Saqqara Airplane Model
This object (shown in sketch) was found in 1898 in a tomb at
Saqqara, Egypt and was later dated as having been created near 200
BCE. As airplanes were unknown in the days when it was found, it was
thrown into a box marked "wooden bird model" and then
stored in the basement of the Cairo museum.
It
was rediscovered by Dr. Khalil Messiha, who studied models made by
ancients. The "discovery" was considered so important by
the Egyptian government that a special committee of leading
scientists was established to study the object.
To elucidate the reasons for the decision of the committee,
almost unprecedented in the field of archeology, let's consider some
aspects of the model. The model has the exact proportions of a very
advanced form of "pusher-glider" that is still having
"some bugs ironed out". This type of glider will stay in
the air almost by itself—even a very small engine will keep it
going at low speeds, as low as 45 to 65 mph., while it can carry an
enormous payload. This ability is dependent on the curious shape of
wings and their proportions. The tipping of wings downward, a
reversedihedral
wing as it is called, is the feature behind this capability. A
similar type of curving wings are implemented on the Concorde
airplane, giving the plane a maximum lift without detracting from
its speed.
In that context, it seems rather incredible that someone, more
than 2,000 years ago, for any reason, devised a model of a flying
device with such advanced features, requiring quite extensive
knowledge of aerodynamics. There were no such things as airplanes in
these times, we are told by archeologists and historians. But this
case seems to be an exception, living in the midst of the rather
unimaginative and rigid paradigm of contemporary science. It is also
necessary to point out that Egyptians are known to have nearly
always made scale-models of projects and objects which they planned
to create or build.
Precolombian Airplane Models
Is the concept of an airplane limited to Egypt? That doesn't seem
to be the case. Gold trinkets were found in an area covering Central
America and coastal areas of South America, estimated to belong to a
period between 500 and 800 CE, but since they are made from gold,
accurate dating is impossible and based essentially on stratigraphy
which may be deceptive. However, we can safely say that these gold
objects are more than 1000 years old.
As seen from the pictures, the shape of the sample object is
rather ambiguous. The archaeologists labelled these objects as
zoomorphic,
meaning,
animal shaped objects. The question is, what animal
do they represent? When we compare these with other objects from the
same cultures depicting animals, a curious facet of the comparison
would be obvious: the other objects are recognizable, rendered
usually with a great accuracy and attention to realistic detail.
There are several types of animals which fly—birds, insects,
and several mammals, such as bats and some gliders, for instance
flying squirrels, oppossums, and then there are some lizards; there
are also some fish which for brief periods glide through the air.
There are water animals which seem to
fly through the water,
such as rays, skates and some selachians. But how does the depicted
object compare with these choices? All its features taken into a
consideration, we have no match. Seen from above, the object
obviously has no fish features, but seems to show rather explicitly
mechanistic ones.
The structures just in front of the tail are strongly reminiscent
of
elevons (a combination of ailerons and elevators) with a
slight forward curve, but they are attached to the fuselage, rather
than the wings. In any case, they look more like airplane parts than
like the claspers of a fish. If the two prominent spirals on the
wings are supposed to be a stylized version of the eyes of a ray,
then what are the two globular objects positioned on the
head
supposed to represent? To complicate the identification even more,
the spirals on the wings have their
copies positioned on the
nose of the object, in the opposite direction. When the object is
viewed in profile, the didsimilarity to anything from the animal
kingdom is even more pronounced. If the zoomorphic explanation is
supposed to hold, then why did the artist
cut the head off
almost three quarters from the body? And why is the nose is
practically rectangular and the cut tilted forward, with eyes
positioned at either side, when fish eyes are usually more near the
center of bodyline and far forward on the head?
What we can make of the semicircular grooves on the inside of the
cut? What is it supposed to be—fishwise? And what about the
scoop, forward and under the
cut? It is a scoop, not
just a ridge for drilling a hole through to place the object on a
necklace chain. Then there is another rectangular feature,
positioned further back at the approximate center of gravity under
the fuselage. The wings when viewed from the side are perfetly
horizontal, but when seen from the front, they curve slightly
downward. The
elevators, which are right behind the wings,
are positioned on a slightly higher horizontal level and are
square-ended, thus a definite geometric shape. Above them is another
rectangular shape, with a relief which may be reminiscent of
knobs.
The tail is equally intriguing. No fish has only a single, upright
and perpendicular flange. But this tail fin has an exact shape of
fins
on modern airplanes. There are also some markings on the tail which
are hard to identify, but it does not seem to be anything related to
animals, either.
When all the features are taken into an account, the object does
not look like a representation of any known animal at all, but does
look astonishingly like an airplane. The photos and enlarged outline
of the object has been submitted for an analysis to several people
from the field of aerodynamics. One of them was Arthur Young, a
designer of Bell helicopters and other aircraft. His analysis
confirmed that the object contains many features which would fit the
airplane hypothesis, but there were several ones which would not fit
that scenario. Wings do seem to be in the wrong place—they should
be further forward so that their 1/4-chord
coincides with the center of gravity. The nose is not like anything
on airplanes, as well. So, while the object is suggesting an
airplane, some features would not seem to support this hypothesis.
But
let's entertain several possibilities. If we imagine that the
separation after the
windshield is not a cockpit and that the
pilot and the cargo were located somewhere in the main fuselage
body, then we can envision the
nose as something else. Let's
assume that the nose is actually a jet. If the machine needs to slow
down, the jet flow directed against the path of flight would
accomplish just that. But how to redirect the jet into the opposite
direction? If we envision the nose as a movable part of the plane,
turning around the point located where the nose and fuselage meet,
thus pivoting the nose downward to tuck it under the fuselage, that
would enable the desired effect. What's more, it will re-adjust the
center of gravity and the wings would be just in the right place for
a high powered flight. Another problem, though, will appear and that
is the drag which would be created by the back of the nose now
positioned in front. But that can be attributed to artistic
license.
That seems to be the case, because several other similar
planes
feature the back part of the nose
tilted more forward, so the
angle of the back of the nose when pivoted is more corresponding to
aerodynamic principles.
All things considered, the object seems to represent a
convertible type of craft, with two possible configurations—one
for ascent when the nose is facing backwards, and the other for
descent with the nose facing forward. One unsolved item
remains—the spirals on the both wings and the nose. According to
Amerindian iconography, these spirals have discernable
meaning—they represent ascending and descending, depending on
whether they are right-oriented or left-oriented, respectively. As
the spirals are not only on wings but also on the nose, the meaning
is fairly obvious—the wings and the nose (as much) were the
features which were directly involved in ascent and descent.
Text ©1996 Lumir G. Janku. All rights reserved.
.jpg)
