and quality standards.

How Much Does It Cost to Manufacture an Airplane?

The list price for a Boeing 737-800 is $89.1 million, which is one of the least expensive passenger airliners. The Boeing 777-9 starts at $442.2 million.

The two biggest factors that influence cost are design and testing. Before manufacturing the plane, airplane manufacturers need to design it. This involves a team of engineers who may spend years refining their designs.

After beginning production on a line of airplanes, the manufacturer needs to begin sourcing parts and components for the planes. Every single item in the plane needs to meet specific standards for safety and quality. The extensive testing process dramatically increases the price of even the smallest component.

Airline manufacturers also have fewer suppliers compared to manufacturers in other industries. For example, a car manufacturer may outsource the production of brakes for a line of cars. The manufacturer may have dozens of brake suppliers competing for a contract, which helps to drive down prices.

With fewer suppliers, airline manufacturers pay more for each component that is not manufactured in their facilities. Boeing and Airbus obtain most of the components needed for their planes from a limited selection of third-party suppliers.

Dozens of companies may produce brakes for cars but only a few companies make airplane seats or engines. This allows them to charge more for their products, which drives up the costs of manufacturing an airplane.

The manufacturing process for airplanes is also time-consuming. The average plane takes about 9 to 12 months to complete. Manufacturers employ thousands of workers at multiple facilities, which is factored into the cost of the plane.

Airplanes are also expensive due to limited competition. As with the third-party companies that supply airplane components, airline manufacturers can charge more for their products because customers have fewer options. Airbus and Boeing are the only US manufacturers of commercial passenger airliners.

Why Is Private Flying So Expensive?

Private jets are costly for owners and travelers. The high cost is due to several factors, including ground services, fuel, and maintenance. Travelers also need to cover the cost of labor when hiring a pilot for a private jet.

Landing and handling fees at airports can easily add up to $2,000 or more for a single trip. Airplane owners also need to cover insurance, maintenance, and other expenses. Due to the various costs involved, some private jet charter companies charge $4,000 or more per hour of flight.

The cost also depends on the type of private jet. A mid-size or super-mid-size jet is likely to cost significantly more compared to a light jet, such as a Cessna Citation. A private flight on a Bombardier Learjet or a Hawker Beechcraft may cost $5,000 to $7,000 per hour.

What Are the Most Expensive Components on an Airplane?

The engine is one of the most expensive parts of an airplane. The engines used in large passenger airliners can cost many millions of dollars. For example, the 747-400 has three engine options ranging in price from $11 million to $12.2 million.

The avionics, which includes the controls and GPS navigation systems in the cockpit, are also costly. A basic GPS navigator for a small plane costs about $20,000. A full avionics panel for a 747 may cost $100,000 or more.

Another major cost is the cockpit windshield and the windows of the airplane. The average cockpit windshield costs over $26,000 while each window may cost about $500.

The seating is also quite expensive, costing $3,000 to $5,000 per seat. High-quality seats for airplanes that handle long flights can easily cost $10,000 or more per economy seat.

First-class seats tend to start at about $60,000. The most expensive first-class seats cost over $1 million.

Most modern commercial flights provide in-flight entertainment for passengers. While most of the inflight entertainment systems consist of one or more TV screens, speakers, and playback devices, they can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars.

The manufacturers of in-flight entertainment systems charge about $10,000 to $20,000 per seat. The Boeing 747 has a seating capacity of about 366 passengers. The entertainment for a 747 may cost $3.6 to $7.2 million.

To summarize, let's sum up the cost of some of the components of a Boeing 747 airliner. Keep in mind these are estimates and actual numbers vary from model to model.

Engine: $12.2 million each (x4)

Avionics: $100,000

Cockpit windshield: $26,000

Windows: $500 each

Economy seats: $10,000 each

First class seats: $60,000 each

In-flight entertainment: $20,000 each

How Much Does a Single-Engine Plane Cost?

The average single-engine plane costs about $15,000 to $100,000 used. The Cessna 150 is one of the least expensive single-engine planes, starting at $15,000. It was originally produced in 1958 and remains a popular choice for pilots.

As owning an airplane carries more of a risk compared to driving an automobile, obtaining financing for an airplane is more difficult. Lenders are more likely to require collateral or charge a higher rate of interest.

What Is the Cost of Owning a Small Plane?

After the cost of purchasing a plane, airplane owners need to deal with a variety of related costs. The cost of owning a small plane includes parking, gas, insurance, and maintenance.

Most airplane hangars charge about $275 per month to park a small plane. Pilots may also pay $100 for tiedown gear for the plane and things like wheel chocks.

Pilots are required to have their planes professionally inspected each year. This costs between $600 and $1,200, depending on the region and the type of plane. Airplane owners may also need to deal with occasional maintenance issues outside of the yearly inspection.

The cost of fuel should also be considered, which averages about $5 per gallon. Single-engine planes can burn through about 5 to 10 gallons per hour, costing the pilot $25 to $50 for an hour of flight.

If the pilot intends to fly the plane and land at an airport, they may pay $100 to $500 in airport fees. With these costs, the average owner may spend about $5,000 to $10,000 per year owning and flying a plane.

Is it Less Expensive to Fly Your Own Plane?

Compared to chartering a private jet, flying a plane is likely to be less expensive. A private airplane owner needs to cover the costs of fuel, insurance, and maintenance. Analysts estimate that the average owner spends about $150 to $200 per hour of flight.

Chartering a single-engine plane may cost $500 to $1,500 per hour, which is at least 250% more than the highest cost of flying a plane.

When chartering a light jet, travelers can expect to pay about $1,500 to $3,000 per hour. A mid-size jet may cost $4,000 to $8,000 per hour while a long-range jet costs about $8,500 to $13,000 per hour.

Flying a plane is much less expensive compared to chartering a plane, but owners may also need to account for the initial cost of the plane. With an average cost of $15,000 to $100,000, an airplane owner may need to fly for many hours before saving money compared to hiring a plane and a pilot.

Related Posts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why Are Planes So Expensive to Make? - Aircraft Compare

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The average passenger airliner costs between $82 and $230 million. Even a single-engine plane costs upwards of $100,000. While airplanes are incredibly expensive, the average new car costs just $36,000. This leads many people to wonder why airplanes are so expensive to make. TLDR - The high cost of a...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The air transport sector (passenger and freight) represents only a small share of OECD countries' value-added (around 0.3 % on average, see Figure 1). Yet, strong inter-industry linkages with both upstream and downstream sectors make it an important part of the economy.

First, air transport relies on several upstream sectors: support activities to air transportation (including the operation of airports); aircraft manufacturing; rental and leasing services; and refined petroleum manufacturing (including the blending of biofuels). In particular, the air transport sector and airports are inherently intertwined. Some airports depend heavily on one or a few companies that use it as a hub. Shared ownership is common, either by private actors (e.g. Lufthansa owning a minority share in Frankfurt's airport) or by the public sector. The OECD Indicators on Product Market Regulation show that in 2018, the public sector was a shareholder of the largest domestic airport in three out of every four OECD countries and of the largest air carrier in one out of three countries. Moreover, aircraft manufacturers are highly dependent on demand from the air transport sector, directly or through leasing companies. Because both the activity level and the strategic decisions concerning air transport, airports and aircraft manufacturing are linked, this brief considers them jointly as the "aviation industry".

Figure 1. Size of the aviation industry, selected OECD economies

Share in total value added, 2017

Note: Industries based on ISIC Rev.4 classification (Air transport: Division 51; Manufacturing of air and spacecrafts: Group 303; Operation of airports: Class 5223). Value-added for the operation of airports not available in Australia, Canada, Japan and the United States. Data from 2016 for Canada and 2018 for the United States.

Source: Calculations based on the OECD STAN Database, http://oe.cd/stan.

Second, air transport is a key input for downstream sectors, as it enables several economic activities by way of trade in goods and especially in services through the movement of natural persons (i.e. mode 4 services trade). Air cargo is essential for the smooth operations of global supply chains. Business travel is an important channel of international knowledge transfer. The availability of non-stop intercontinental flights is an important determinant of the location of large firms' headquarters, even though the impact of airports on local economic activity is debated. The readiness of flights reaching a large number of destinations is also instrumental for tourism, in particular international tourism.

Beyond inter-industry linkages, air transport is characterised by both complementarity and substitutability with other modes of transport, especially high-speed rail on short- and medium-haul routes. Under pre-COVID conditions, the International Energy Agency estimated that 14% of global flights could be competitively shifted to high-speed rail. Yet, air transport remains essential for territorial cohesion and development convergence as it is often the only viable way of connecting peripheral regions.

The change in the behaviour of passengers following the COVID-19 crisis, travel restrictions and the ensuing economic crisis have resulted in a dramatic drop in demand for airline services. According to IATA, passenger air transport measured as revenue passenger kilometre was down 90% year-on-year in April 2020 and still down 75% in August. The collapse in economic activity and trade affected freight, which was almost 30% lower year-on-year in April and still about 12% lower in August.

The size of the shock has put the liquidity buffers of airline companies under pressure, even if a significant share of its costs are variable ( around 50% according to IATA, notably fuel accounting for 25% of the total costs) and the recent drop in oil prices has decreased airlines' operating costs.

In the medium run, airline companies face two uncertainties:

The cost of health-related measures. Operating costs are likely to increase in the short-run for both airlines and airports because of additional health and safety requirements (e.g. disinfection, PPE, temperature checks or viral tests) before they can be passed on to consumers. Moreover, if implemented for air transport, social distancing measures could force a reduction in the passenger load factor (i.e. the number of seats that can be occupied during a flight) by up to 50%.

The shape of the recovery for commercial flights. International travel restrictions, the contraction of economic activity and changes in transport behaviour by cautious consumers may prevent a return to pre-crisis demand levels, even as lockdowns and domestic travel restrictions measures are loosened in many countries. Commercial air traffic is slow to recover: as of September 2020, the number of flights remains more than 40% below pre-crisis level globally ( Figure 2). This hides differences across flight lengths: the drop is even more pronounced for long-haul flights. In the longer run, changes in consumer behaviour may result in structural changes in air transport demand. Even though the rebound of domestic flights in China suggests that traffic may revert to pre-crisis levels, a permanent drop in demand from pre-crisis levels cannot be excluded, either through modal shifts in services trade (e.g. video-conferencing instead of business travel) or, to a lesser extent, through substitution with other modes of transport (e.g. high-speed trains).

The combination of negative demand and supply shocks and the uncertainty around the medium-run outlook create an uncertain perspective for airline companies. Through inter-industry linkages, this uncertainty affects the whole aviation industry. Moreover, the industry remains exposed to a possible resurgence of the pandemic, as governments may impose new air travel restrictions to tackle flare-ups or a potential second wave of infections. This may threaten the existence of some firms in the industry, as production and revenues are likely to remain inferior to pre-crisis levels for some time.

Figure 2. Commercial air traffic, world

Number of flights tracked daily by Flightradar24, 2020 v. 2019

Note: 7-day moving average of the number of commercial flights tracked by Flightradar24 per day (UCT time). Commercial air traffic includes commercial passenger flights, cargo flights, charter flights and some business jet flights; it does not include private flights, gliders, helicopter flights, ambulance flights, government flights, military flights or drones.

Source: FlightRadar24 Statistics, flightradar24.com.

Airline companies were in very different situations before the COVID-19 crisis began. In particular, air transport is one of the sectors with the highest dispersion in productivity across firms and, to a lesser extent, in profitability. Airline companies thus entered the crisis with strikingly different abilities to withstand such a shock and heterogeneous prospects for the future.

Bankruptcies or mergers and acquisitions among large companies could have a negative effect on competition in air transport, with possible repercussions on prices. Even if 80% of passenger seats are on routes with several carriers, many of these routes rely on a small number of firms ( 36% of routes involve only two or three carriers).

Past public policy interventions in the aviation industry have had different rationales. Most interventions have targeted aircraft manufacturers. These firms are usually subject to learning-by-doing and significant economies of scale, which may cause under-investment in technology, innovation or production facilities and, hence, justify public support. Public policies have also aimed at co-ordinating a wide array of suppliers and different know-how, and ensuring aircraft safety. More recently, aircraft manufacturers have also been the target of green industrial policies, seeking to accelerate the shift towards low-carbon aircraft. Beyond supporting aircraft manufacturers, governments have also intervened to preserve employment in large air transport companies.

When it comes to the response to the COVID-19 crisis, most of the sector- or firm-specific measures thus far have targeted air transport. As of August 2020, governments have provided about USD 160 billion of support to airlines ( Figure 3). Almost two-thirds of that support consists of direct aid (subsidies, loans, equity, cash injection), while one quarter takes the form of wage subsidies. Interventions have generally taken three forms:

Figure 3. Government support to airlines in the aftermath of the COVID-19 crisis

Monetary value of relief measures for airlines across economies, as of August 2020

Note: Proposed or confirmed, monetarily quantified relief measures for airlines provided by governments or government-backed entities across 57 countries as of August 20, 2020 in billion USD, Measures include: government-backed commercial loans and government guarantees; recapitalisation through state equity; flight subsidies, nationalisation; deferral and/or waiver of taxes and charges; grants; and private equity.

Source: OECD elaborations on Abate, Christidis & Joko Purwanto (2020) J. Air Transp. Manag. 89:101931.

As the crisis lingers, governments may resort more to equity injections. Even if airline companies did not appear to enter the crisis with higher leverage than firms in other sectors, their debt level could increase by as much as 28% in 2020, according to IATA. Absent any equity injection, this would significantly affect their capacity to finance new investments and, for some firms, affect their solvency.

The COVID-19 crisis has reinforced some of the rationales that were previously used to justify support to the aviation industry. In particular, liquidity challenges, increasing debt burdens and uncertain prospects can jeopardise crucial investments to reduce the industry's carbon intensity, notably the acquisition of more fuel-efficient aircraft.

Whereas industrial policy in the aviation industry has primarily focused on aircraft manufacturers, the crisis exposed the crucial role of air transport and airport infrastructure for the connectivity of peripheral areas (in particular islands). In several countries (France, Greece, Iceland, Italy, Spain, Norway, Portugal), retail tariffs of air carriers for domestic transportation are regulated and sometimes subsidised as a result of a public service obligation on certain routes.

If not well-designed, government interventions can slow business dynamics and ultimately productivity growth. If they go beyond sector-wide interventions and provide firm-specific support, governments should only target solvent and productive companies. As in any other industry, governments should avoid supporting non-viable companies; rather, they should allow exit and promote resource reallocation. In practice this calls for sector-wide measures and boosting competition.

The risk that government interventions negatively affect business dynamics and productivity may be particularly acute for air transport, given the high dispersion of profitability and productivity across firms in the sector. With demand likely to remain muted in the medium run, the sector has started to adapt and downsize. In this context, governments should enable downsizing rather than counter it, being particularly careful to foster restructuring or exit of the least efficient firms while continuing to target an efficient use of public resources.

In the process of restructuring, government need to smoothen the transition for displaced workers. Besides mitigating costs for firms, job retention schemes protected aviation industry workers' income at the height of the crisis. As uncertainty regarding the cost of health measures and the shape of recovery for commercial flights resolves, job retention schemes need to adjust to target jobs that are viable but at risk of being terminated. At the same time, governments need to focus on supporting aviation industry workers at risk of becoming unemployed, rather than supporting specific jobs.

Although significant, the reduction in emissions due to containment measures and the economic crisis is likely to be only temporary, and will be inconsequential in slowing down climate change. While the grounding of a significant part of the global fleet could result in the retirement of the least efficient aircraft, the COVID-19 crisis could also reduce or postpone the necessary low-carbon investments due to financial constraints and the recent drop in oil prices. The crisis has already dampened the ambitions of the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA).

Investment in cleaner aircrafts and fuel can contribute to long-term resilience in the aviation industry. Putting firms on a sustainable path can contribute to their long-run viability and mitigate moral hazard potentially induced by the current wave of support. In that respect, governments' interventions should consider the transport sector holistically and, where relevant, consider promoting a shift towards more energy-efficient transport modes, e.g. high-speed rail.

Making firm-level support decisions contingent on environmental improvements may help ensure that firms transition into cleaner technologies and fuels, and that the transition occurs gradually (e.g. the loans and loan guarantees to Air France and Lufthansa). In particular, as shareholders, governments should encourage this shift.

Policies should not engage in stimulating demand for aircraft by airlines. The additional costs could jeopardise the solvency of the latter and be ineffective in ensuring a steady flow of orders for aircraft manufacturers.

Moreover, rather than focusing on large players, interventions should ensure that young firms and start-ups are included, for instance through complementary measures (e.g. the French Aeronautics support plan includes funds and subsidies dedicated to small and medium-sized firms). Failing to include young firms may lead to excessive consolidation by the largest players.

Mission-oriented strategies aimed at greening the aviation industry can be a useful tool in this respect, and industrial-policy responses to the COVID-19 crisis targeting the aviation industry should be part of the low-carbon transition strategies implemented or under discussion in many OECD countries. Such co-ordinated packages of policy measures can contribute to addressing societal challenges, in particular by co-ordinating all stakeholders and ensuring the consistency and complementarity of public and private investments.

Further reading

Abate, Megersa, Panayotis Christidis and Alloysius Joko Purwanto (2020), "Government support to airlines in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic", Journal of Air Transport Management 89:101931, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2020.101931

IEA (2020), "Changes in transport behaviour during the Covid-19 crisis", International Energy Agency, Paris, https://www.iea.org/articles/changes-in-transport-behaviour-during-the-covid-19-crisis

International Transport Forum (2020), "Restoring air connectivity under policies to mitigate climate change", COVID-19 Transport Brief, https://www.itf-oecd.org/sites/default/files/air-connectivity-covid-19.pdf

International Transport Forum (2018), "Government support measures for domestic air connectivity", Case-Specific Policy Analysis Reports, https://www.itf-oecd.org/government-support-measures-domestic-air-connectivity

OECD (2020), "Job retention schemes during the COVID-19 lockdown and beyond", OECD Policy Responses to Coronavirus (COVID-19), https://www.oecd.org/coronavirus/policy-responses/job-retention-schemes-during-the-covid-19-lockdown-and-beyond-0853ba1d/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
COVID-19 and the aviation industry: Impact and policy responses

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The dramatic drop in demand for passenger air transport (and freight, to a lesser extent) due to the COVID-19 pandemic and containment measures is threatening the viability of many firms in both the air transport sector and the rest of the aviation industry, with many jobs at stake.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The number of flights performed globally by the airline industry increased steadily since the early 2000s and reached 38.9 million in 2019. However, due to the coronavirus pandemic, the number of flights dropped to 16.9 million in 2020.

The global airline industry

The number of flights performed increased year-on-year continuously to transport both passengers and freight. The industry's recent growth can be attributed to a combination of increasing living standards and decreasing costs of air travel. While North American and European airlines currently dominate in terms of both revenue and passengers flown, it is predicted that future growth will be highest in the emerging markets of Africa, Latin America and Asia. This is due not only to economic development but also to the expected increase in the working-age population of many countries in these regions.

Opinion of people on global airlines and COVID-19

Under the circumstances of COVID-19, governments made a multitude of adjustments in the aviation industry to take the spread of the pandemic under control. Flights were canceled, and individuals had to keep high levels of safety measures, such as social distancing. Subsequently, COVID-19 created many hurdles for the airlines to handle to be able to operate. According to an early 2020 survey, roughly 44 percent of individuals somewhat approved of how airlines dealt with the COVID-19 outbreak. The emergence of COVID-19 also challenged the feeling of comfort amongst individuals to fly. As of May 2020, more than 40 percent of people expressed that they will use air travel less than planned over the next 18 months in the aftermath of the coronavirus pandemic. This type of change in individual preferences raises a multitude of potential hurdles for aviation firms to tackle to survive this crisis sustainably.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Airline industry worldwide - number of flights 2004-2022 | Statista

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The number of flights performed globally by the airline industry increased steadily since the early 2000s and reached 38.9 million in 2019. However, due to the coronavirus pandemic, the number of flights dropped to 16.9 million in 2020. The number of flights performed increased year-on-year continuously to transport both passengers and freight.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Up

The Wright
Story
(You are here.)

Down

Need to

find your

bearings?

Try these
navigation aids:

If this is your first
visit, please stop by:

Something to share?
Please:

Available in Française, Español, Português, Deutsch, Россию, 中文, 日本, and others.

"Before the Wright Brothers, no one working in aviation did anything fundamentally correct. Since the Wright Brothers, no one has done anything fundamentally different."

- Darrel Collins, US Park Service
Kitty Hawk National Historic Park

o simply say that the Wright Brothers invented the airplane doesn't begin to describe their many accomplishments. Nor is it especially accurate. The first fixed-wing aircraft -- a kite mounted on a stick -- was conceived and flown almost a century before Orville and Wilbur made their first flights. The Wrights were first to design and build a flying craft that could be controlled while in the air. Every successful aircraft ever built since, beginning with the 1902 Wright glider, has had controls to roll the wings right or left, pitch the nose up or down, and yawthe nose from side to side. These three controls -- roll, pitch, and yaw -- let a pilot navigate an airplane in all three dimensions, making it possible to fly from place to place. The entire aerospace business, the largest industry in the world, depends on this simple but brilliant idea. So do spacecraft, submarines, even robots. (For more details, download our illustrated PDF, What did the Wright Brothers Invent?)

More important, the Wright Brothers changed the way we view our world. Before flight became commonplace, folks traveled in just two dimensions, north and south, east and west, crossing the lines that separate town from town, nation from nation. Seen from above, the artificial boundaries that divide us disappear. Distances shrink, the horizon stretches. The world seems grander and more interconnected. This three-dimensional vision has revealed a universe of promises and possibilities. The world economy, our awareness of our environment, and space exploration are all, to some degree, the results of the inventive minds of the Wilbur and Orville Wright.

Here, in brief, is their story. To explore any part of it in greater detail, click on the section titles below or left. You may also want to check out our illustrated Wright Timeline. For serious scholars who wish to consult a day-to-day chronology on the Wright brothers' lives, we offer George Arnold Renstrom's classic, Wilbur and Orville Wright: A Chronologyin PDF format. Renstrom's work also contains a detailed flight log of their glider experiments, test flights at Huffman Prairie, training flights and exhibition flights in Europe and America.

Wilbur Wright, 1867 to 1912

Orville Wright, 1871 to 1948

Wilbur and Orville were the sons of Milton and Susan Wright and members of a warm, loving family that encouraged learning and doing. Milton was a bishop in the United Brethren Church, and was often away from home on church business. But he wrote hundreds of letters home, and often brought back presents from his trips, exposing his children to the world beyond their horizon. In 1878, he brought home a rubber band-powered helicopter, and young Wilbur and Orville immediately began to build copies of it.

In 1884, Bishop Wright moved his family to Dayton, Ohio, the political center of the United Brethren Church. About the same time, his wife Susan fell ill with tuberculosis. Wilbur, just out of high school, put off college and nursed his sick mother. Orville began to lose interest in school and learned the printing business. Susan Wright died in the summer of 1889, the same year that Orville dropped out of high school to open his own print shop.

In 1890, Wilbur joined Orville in the printing business, serving as editor for The West Side News, a weekly newspaper for their west Dayton neighborhood. It was modestly successful, and the Brothers began a daily, the Evening Item, in 1891. However, they couldn't compete with larger, more established daily newspapers, and after a few months they went back to being simple job printers.

In 1894, Wilbur and Orville were caught up in the bicycling craze that swept the nation. To augment the income from their printing trade, they began repairing and selling bicycles. This soon grew into a full-time business, and in 1896 they began to manufacture their own bikes. The Wright Cycle Company returned a handsome profit, but the brothers cared little about the money. They were already thinking about trading their wheels for wings.

The Wright home in West Dayton, 1897. Wilbur and Orville built the front porch. Note the bicycle leaning against the fence - they probably built it as well.

In 1896, the newspapers were filled with accounts of flying machines. Wilbur and Orville noticed that all these primitive aircraft lacked suitable controls. They began to wonder how a pilot might balance an aircraft in the air, just as a cyclist balances his bicycle on the road. In 1899, Wilbur devised a simple system that twisted or "warped" the wings of a biplane, causing it to roll right or left. They tested this system in a kite, then a series of gliders.

They made their first test flights at Kitty Hawk, North Carolina, on the shores of the Atlantic where the strong winds helped to launch the gliders and the soft sands helped to cushion the fall when they crashed. Their first two gliders, flown in 1900 and 1901, failed to perform as the Wrights had hoped. The gliders did not provide enough lift nor were they fully controllable. So during the winter of 1901-1902 Wilbur and Orville built a wind tunnel and conducted experiments to determine the best wing shape for an airplane. This enabled them to build a glider with sufficient lift, and concentrate on the problem of control. Toward the end of the 1902 flying season, their third glider became the first fully controllable aircraft, with roll, pitch, and yaw controls.

During the winter of 1902-1903, with the help of their mechanic, Charlie Taylor, the Wrights designed and built a gasoline engine light enough and powerful enough to propel an airplane. They also designed the first true airplane propellers and built a new, powered aircraft. Back in Kitty Hawk, they suddenly found themselves in a race. Samuel P. Langley, Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, had also built a powered aircraft, patterned after a small, unmanned "aerodrome" he had flown successfully in 1896. To add to their frustrations, the Wrights were delayed by problems with their propeller shafts and the weather, giving Langley time to test his aircraft twice in late 1903. Both attempts failed miserably, however, and Langley left the field to the Wrights. On December 17, 1903, Wilbur and Orville Wright made the first sustained, controlled flights in a powered aircraft.

Back in Dayton, Ohio, the brothers found they had much to do to perfect their invention. While the 1903 Wright Flyer did indeed fly, it was underpowered and difficult to control. They established the world's first test flight facilities at Huffman Prairie, northeast of Dayton (today, the site of Wright Patterson Air Force Base). For two years they made flight after flight, fine tuning the controls, engine, propellers, and configuration of their airplane. At first, they could only fly in a straight line for less than a minute. But by the end of 1905, they were flying figure-eight's over Huffman Prairie, staying aloft for over half an hour, or until their fuel ran out. The 1905 Wright Flyer was the world's first practical airplane.

After the 1905 flying season, the Wrights contacted the United States War Department, as well as governments and individuals in England, France, Germany, and Russia, offering to sell a flying machine. They were turned down time and time again -- government bureaucrats thought they were crackpots; others thought that if two bicycle mechanics could build a successful airplane, they could do it themselves. But the Wright persisted, and in late 1907, the U.S. Army Signal Corps asked for an aircraft. Just a few months later, in early 1908, a French syndicate of businessmen agreed to purchase another.

Both the U.S. Army and the French asked for an airplane capable of carrying a passenger. The Wright brothers hastily adapted their 1905 Flyer with two seats and a more powerful engine. They tested these modifications in secret, back at Kitty Hawk, North Carolina for the first time in several years. Then the brothers parted temporarily -- Wilbur to France and Orville to Virginia.

In 1908 and 1909, Wilbur demonstrated Wright aircraft in Europe, and Orville flew in Fort Meyer, Virginia. The flights went well until Orville lost a propeller and crashed, breaking his leg and killing his passenger Lt. Thomas Selfridge. While Orville recuperated, Wilbur kept flying in France, breaking record after record. Orville and his sister Kate eventually joined Wilbur in France, and the three returned home to Dayton to a elaborate homecoming celebration. Together, Orville and Wilbur returned to Fort Meyer with a new Military Flyer and completed the U.S. Army trials. A few months later, Wilbur flew before over a million spectators in New York Harbor -- his first public flight in his native land. All of these flights stunned and captivated the world. The Wright Brothers became the first great celebrities of the twentieth century.

As their fame grew, orders for aircraft poured in. The Wrights set up airplane factories and flight schools on both sides of the Atlantic. Unfortunately, once they had demonstrated their aircraft in public, it was easy for others to copy them -- and many did. The Wrights were dragged into time-consuming, energy-draining patent fights in Europe and America. The most bitter legal battle was with Glenn Curtiss, who, as part of his defense, borrowed Langley's unsuccessful aircraft from the Smithsonian Institution and rebuilt it to prove that the Aerodrome could have flown before the Wright Flyer. The ruse didn't work -- Curtiss made too many modifications to get Langley's aircraft in the air and the courts ruled in favor of the Wrights. Yet although the case resolved the Wright/Curtiss dispute, it left an enduring resentment between the Wrights and the Smithsonian.

Outside the courtroom, the world seemed no friendlier to Wilbur and Orville. The aircraft business was uncertain and dangerous. Most of the money to be made was in exhibition flying, where the audiences wanted to see death-defying feats or airmanship. The Wrights sent out teams of pilots who had to fly increasingly higher, faster, and more recklessly to satisfy the crowds. Inevitably, the pilots began to die in accidents and the stress began to tell on the Wrights. Additionally, their legal troubles distracted them from what they were best at -- invention and innovation. By 1911, Wright aircraft were no longer the best machines flying.

In 1912, Wilbur Wright, worn out from legal and business problems, contracted typhoid and died. Orville, his heart no longer in the airplane business, sold the Wright Company in 1916 and went back to inventing.

Patent fights and business troubles behind him, Orville Wright built a small laboratory in his old West Dayton neighborhood. Here, he contracted out as a consultant on a wide variety of engineering problems. He also took up a number of projects that caught his imagination. He did much aeronautical work, helping to develop a racing airplane, guided missile, and "split flaps" to help slow an aircraft in a dive. But he also worked on aerodynamic automobile designs, toy designs and manufacture, even a cipher machine for encoding communications.

His fame as the co-inventor of the airplane endured and he put it to good use. He was on the original board of the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA), and served longer than any board member since. (NACA later became the National Air and Space Administration, or NASA.) He helped oversee the Guggenheim Fund for the Promotion of Aeronautics, an effort that helped America recapture the technological lead in aviation during the late 1920s. He also worked tirelessly to help unknown inventors bring their ideas to market.

And he continued a long, running battle with the Smithsonian that had begun with their duplicity in the Curtis patent suit. After the First World War, the Smithsonian exaggerated Langley's contributions to aeronautics while seeming to belittle the Wrights. Friends of Orville set the record straight, but the Smithsonian kept on. In retaliation, Orville sent the 1903 Wright Flyer, the airplane in which he and Wilbur had made the first powered flights at Kitty Hawk, to the Kensington Science Museum of London in England. In the 1930s, Charles Lindbergh, the first aviator to fly from New York to Paris nonstop, attempted to mediate the feud, but to no avail. It wasn't until 1942 that Orville Wright's friend and biographer, Fred Kelly, convinced the Smithsonian to back down and publish the truth. That done, Orville sent word to England that the Flyer was to be brought home to America. Its return was delayed by the Second World War, but it was finally returned in 1948.

Orville's Wright last big project was, fittingly, an aircraft. He helped to rebuild the 1905 Flyer III, the first practical airplane, which he and Wilbur had perfected at Huffman Prairie. This was put on display at Deeds Carillon Park in Dayton, Ohio in 1950, but Orville did not live to see the ceremony. He suffered a heart attack in 1948 after fixing the doorbell at his home and died a few days later.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Up Down Need to find your bearings? Try these navigation aids: If this is your first visit, please stop by: Something to share? Please: Available in Française, Español, Português, Deutsch, Россию, 中文, 日本, and others. "Before the Wright Brothers, no one working in aviation did anything fundamentally correct.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Zachary Shaw - Les notes à propos de mon sujet pour le site web