As a pilot I would like to weigh in on the Gustave Whitehead discussion (the editorial, "Grounding Conn.'s flight of fancy," published Jan. 15, and guest commentary, "Much proof first flight was in Connecticut," published Jan. 20).

In science the key element is documentation. For an experiment to be considered valid, it must be fully documented, peer-reviewed, and replicable. None of these conditions exist at any believable level for the alleged Whitehead flight. The Wright's documentation is public and fills yards of book shelves. The Whitehead documentation is little more than a murky photograph and a paragraph buried deep in the back pages of a local newspaper. The Wrights' first flight was public as were countless later demonstratio• flights. There is no record of even a second flight by Whitehead.

Jane's All The World's Aircraft is one of the premier aviation journals and any pronouncement by it carries weight, just as a U.S. Supreme Court decision carries weight. But august bodies do make monumental errors in judgment. For the Supreme Court it was the Dred Scott Decision and for Jane's it is the alleged Whitehead flight.

Whitehead supposedly made his historic flight in the dark of night but his claim does not stand up in the clear light of day.