Chap­ter XVII — Fly­ing Machines Con­struc­tion And Oper­a­tion marks a turn­ing point where cre­ativ­i­ty and exper­i­men­ta­tion rede­fine the mechan­ics of flight. This chap­ter illus­trates how engi­neers and vision­ar­ies, moti­vat­ed by both ambi­tion and curios­i­ty, began reshap­ing air­craft design in pur­suit of improved sta­bil­i­ty, con­trol, and effi­cien­cy. As aero­nau­ti­cal knowl­edge expand­ed, each new mod­el not only test­ed the lim­its of mate­ri­als and engines but also brought unique solu­tions to the per­sis­tent chal­lenges of ear­ly avi­a­tion.

Frank Van Anden’s biplane stands out for its focus on in-flight bal­ance, made pos­si­ble through an auto­mat­ic sta­bi­liz­er that respond­ed impres­sive­ly dur­ing real flight con­di­tions. When strong gusts hit the air­craft midair, this mech­a­nism adjust­ed the wing posi­tion with­out man­u­al input, cor­rect­ing its tilt and pre­vent­ing a poten­tial crash. Such a fea­ture was rare at the time and reflect­ed a deep­er under­stand­ing of aero­dy­nam­ic forces. The air­craft was built with durable spruce and cov­ered in treat­ed silko­lene for a bal­ance of strength and light­ness. Its con­trol sys­tem bor­rowed from Cur­tiss, using a wheel-based set­up that allowed for both ver­ti­cal and hor­i­zon­tal nav­i­ga­tion. The intro­duc­tion of an engine-linked tip con­trol added anoth­er lay­er of safe­ty by react­ing quick­ly dur­ing insta­bil­i­ty.

The Van Anden mod­el is a tes­ta­ment to how ear­ly avi­a­tion merged mechan­i­cal sim­plic­i­ty with intel­li­gent design. Its dual rud­der configuration—placed at both the front and rear—improved respon­sive­ness in tight maneu­ver­ing sit­u­a­tions. Van Anden’s approach was to har­mo­nize struc­ture and func­tion, cre­at­ing a machine that not only flew but adapt­ed midair. Flight reports sug­gest that despite its mod­est size, the biplane han­dled wind stress well, which proved crit­i­cal in the unpre­dictable weath­er com­mon on Long Island. Engi­neers who observed its tri­als not­ed the reduc­tion in pilot work­load, as the air­craft’s auto­mat­ic fea­tures allowed the avi­a­tor to focus on direc­tion rather than sta­bil­i­ty. These refine­ments high­light­ed a shift from exper­i­men­tal con­trap­tions to pilot-sup­port­ive fly­ing machines. The air­craft was no longer just about lift—it was becom­ing about ease of flight.

Sim­i­lar inno­va­tion was seen in the Her­ring-Burgess aero­plane, which intro­duced a lighter motor with­out com­pro­mis­ing out­put, essen­tial for high­er alti­tude attempts. Pilots praised the bal­ance achieved by its sta­bil­i­ty device, which, while dif­fer­ing in mech­a­nism from Van Anden’s, served the same purpose—making flight safer and smoother. The design­ers empha­sized min­i­mal drag and effi­cient fuel use, crit­i­cal con­cerns in extend­ing flight time and con­serv­ing resources. With a con­trol sys­tem tai­lored to intu­itive pilot han­dling, the craft exem­pli­fied ergonom­ics in ear­ly air­craft design. Its frame­work pri­or­i­tized light­ness with­out weak­en­ing the core struc­ture, allow­ing for eas­i­er ground han­dling and improved take­off respon­sive­ness. By mar­ry­ing reduced weight with reli­able pow­er, Her­ring and Burgess chart­ed a new path for­ward for engine design.

Anoth­er notable entry in this chap­ter is the uni­ver­si­ty-built “Penn­syl­va­nia I,” a pio­neer­ing exam­ple of col­lab­o­ra­tive engi­neer­ing dri­ven by aca­d­e­m­ic pas­sion. Stu­dents led by Lesh tack­led not just the tech­ni­cal aspects of build­ing a plane but also pro­posed nov­el con­trol solu­tions, like tan­dem steering—a sys­tem inspired by the dynam­ics of mul­ti-wheeled vehi­cles. The use of dual pro­pellers pow­ered by an 8‑cylinder motor pro­vid­ed thrust bal­ance, while the lat­er­al con­trol mech­a­nism added finesse to nav­i­ga­tion. Despite being a stu­dent project, its per­for­mance on test­ing grounds sug­gest­ed real-world promise. Instruc­tors not­ed that the machine respond­ed reli­ably to direc­tion­al changes and had a cen­ter of grav­i­ty well-suit­ed for steady glid­ing. Such edu­ca­tion­al endeav­ors proved vital for the broad­er growth of avi­a­tion, pro­duc­ing not only machines but future design­ers and avi­a­tors.

The broad­er sig­nif­i­cance of these advance­ments lies in how they reshaped the goals of avi­a­tion. No longer was the aim sole­ly to achieve flight; it had expand­ed to mas­ter­ing con­trol, ensur­ing sta­bil­i­ty, and opti­miz­ing effi­cien­cy. Inven­tors began look­ing beyond the thrill of launch to the fin­er points of air trav­el: how to han­dle wind cur­rents, reduce pilot fatigue, and stretch the endurance of light­weight motors. This matu­ri­ty sig­naled the evo­lu­tion from bold attempts to dis­ci­plined engi­neer­ing. At the same time, the pub­lic became increas­ing­ly engaged, read­ing about flight mile­stones and watch­ing test flights with grow­ing inter­est. Avi­a­tion was trans­form­ing into both a spec­ta­cle and a seri­ous dis­ci­pline, fueled by each new machine’s suc­cess and the vision of its cre­ators.

Behind each of these designs were sto­ries of tri­al and refine­ment. Builders often faced failed tests, with wings snap­ping or engines stalling. Yet with every set­back came new insights—how a shift­ed wing curve affect­ed lift, or how pro­peller angles influ­enced torque. By embrac­ing these lessons, inven­tors moved clos­er to the dream of reli­able flight. Such resilience under­scores why this chap­ter is crucial—it shows the tran­si­tion from tri­al-and-error to cal­cu­lat­ed risk, from curi­ous tin­ker­ers to avi­a­tion pro­fes­sion­als. The con­tri­bu­tions of Van Anden, Her­ring, Burgess, Lesh, and oth­ers pro­vid­ed a foun­da­tion for the future. Their col­lec­tive progress made clear that the age of con­trolled, sta­ble, and repeat­able flight was no longer a fan­ta­sy, but an emerg­ing real­i­ty.