OT but I must: I've always hated this use of "invented": they were the first to successfully cover a particular (small) distance using a self-powered device, which we today consider a first successful flight, out of many competing teams striving to do the same thing at roughly the same time.

I hate the use of the term because nobody has really "invented" anything in the last century or so. We are always building on the shoulders of giants enabling us to apply existing knowledge in new directions. Heck, Gallileo did not invent a telescope, but he did point a scope at the stars and planets.

We could arguably say things like Leibnitz "invented" integrals, but he actually gave them a nomenclature and written language, whereas many contemporaries worked on infinity calculus at the same time (including Newton).

I think I have a problem with the use of the term because it is so overloaded and can mean a number of things (I've heard people say things like "he invented gravity" which just boggles my mind, just like your use of "inventing a flight" where there were birds flying forever and people strived to fly for just as long).

I am guessing it is just me who is weird, but I wonder if it is so? :)

You're right, of course: I should have written 'discovered.'

Very droll.

Perhaps 'implemented' would be better.

But to claim imperial measurements were key to implementing a very short powered heavier-than-air flight (lots of qualifiers, given myriad successful flights had occurred prior) is a stretch.

Not key, just not an impediment.