Gents,

Motor mount with the mounting plate (I did call it adaptor plate!). (picture 1)
We did see an example in the plane of Ralph Brooke. (picture 2)

I did find a third example in the Vintage & Antique RC.
Date:2/3/2009
In RC Modeler Magazine, date unknown.
Low wing Tauri called Taurisimo, in a thread of Michaelj2k.

The article of this magazine of course again from Ray.

A highly modificated Tauri and I show you a part of the fuselage.
Motor mounting with the mounting plate also ¼ “ aluminum.
The Tauri has normaly the motor/engine directly mounted on the wooden bearers.

For who is interested in adjustable engine mounting constructions in the past.

Cees

Cees;
When I said "tell them you're a VR/CS member..." the means I'm not serious when I say that...it was a joke.

As for posting the info about the plan, I was led to believe it was the original 1961 plan, but in the end it turned out to be the kit plan, which is nice but nothing new. I apologize to the readers of both threads to mistakenly mislead them.

Cees...this is a thread about the "Redesign and Reconstruction of the OLDEST TAURUS ON EARTH". If the plan had turned out to be the 1961 prototype plan, it would have been a plan of the plane you are building in this thread. That's what I understand the "Wester Taurus" to be...an exact copy of the "OLDEST TAURUS ON EARTH". I honestly thought it would be something you would be excited about if you are looking for the ultimate in accuracy. If you want "logical facts and the truth", the plan would have provided that. That's the only reason I posted it in your thread...I was trying to be helpful.

If I am able to get information on that plan in the future, I'll post it on the other thread. I don't want it to get in the way of your "project", or disrupt your "history" further.

Duane

Gents

For who is interested in the history of the Oldest Taurus on Earth, the original contest Taurus of Ed.

In Post 293 page 12 I did tell you there was already on 2 and 3 June 1962 a contest Taurus pilot, Maxey Hester who did win, with his Taurus, in Lincoln Nebraska a contest and a lot of them did follow him that year.
It was like WWI with the Fokker Menace in Europe, there was a Kazmirski Menace with 12 Victories for the Taurus pilots on US Nats and invitationals.

I did take a search on the WWW to find out the reason, why there were so many Taurusses on the contests in 1962.
I did find a reason and maybe there were more.

If somebody can do a second check, please do! I did find this on February 17, 2009!

If you are interested, read a part of history of the Radio Control Club of Detroit, one of the oldest chartered clubs of the AMA.
We already did talk about Tom Brett! His club and of course many others!


You can find the article: http://www.rccd.org/About%20RCCD.htm

Look in: HISTORY OF RCCD
A history of Radio Control Club of Detroit
1953 - 2003

If you do not want to read the whole story, then start with Chapter one: ”The beginning” page 4 bottom of the page. I did copy the text.

Start of copy:

On the week following Labor Day, traditionally the “Cream of the Crop” of RC flyers in the United States and Canada gather in Detroit for what has become to be known as ” The Experts Contest”.

For the past three years it has been formally called “The Detroit Invitational” and prior to that “The Great Lakes Meet”.

The entry list is determined by invitation from the RCCD.
By limiting the entry list to about 20 of the top flyers it was felt that a truly dream contest would result.”

This was the tenth anniversary of the event. The following list of previous winners indicates the wide geographical spread:

1953 - JIM PEPINO - LONDON, ONTARIO
1954 - L.D. CRISP - PERRYSVILLE, INDIANA
1955 - HAROLD DEBOLT - BUFFALO NEW YORK
1956 - JIM GALL - TOLEDO, OHIO
1957 - ED KAZMARSKI - CALUMET CITY, ILLINOIS
1958 - ED KAZMARSKI - CALUMET CITY, ILLINOIS
1959 - ED KECK - ROCHESTER, NEW YORK
1960 - BOB DUNHAM - LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA
1961 - ED KAZMARSKI - CALUMET CITY, ILLNOIS
end of copy


The week after Labor Day has to be the week of 10 - 17 September so the weekend of 16 and 17 September.

What I show you, Ed did use with success after about 5 months of optimizing, his own design contest Taurus to beat the 19 best RC pilots of the United States and Canada.
What about that, a fact not to forget because they also did not, never!!

The start of the Taurus Menace that would follow Ed for two years just like the Fokker Menace, only in Europe Ed was the person to beat!

So Ed did not only get the Lufthansa awarded Trophy Concours d’Elegance in August 1963 for his Contest Taurus.
He also was, with this new contest Taurus, already in September 1961;

Winner of the “The Detroit Invitational”
(or did they call it still "The Great Lakes Meet"?)

Master finisher of plane and place, Ed Kazmirski, Ed Kazmurski or Ed Kazmarski, he is all the same with a different name!!
(And in 1962 he did it again!?)



We in Europe still know that menace and will never forget!


Cees

Very interesting Cees

My father and I were members of the RCCD. I flew my first plane there at the Mound Road/18 Mile Rd site. We first started visiting the field in the summer of 1963 when we moved to the area. The picture of Ed sitting next to the Taurus 2 was taken at one of the later Detroit Invitationals. That particular Invitational was won by Don Lowe and his ORIGINAL Phoenix 1, (see below).

BTW.....if anyone has old model mags from 1961 to the mid to late 60s, I would be interested in any mention of the Detroit Invitational, the winner for those years, and what plane was flown.

Everything you say about the Detroit Invitational is true, but I still have some questions:

-Did the article say what airplane Ed flew at the Detroit Invitational in 1961? It could have been anything...(even a borrowed plane)you are assuming it is the "Wester Taurus". Even if it says he flew a "Taurus", we have seen that Ed flew a plane at the 1961 NATS called a Taurus that may very well have been the plane pictured on Ray's post in Ed Kaz.Taurus post 131.

-The biggest question I have has to do with the Taurus prototype plans that were drawn in Dec of 1961, that specifically say the first flight of the prototype took plane Thanksgiving, (end of November) 1961. How do you get around that...it is an honest question to ask? You would have to take the position that the "contest prototype" first flight as described on the plan itself being in November is mistaken, and I can't accept that. The person drawing that plan was in a better position to know the date of the first flight than we are 46+ years later. I could accept that the prototype could have been built and flown in September 1961 and the plan drawn in December, if the person who drew the plan had not given a specific date.

That prototype had a span of 68", (as does the NATS 1962 and Jan 1963 MAN Taurus). The prototype HAS TO BE the original Taurus AS WE KNOW IT, (as opposed to the strange looking Orion/Taurus hybrid he flew at the 61 NATS as described by Ray and pictured again below). There was a report that said the plane crashed during the NATS due to equipment failure, but it could have been repaired for the Detroit Invitational or he could have flown the Orion...we just don't know for sure...not yet.

We have to be open to all the evidence to see how it all fits. The dates on the plan are critical, and can't be ignored.

Cees,

"The week after Labor Day" in 1962 would be the days Sept 4-8 (see 1962 Calendar here), as Labor Day is the first Monday of September (in 1962, it would be the 3).

The weekend in question would have been Sept 7-9.

Hope this helps.

Andy

I realized the week he quoted was wrong, but it really doesn't matter what the exact week was. The real issue has to do with when the Taurus was first built and flown. As I said above, a statement in the original drawn plans said Ed flew the "contest prototype" Taurus for the first time "Thanksgiving 1961" which is near the end of November. If that statement is true, (and we really have no basis not to believe it is), then the plane Ed flew at the Detroit Invitational in 1961 could not have been the prototype for what we now call the Taurus. To summarize Cees's position, he believes the original of what we would all agree is a Taurus flew at least six months before the Thanksgiving date. I'm saying it first flew in November based solely on that piece of evidence above.

There was an ancestor of the commonly known Taurus that I pictured earlier, (that Ed apparently first gave the Taurus name to), that Ed DID fly in the 1961 NATS that summer according to Ray in post #131 of the "Ed Kazmirski's Taurus" thread. That plane was quite a bit different in moment lengths, and overall look. Most people would NOT call it a Taurus, but instead a pre-Taurus. Ed most likely flew that plane, or another unnamed plane that we don't really know about.

Since the Detroit Invitational was one of the premier events similar to the American TOC, and attendance was by invitation only, it is quite possible that the old modeling mags from late 1961 or early 1962 might mention the contest, and what Ed flew. I hope Ray, (who is the best at doing this kind of research), is out there looking through his archives right now. There might even be a picture of it.

Duane

Come on, why all this fuss over restoring a darn Ford Taurus. Maybe a Shelby 350 GT.

Bill

Something you just wrote clicked something in my brain.

I used to race boats competitively around the country. When I did, it wasn't uncommon for any of us to have a new hull design which we would give the name of the previous hull, simply to maintain continuity in the buying public's mind. I used to manufacture a scale hydroplane which was known as the UL-1 (still is, in fact). There were 4 different molds used to make them, and there were some slight differences between each (enough that you couldn't get parts from one mold set to fit parts from another). But they are all UL-1 (and even Aqua Craft has hooked up with my name, adding to the confusion).

What if Ed, hoping that Taurus would be the Next Big Thing, used the same name for his prototype as well as the contest winner? HE would know the difference, and the early photos show they aren't the same thing as what we all recognize as "Taurus."

Just a thought.

Andy

Andy

You are right, there was something wrong with the date.
Your date, you show us as example, we can see also on the advertisement picture, the situation in 1962. (See picture 1 red square)

I did write about one year earlier, 1961, because also then Ed already did win this Invitational of Detroit with his contest Taurus and that has to be the date 9 and 10 September for 1961 and not 16 and 17, thanks.
(In the Netherlands we would have say the week OF Labor Day or the weekend after Labor Day).

Andy, about your last post.

As you show us with your race boat competition, we know also a contest plane is in development for a period and of course the first prototype is different from a later kitted plane .
For a kit a recognizable name is important for advertisement and also of course the victories, see also picture 1.

Normally the names of cars we use to drive in are protected for this reason and these names used for long times.

“simply to maintain continuity in the buying public's mind” what you write.

When we read the article Mr. K goes to Africa, we see Ed did call the Oldest Taurus on Earth, his contest Taurus on that moment, “light Taurus”.
Why did he call this ”light Taurus”?
Because the tail is shorter , the fuselage slimmer.
So the plane would have been (difficult language?) remarkable lighter with his K & B than the other Taurus with VECO engine and the other Taurusses, scratch build from the drawings of Karl Myers that already fly in the USA.

So what you write:

What if Ed, hoping that Taurus would be the Next Big Thing, used the same name for his prototype as well as the contest winner? HE would know the difference, and the early photos show they aren't the same thing as what we all recognize as "Taurus."

Isn’t the complete description for me.

I would say, Ed and Top Flite were hoping the Taurus would be the Next Big Thing after the Orion.
Top Flite did pay the trip to Africa after seeing the (light) contest Taurus of Ed in 1961 and paid later for Advertizing to sell as much as kits as possible.

The advertisement has often the result the development steps are deliberately ignored and so forgotten by the people. The pilots are often forced only to show (and fly?) there “kitted or kitted look” plane. You have to read the advertisement of Top Flite very carefully (picture 1) to see that these taurusses of 1962 were all scratch build.
That’s also the reason you have to look very carefully to the pictures of that period and “snap shots” are better.

Thanks for comment Andy,

Cees

Actually, Cees, you are saying the same thing if I interpret your English correctly. Ed had multiple planes called Taurus which had significant design differences (airfoil, nose moment, tail moment, span, area) even if they appeared the same even to a non-casual observer, as well as at least one plane called "Taurus" which had a distinctively different fin and rudder.

Andy

Andy,

Actually, Ed did have one contest plane, called “Taurus”.

This original Taurus started with normal tail cone, wing and stab, K & B engine and reeds radio in 1961 March, April and is the subject of this thread.
After about 4 recognizable evaluation steps the plane is stored for about 43 years in the same crate as we see the original plane on a picture in the article: “Mr. K goes to Africa”, a trip Ed did make in April 1962.

For me, only the “centre section” of the fuselage of the contest Taurus is still original after all the modifications.

What you say, talking about all the evolution steps, not planes!:
even if they appeared the same even to a non-casual observer, as well as at least one plane called "Taurus" which had a distinctively different fin and rudder.
Is right, we see an example of the way people look to the contest Taurus in 1963/1965 in the Ed Kazmirski’s Taurus thread, post 391 on page 20.

The Top Flite kitted version of the Taurus we see in the MAN of January 1963 is known all over the world.

Cees

Did I misunderstand that the attached photo was called Taurus? That tail doesn't at all resemble your Taurus (or MAN or anybody else's), nor does it resemble the taildragger Orion (also attached). If it is not a Taurus (vs. "Contest Taurus" ) what is it?

Andy

Look at the bottom for the date of this ad, (below).

The dates cited for the Detroit Invitational do not correspond to 1961, (which was 9-10). This is a 1963 ad that appeared in the same issue of MAN as the Kazmirski Taurus article, and was intended to promote the kit which only came out about that time.....and after Ed had won the 1962 NATS. The weekend date of the Invitational coresponds to the year 1962.

The plane Ed is holding is not the "kit" Taurus, but his NATS, (scratch built) version. Though we have learned the NATS Taurus had a 68" winspan and different tail moment than the kit, this would not have been noticable to anyone at the time.

Duane

Andy, that plane?

After the first flights of that plane Ed did write in his notebook: FLOP.
People thought it was the name but it stands for:


Faultless Lack Of Performance.

After Ed deleted the valuable parts as, canopy, pilot, gear and maybe the top of the fuselage the plane went “Flop” in the astray.

BTW the wings are two times doped and sanded and the locations for aileron servo and airspeed transmitter are prepared so time to cover with silk.
The hoses for the airspeed transmitter I can replace also after the wing is covered and I will use thinner hoses in the future.

Cees

Andy;

The answer to your question I believe is that it is a PRE-Taurus....kind of a link between the Orion and the MAN Taurus, (the plane in the ad). According to magazine and picture documentation provided by Ray in the Ed Kaz Taurus thread, (page 7 post 131), it was flown at the 1961 NATS, and gathered a lot of interest. As you mentioned, it doesn't look anything like what we would come to know as the popular Taurus. If it had a different paint scheme, you might look at it as maybe a highly modified trike gear Orion, but he called that 1961 plane a "Taurus". He tried a long nose moment and short tail moment on this 1961 plane. He obviously didn't like the results, as the next version which appeared after the '61 NATS...(the final Taurus), was the reverse, with a short nose and long tail moment. One report said the 1961 NATS Taurus crashed due to radio problems.

I don't mean to challenge Cee's theory in his own thread, but we are looking for the "true history" of what really happened back then. If his theory is true, one term needs to be fully explained. What is meant by "contest Taurus"?

Unless I misunderstand him, Cees says the "contest Taurus" is on the right side of the crate. This is the plane Cees is recreating now, (and it certainly looks like a recognizable Taurus). My understanding of the "contest Taurus" is the plane spoken of on the prototype plans where the term "contest Taurus" is actually used, (drawn on Dec 6, 1961 which also mentions the 1st flight as being at Thanksgiving 1961). I believe that at least one, and probably both planes in the crate were built according to that plan. If Cee's "contest Taurus" in the crate in April 1962 was in existance in March of 1961 as Cees says, why didn't Ed fly the more advanced second generation Taurus at the 1961 NATS, (summer of 1961), instead of what the magazine and picture says he flew? There is no way the right side fuselage in the April 1962 Africa crate could have been in existance in March of 1961, (several months before the 1961 NATS), unless it was already built at the time of the 1961 NATS. Why fly a plane that is of earlier vintage when both were supposedly available to use? Of course, another explanation might be that the magazine account and picture of the plane Ed flew at the 1961 NATS was wrong, but there is no evidence for that assumption. That article and picture were published 46+ years ago, (at the time)...we have to assume it is accurate.

The first plane we have actual evidence for that looks like the real Taurus we know, (contest or otherwise) appears in the article about the April 1962 trip to Africa. There is no doubt that both the planes in the crate from April 1962, are genuine "in final form" Taurus models.

When the 12-6-61 plan is finally examined, I believe it will look like the Africa planes used in 1962, and later at the 1962 NATS. This was the plane in the MAN article....its first flight was Thanksgiving of 1961 as the plan says...after the '61 NATS.

Duane

A possible source of confusion is our way of writing dates.

12-6-61 = December 6th 1961 in USA.
12-6-61 = 12th June 1961 in Europe.

Ray

I agree, Ray, but if someone were to say it meant the plans were drawn June 12th, then the Thanksgiving flight would be 5 months in the future. But if you're European and don't know when Thanksgiving comes, it would be an excusable error.

Thanks for the explanation, Duane. So Ed called the pre-Taurus "Taurus," even though it bore little resemblance to the final Taurus design? That would fit with the way things happen in the commercialized world.

Andy

Gents,

Howard Bonner also used the engine mounting plate.
See the picture: ” TUFNOL engine plate.”

I did look for an example older than the Taurus and there were, in the Smog Hog but also the Astro Hog.
To protect the engine in a crash Howard did use TUFNOL.

In the Netherlands we know in that period: PERTINAX or NOVOTEX.

When using a aluminum engine mounting plate it is good to use bras bolds, just Ed did.

Cees

Not much luck - so far. This is from AM January 1962 but does not tell us what we want to know. As you can see, the event was held on September 9th & 10th 1961.

As C. Montgomery Burns would say "continue the research"

Ray

Good job Ray Actually every bit of info is nice to read and adds to our overall knowledge. This event was held two years before we moved to the area, but it's interesting to see a list of the competitors. I only remember going to ONE Detroit Invitational, (where all the pictures my Dad took were taken), but there may have been more. That was a "snapshot" of the event. Printing this info about the meet demonstrates the ongoing nature and importance of that contest at the time. The RCCD, (Radio Control Club of Detroit), still exists, and is a large club.

Don Lowe, (mentioned in this article) won the event I went to see. Don is still active as an "elder statesman" of R/C pattern. I had the chance to visit with him in 2007 when he flew his Phoenix 6 again in a vintage competition.

At least we know for sure that he flew the "stubby Taurus" at the 61 NATS, but would still like to know what he flew at this meet.

Keep looking-I'm going to a large swap meet in a week...I'll look for old magazines as well.

Duane

This is the MAN report of the same 1961 Detroit Invitational. Again, as far as I can see, no useful information []

Ray

Great Ray

What issue of MAN was this in? Notice they are already making reference to an article in future issue.....but that can't be the Jan 1963 article, it would have been over a year away. Was there an earlier article about the development of the Taurus that appeared in MAN sometime in 1962?

Duane

Duane,

It is from the September 1962 issue but the article is more general publicity for the event rather than an actual report of the 1961 contest - so the Taurus was just three months away from publication when this appeared.

Ray

Ray, I find always useful information!


There it is, assignable cause, fault of the RCCD Web site editor.
Top, copy of the webpage RCCD so 16 and 17 september:<WEEK>
Bottom is original copy of MAN so 9 and 10 September:<WEEK END> as I did write in post 309
(In the Netherlands we would have say the week OF Labor Day or the weekend after Labor Day).

Always be careful with data and if possible, double check!!!!!!


BTW I did make a picture of the wind speed in Chicago, Illinois on the date 8 and 9 april 1961, maybe the weekend of the first flight of the Oldest Taurus on Earth to see if test flying was possible in that period. 5 Months before the Detroit Invitational.
Of course I also know humidity, temperature, barometer pressure etc.
More to come, wing covering is hot item these days.

Cees

Cees

Why do you feel the first flight of Oldest Taurus on Earth was April 8 and 9th, (or thereabouts), when the prototype plans says it was the end of November, (4th Thursday in the month) 1961? I know one source at the W/C in 1963 made a casual reference to
"2-1/2 years old", but that is a very unreliable reference compared to an exact date on the prototype plan. Is there any other evidence beside that one reference to support an age of "2-1/2 years"? Is there anything that says the first flight was in April of 1961? Why didn't Ed fly that plane at the 1961 NATS?

Duane