ORIGINAL: kingaltair
Cees
If you want, why don't I take measurements of the canopy of the Taurus II, (which I believe you feel IS the original fuselage of the Wester Taurus).....that will give you an exact measurement.
On the other hand, from the other thread it was proven that the pilot figure in the crate picture, (PICTURE #2) is NOT the same pilot figure in the PRESENT Taurus II, (picture on the left). If you look carefully, you can see the difference in the way the pilot figures were painted. That means that canopy may not be the same one in the crate photo either, but there is no evidence to indicate the Taurus II canopy is not the original. The plane in the carrier picture is the same one I now have. It is the B&W picture on the left (where the plane is viewed from ground level from the side) above. That picture was taken during the very short span of time when Ed used the thick "carrier wing".
BTW-Cees. I just received a ST .56 for the plane, and it fits on the motor rails perfectly in the "slot" between the inside fuselage sides that frames the engine. It is as if the plane was made for, (or built around), a ST .56, but we know that's not true because the blind nuts fit a Veco .45. Ed designed two metal clips to hold the side engine lugs.
Duane
Duane, Ed did change the canopy after the period of the carrier and the thick wing that was my message, so it is what you write, I still think the centre section of the fuselage of Taurus II is from the Oldest taurus on Earth, but not the canopy. So I cannot use measurements of the canopy of Taurus II. That was why I did write: "For the canopy I will not use modern pictures anymore."
About the pilots.
The original pilot (your picture #2) of the crate Ed did remove with the canopy after the carrier period. This pilot did use space in the fuselage we can see on the crate picture.
The new pilot was later mounted "on" the fuselage in the new and much higher canopy.
About the engine.
The crate picture shows us the K & B Greenhead and the position about 8 mm higher in the fuselage. So that is the reason I use the adaptor plate now.
Ed did use an adjustable side thrust we can read so the ST wasn't original used for design of this fuselage. You cannot change the sidethrust of the ST and that is an important fact of adjustment of the contest plane.
I show you that also Ralph Brooke did use such a plate. He did call it a mount plate.
Cees