ORIGINAL: Insomnia88
Duane,
Are you telling us you believe the airplane Ed Kazmirski crashed at the 1961 Nationals is the airplane pictured in post 897? According to American Modeler Annual 1962 Ed Kazmirski flew a Taurus with a 68 inch wing span, 690 area, and 17.9 loading. The plane had a 17% thick wing. According to American Modeler Annual 1963 Ed Kazmirski flew in the 1962 Nationals a Taurus with a 68 inch wing span, 690 area, and 17 loading. Sounds like same airplane to me. There were 12 other modelers that flew a Taurus in the 1962 Nationals. Most listed the wing span to be 68 inches and the wing area to be 690. The kit Taurus has a 70 inch wing span and 720 sq inches of wing area. Apparently, these 12 Taurus flown at the 62 Nats were all scratch built and not from a kit. If Ed Kazmirski test flew the Taurus in late November 1961 how would 12 individuals have seen that airplane fly and been impressed with it enough to have one ready to fly and fly it in the 1962 Nationals in August of 1962? Cees claims that Ed Kazmirski’s Taurus won the concours’ de elegance at the 1963 World Championships with the original that was 2 ½ years old. The 1963 World Championships were in September 1963. If the Taurus was 2 ½ years old it would have had to been test flown in March or April 1961. I doubt highly seriously that Ed Kazmirski would have left that airplane at home and flown the airplane pictured in post 897 at the 1961 Nationals. If you look at the modified Astro Hog the Orion and the Taurus you can see the natural progression in the development of the Taurus. The airplane that you have Ed Kazmirski flew at the 1964 Nationals. In the American Modeler Annual 1965 Ed Kazmirski list it as a modified Taurus with a 70 inch wing span. His remarks on the airplane are as follows: Plane similar to Taurus but with straight wing T.E. and longer fuselage.
I am not a casual observer of the evolution of the pattern airplane!
Jim Kimbro
Jim;
There is a lot to talk about here. It is very important to CAREFULLY read everything that is said. I also assume as factual all documented pieces of information, (from articles, drawings etc) provided by people who post.
First, and most importantly, I never said you were a "casual observer of the evolution of the pattern airplane". The closest thing in my comments that corresponds to that sentence is from the quote I borrowed from BERUSTY:
"...As a casual follower of this
thread, Mr. Kimbro has apparently provided a most interesting detail to drive Cees crazy...? This quote came from him on p36, and it was intended as part of a well-intended complement to you. I have the utmost respect for you, your credentials, and your contribution to pattern flying.
PIMMNZ on page 6, (post 131) described and showed a picture of the plane Ed flew at the 1961 NATS. In your post (#892) you described the plane Ed flew at the 1961 NATS. Assuming both posts are factual and are talking about the 1961 NATS, I put your description with his picture.
There was an earlier post that showed the original plan of the Taurus prototype, (see below). On the plan it says the first flight of that prototype was "Thanksgiving 1961", which of course meant that it couldn't have been flown at the 1961 NATS.
Because of all this, I believe the plane pictured in post #897 was part of that evolution you describe...the link between the Orion and the MAN Taurus of 1962. In the Jan 1963 Taurus article Ed describes a plane with a long nose moment and a short tail moment. He later says he wanted to do the OPPOSITE when designing the Taurus that won the '62 NATS and was featured in that article, so they are definitely not the same plane. From your earlier post, I assume the 68" wingspan was the wingspan of the 1961 NATS Taurus. I don't have the wingspan measurement from the VR/CS Taurus, (62 NATS/MAN Taurus), and I don't have the MAN Taurus article here at work to look at, but it may or may not be greater than 68". It all depends what the prototype plans call for, (see below), and whether or not Ed built a greater span wing for the 62 NATS. I can say for certain however that the Taurus-2 wings, (both of them) actually measure 71" tip to tip. When you quote Ed saying my plane's wingspan is 70", it is obviously a rounded-off number.
About the twelve other modelers that flew at the 1962 NATS. If we assume the prototype plan was drawn on 12-6-61 as the plan says, then there would have been plenty of time for other modeling friends of Ed to get a copy of those prototype plans to build their own models. Remember that Ed was possibly the most famous pilot in R/C pattern circles back in the very early 60s. I don't think others would have to personally see the Taurus fly to be interested in building their own ship from the prototype plans. It may very well be that the 68" wingspan was the original span of the prototype....perhaps the 12-6-61 prototype plans call for a 68" wingspan which Ed later increased to 70 or 71" for the KIT Taurus. I may soon get a set of the 12-6-61 prototype plans, and will certainly let everyone know the wingspan from those plans.
Finally the Concours de elegance comment about 2 1/2 years could be a "rounded off" date, or it could simply be wrong as journalists sometimes are. We have to look at ALL the evidence, which may or may not all agree 100%. When the prototype plans give a date of 12-6-61, and the first flight was in November 1961, it is safe to assume that sketches and the building of the plane could go back to at least the early summer of 1961, (my own opinion is that Ed started working on the prototype drawings after the 1961 NATS, but it easily could have been earlier). After that experience, he would certainly have lots of ideas of what he wanted to do with his next plane.
Again, I regret misunderstandings over the earlier posts, and hope I have clarified things some. I don't have all the answers, but I'm trying to piece it all together, as are the others on this thread. I would truly welcome your posting of scans of the data from the modeling magazines you quoted. This will provide additional evidence for everone to look at.
Duane