The following might sound a bit "crazy" to some of you, but to me, duplicating the Kazmirski paint scheme was VERY IMPORTANT for it to look authentic. Like I said...we used the paint scheme to measure our accuracy in the project. If you want a Kaz paint scheme, and the exact widths aren't important, that's fine, but for you folks who want yours to look as much like Ed's as humanly possible, the following description should just about do it. I think it is worth the trouble to have your "pride & joy" that you've spent so much time on look "perfect" in its Kazmirski "clothes". All Kazmirski paint schemes use the red/white/black colors, and all are variations of the red/white and black stripes, the top stripe being separated by a white band at an angle. Simple but elegant. I love it.

Bill;
For all practical purposes, nobody is going to be looking at how wide the L.E. black is underneath the stab. I didn't care that much about that measurement, but just let it work out. The red to black stripe up top can fall anywhere between the bottom of the stab, L.E. (which of course must be black), to the greatest thickness of the stab bottom...that should give you about 1/2" or so to "play with". The important part here is how the red to black strip looks on the side compared to Ed's picture. One of the side views shows you exactly how I did it. If I were going to paint mine again, I'd make the red stripe extend another 1/4" wider, (further down).

The main "cues" to me are 1) the bottom of the red to black line (stripe), and where it intersects in the stab area, (in all cases it must be below the L.E. of the stab). 2) the second is the top of the dash either running on, or very close to the thrust line, and 3) the top of the black stripe that is supposed to tuck what looks to me to be beneath the wing L.E. at least 1/2", (but maybe a little more depending on how things look overall). 4) I would use the place where the dash cuts through the wing as an important final cue in order to make final placement of the dash. The dash cutting through the wing is an important landmark; that's why I am probably more interested in this line, and where it falls on YOUR plane than any other marker. If it cuts through the wing correctly, you're there. Of course, everything depends on the height of the wing, so if our final choice for wing placement isn't quite right then the white stripe may still be a bit too wide, but it should be much closer.

You will be surprised what effect a 1/4" difference can make in adjusting the various stripe widths because making one wider makes the next one thinner at the same time. You DO have a little room to adjust the lines up or down to give the best overall effect. I use a pencil or even a pen for the final lines...you may have a much better way that guarantees the lines won't be visible, but that worked for me.

As I said in the earlier post, when I realized how thick that white strip was on the original prototype kit, (too thick!!), I raised the top of the black stripe right up to the L.E. , (raising it higher would make it noticably wrong, at least to me), in order to make the white stripe a little smaller, (this was done later, and shows up ONLY on the "wet runway" photo). You have some leeway in choosing the thickness and length of the dash, (the dash should extend almost to the back of the wing. Use the wet runway photo as guide, not the others because the dash was too short in the first pictures), and the space between the dash and the stripes, (both red and black).

When I'm home I'll include some detailed measurements of how mine was done..you can adjust yours from there depending on how things fall on yours. I'll exactly measure the length of the dash, and where it ends relative to the wing...NOTE: the dash is longer in the "wet runway" picture than it appears in the other earlier pictures. That should help you. I also need to measure the thickness of the white stripe that separates the red on top from the black at the back behind it. Mine originally was too wide, and had to be made thinner in order to look correct, (which I think it does now). Masking off that white stripe just before the fin that separates the red from the black is tricky because that part of the fuselage is pretty "busy" and precise, (how it is masked off also affects the fin and in turn the stab, and where the colors fall, so be careful here...(I'll include some measurements of how wide the black and red dash on the fin are), because you lose perspective with all that masking tape all over, and only see the "final product" when all the tape is removed after the fact.

As I said in a previous post, I was very happy with the fin and stab, (and how they turned out), so I think you can use my measurements (when I take them), with confidence if you choose to follow my lead there.

Hope all this helps. I have taken a number of "interior shots" of the double hatch areas including radio installation which I'll be posting soon. BTW...I had forgotten that my battery pack, (5-cell) was moved way up front by the tank, so watch the tail weight.

Duane

Duane,

Thanks much for the information. These discussions on the paint scheme give me an increasingly more accurate view of how it should turn out. You are quite correct about the confusion all the masking tape causes during the process. That is why it is very important to have some guide line measurements to go by. I like to use a soft pencil to lay out my lines. After masking they can be erased, and it gives me a good representation of what the finished scheme is going to look like. It also allows for any needed adjustments.

My schedule right now will cause me to take several weeks to complete the paint scheme. I will take photos as I go and share them with you to get your input. I figure that at this point, taking a little extra time will be well worth it.

Bill

PS- I am using two 5 cell 6volt 2000 Mah batteries; both for redundancey and balancing. I know it is extra weight, but with the 120 AX to over come that extra weight I feel like the added security is worth it as well as the faster servo speed and greater servo torque.

Bye-Bye

I've never done that...do you hook them up with a Y-harness or somethin sililar.

Yes your 120 should allow it to have its full aerobatic potential. That would be "cool" to see, and to fly. So far, both Kevin and I have flown on .90 2-strokes. It flies decently on that power, but I sense some limitations on that powerplant, it would be nice to see what a 120 can do to "free it up" and let her spread her wings and show off.
From the Ed Kazmirski's Taurus thread, page 97 post 2409

I will be closing the deal on my kit tomorrow, so hopefully I will start building late next week. It typically takes me about two to four weeks to complete a kit of this type construction including a urethane paint scheme.

I KNEW you couldn't do it...finished in two weeks hooey...[8D] Of course I'm just "ribbing" you a little; you are MUCH faster than I ever could, (would want to be), in building. Still I thought at the time when you posted that thread..."man that would be quite a trick since it took me two weeks just to cover and paint it".

I'm glad we're progressed a little slower...a little more time to "talk" and exchange ideas. Now I'm excited and looking forward to seeing some finished pictures. Take your time, concentrate, be "picky" over the details and do an authentic paint job...I'm really looking forward to seeing it. I might have to put "bubble wrap" on mine, or at least set up on the far side of the lfight line from you. My finish is best viewed from FIVE FEET AWAY.

Duane,

I just plug theboth batteries into the dual switch/charging switch and then one lead from the switch into the receiver battery port and the other lead into a spare servo port. Most of the time I try to make them plug into adjacent ports if possible, however, any spare servo port will do.

Now that I have worked on the kit, I still believe a two to four week build is possible. Granted, everything would have to be immediately available and extreme concentration and dedication would be called for,but heck they build complete houses in just seven days.After the build began it became apparent to me that I would enjoy slowing down and follow the build thread. As it turns out I am glad I did. Lots of interesting and informative ideas and techniques. It's alot more fun with a group of you guys than all by my lonesome.

Tried to upload photos of rough dash layout but ran into a system error. Will try again later.

Don't understand how this works, but that's OK. I still use the "wall wort" to charge the RX/TX batteries.

When they build the house in one week, one person doesn't do the whole thing. I have to take my time or the quality really goes down. I need to take my time just to get my normal level of mediocrity.

Duane

Duane,

I failed to mention that the two batteries have to be rated the same ie- the same voltage and the same amperage. In my case the two battery system gives me 6 volts since the batteries are connected in paralell,but I get double the amperage at 4000 Mah. Presumably I am less likely to experience battery failure while getting more time between charging cycles. It also gives extra power for digital servo operation.

Bill

PS- uploaded the photos to post 503

I just noticed your rough design lines, and things look pretty close. I would need to study in more detail side-by-side, but my initial suggestions might be, (and this might not be the case due to the angle of the photo):

1) the dash needs a minor adjustment. The angle of the front of the dash is a little more angled than it needs to be, (it needs to be a little more "up and down"). If you make the angle a bit less steep, you'll probably have to move it forward slightly, and adjust the length.
2) the top of the black stripe line might be lowered just a bit, (maybe 1/4"). You can see on Ed's Simla that it doesn't go all the way to the back of the fuselage behind the stab....it disappears into the fuselage side.

Just an initial opinion. You have the model right there. What do you think?

Duane

1) the dash needs a minor adjustment. The angle of the front of the dash is a little more angled than it needs to be, (it needs to be a little more "up and down"). If you make the angle a bit less steep, you'll probably have to move it forward slightly, and adjust the length.
2) the top of the black stripe line might be lowered just a bit, (maybe 1/4"). You can see on Ed's Simla that it doesn't go all the way to the back of the fuselage behind the stab....it disappears into the fuselage side.

Just an initial opinion. You have the model right there. What do you think?

Duane
[/quote]

Yeah, I know the front of the dash is angled too much and curved from top to bottom.I was planning on fixing that before it gets any paint.

I also am aware of the problem with the bottom black stripe. The problem there is more at the front than the rear. If I lower the stripe then it will begin to fall short of the front of the fuselage. It's true that it will stop farther forward from the stab, but it won't reach all the way to the spinner if I keep the lines all parallel. It is going to be difficult to get it just right, but not impossible. I'll just have to work at it a little more. After all I spent a whole 10 minutes laying out the rough draft.I was just trying to get an idea of what it would look like so that I could share it with you and get your input. So far, so good.

Basically, the top red/black striping will lay out very well all the way through the stab and the dash will work out too. I'm only going to have to work on the bottom stripe. Considering what we have to work with and the extrapolations involved, I think we will come out fairly well. I willdefinitely keep posting photos of the process so that I can get your opinion and that of any other concerned Simla builders.

Thanks again

Bill

Bill

Here are a couple more pictures you can reference. Look at the center picture in the "Big Stuff" attachment; it might help you "guesstimate" how far yours should go based on that picture. The black stripe doesn't completely make it to the front due to the slope of the nose. If you move the black stripe down a bit, it wouldn't be more than maybe 1/4 to 3/8 inch. The fuselage change Jeff made was to make the fuse slightly less "tall" as it approaches the rear...that should actually promote the black stripe disappearing into the bottom sooner than the prototype, not later. Maybe the wing was raised just a bit too much, (but regardless, it's very close), in the final kit, (it's hard to say), but the "dash line" seems to fall right where it should. Refer to the side view picture showing both the dash and black stripe again when deciding where to make the final placement.

After looking at your preliminary lines, I think we modified the kit about right. The way the model is "final-sanded" will also make a subtle difference...I sanded as much as I possibly could in the nose area to make it as sleek as possible, and the final design and kit reflected that. I'm encouraged by the preliminary line placement.

The King Altair wing is almost ready for joining...I'll post some pictures soon.
Duane

Duane,

I just noticed from the picture of Ed and the Simla that the lower black stripe could not possibly go all the way to the spinner. What was causing the confusion is closing in the nose as I did. The question now would be how to cross over from side to side at the front of the fuselage and how far back from the spinner? In other words, would it run square to the nose, curved to the nose or perhaps chevron shaped? What do you think?

My opinion is that the adjustments that you guys made brought it just about perfectly to where it should be. Only Ed would know for sure. But then that's just MHO. In any case I was pretty satisfied with the possible end results.

Bill

Bill;

It's nice to hear you say that you think we got it right...we really tried hard to get it right, and wanted the kit to be as close as possible to the "real thing". Ed's paint scheme is the "acid test" to show that...with any other paint scheme, you lose the similarily to the photo details, so you lose your comparison. I'm glad to see that the first kit completed used Ed's design, (which just happens to be the best possible, and most striking design available...IMHO [8D] )

If it were me, I'd worry about 1) the top of the black line/stripe being parallel to the dash and other lines, (BTW..On the Taurus II, Ed actually bends the line down some so it isn't straight, but it worked for him, I would have done it differently, but "who am I"? (see photo). 2) where the line tucks below the wing L.E., and 3) where the line disappears into the fuselage bottom, (it should not go all the way back to the rudder). If you concern yourself with those three things, the nose will pretty much take care of itself...all you have to decide is what looks best to you to cross-over. Being a simple kind of guy, I'd probably try coming straight across and see how that looks compared to keeping a certain distance from the spinner, (a little like a bulls-eye).

Whatever looks best...looking forward to seeing what you do. For me, I still like the open engine compartment best as you'll see in one of the pictures I'll be posting soon.

WWED (What would Ed do)??

Duane,

It appears as though the entire bottom of the Taurus is curved from the TE of the wing through the rudder. I'm not sure that is relevant to anything, but the scheme of the Taurus and the Simla, though similar are also considerably different. I must keep that in mind when I get to the Taurus. More fun, fun,fun..........

Bill

Bill,

Did you have to mount your 1.20AX back as far as it would go? At least on mine, a rough fit shows that if I don't, the prop washer will stick out ahead of the nose, which we don't want.

Thanks,
Richard

Richard,

No. But then I think I may have added a small block to the very end of the fuselage since I chose to close it in. I typically leave room for the fuel lines to come through the center of the mount and around the engine.I would not be able to do that if I installed the engine as far back on the mount as it would go. The end point for the nose is somewhat adjustable. Make it longer, add a block. Make shorter, saw it off. Easy!

Bill

PS- Now that I think about it the fuselage nose is one of the few places where creative adjustments can be made without drasticallyaltering the overall scheme of things.

Bye Now

PPS- Theoretically, as you move the engine forward you could reduce the diameter of the spinner say 1/4" and get a sleaker/ slipprier front profile, as well asmoving the CG forward to offset any extra tail feather weight. Just a thought.

Bill,

Ah, yes. Fuel lines. I would have remembered those. When it was too late.

You're right about the nose, of course. Easy enough to add a bit of length.

Well, for better or worse, the fuse sides are now joined, and I'll plank the bottom. I'm thinking it wouldn't be a bad idea to paint the firewall before epoxying it in. Probably white or black. By the way, I'm assuming that the thick F4 doublers are glued-in *after* the firewall. Unless I missed it in reading and rereading the instructions, F4 is never mentioned.

The latest order of sheeting from National Balsa arrived. This time, I asked them to make the edges straight. The first batch had too many C-shaped planks that had to be trimmed to the point that it took more sheeting per wing skin and I was running out.

Between long hours at work this past week to meet Friday's deadline, and some photo shoots to raise a little extra money, I have not accomplished nearly as much as I had hoped. Murphy strikes again. ("Everything takes longer.")

Cheers,
Richard

Richard,

Yeah, I have had my fair share of meetings with Mr. Murphy over the years. He's like the uninvited guest at the party; you don't know why he showed up, and you just can't wait until he leaves!

Painting the firewall before it is installed might be the way to do it. It has always been a challenge getting the engine bay painted after it is completed and closed in. It's like trying to spray paint the inside of a tiny box. Invariably I get dry over spray or runs. Maybe this time itwill be a little easier since the engine bay is somewhat larger than I am used to.

I'm doing a little finish work on the fuselage hatches this weekend. I also think I'm going to prime the fuselage, guide coat it, and block it one more time before I paint it. Hopefully I'll have some color on it this week.

Bill

The reason I mentioned it is to illustrate that Ed had many variations of the same basic paint scheme...even to the point of curving the line. I like the general paint scheme, but in this one case, I will NOT copy Ed's scheme exactly when Jeff and I do the Taurus II project, (someday).

Just my 2 cents, but I would not paint the firewall before installation, because I think you will possibly get a stronger and better adherance if the glue joint for the firewall joins a more porous non-painted surface. It may not matter, (especially iof you've already done it). I usually polyurethane the firewall and engine compartment later.

Regarding the hatches, I have some photos of the double hatch area on the prototype. As I said earlier, Kevin had two hatches as well, but devised a method where he only uses one screw for BOTH hatches. (Make sure that one is tightened down well).

Here are the rest of the pictures. Notice the position of the battery pack ...at least on my plane. It has been awhile, but I must have found it necessary to do that to get the calculated C/G.

BTW...the Simla is the ONLY plane I've ever flown that flies equally inverted as upright with NO down elevator pressure at all when inverted. Maybe it shouldn't be that way, but right now it's kind of "neat" to just flip it over and not have to think about any DOWN elevator correction.

Duane

Just a few shots of primer and guide coat.

Looking more like a Simla every day.

Duane

Duane,

I had planned to leave bare spots for gluing. But painting the firewall is pretty mandatory, since I have pencil lines all over the front.

Cheers,
Richard

I'm sure it will look great. I never thought to tilt the engine, but due to the muffler extender, everything turned out OK.

The additional pictures are posted in post #518. There is one of the engine compartment. One nice thing about Ed's decision to leave the compartment open on the original is the tremendous accessibility to everything. Because of the muffler, you hardly notice the compartment is open.

BTW...I'm pretty much done with additional photos unless there is something you'd like to see. I'd be happy to photograph any part of the plane if it will help someone.

Duane

Duane,

I see our mutual friend has taken himself off to RC Groups, Vintage and Old Timer Design thread, to show us all how a real Simla should be built.

Ray

Do you have a link?

All I know is that Ed would have to take a very close look to tell the difference between ours and "our friend's".

Even though the World Engines ad says in plain English that the Simla has a Bosch airfoil, (which we know he used on the Taurus II), he needs to rediscover the facts for himself...I don't understand that...he must have tremendous faith in his methods and none in the written word. It would be interesting to see if he compares his to the Bosch and lets us know.

I wonder if he will share his finished plan with the world? He has ours.

Duane