Free Bird

ROFLMAO!!!!

WEDJ

FB, you forgot the "F" (between the M and the A)

Free Bird

I know, but this is a family oriented forum.....

FB

Jeff Boyd 2

WARNING - This is a joke.

Speaking of "F" . . the video should really show a flight of F-11 . . Ummmm . . nahhh . . it's too new ! . . Make it F-09 (that's been flown since Argentina). I know that one, so can judge the flight more accurately (still trying to get my head around P-11 . . and probably wouldn't even look at F-11 for about a year or so ! ).

ALTHOUGH - This isn't.

WOW, the video would be awesome to watch . . I loved the Taurus when I was a kid. Would really like to see one flying again . .

Cheers, JB

Taurus Flyer

Berusty, Gents

I do have contact with AMA, and wait for response from Jay Smith.

I will fly the plane after I do have the info they understand my statement and reconstruction process.
Because it is possible there must be made more additional pictures, I do not fly the Wester Taurus and also not my copy Top Flite Taurus.
An example of the dozens of picture I did make already for that I show you, picture 1.

I also can let other people make a picture of their Taurus and photo shop this in the crate, simple by tell the right POV. Also for that fuselage on the right side I do have x - y – z coordinates for the position of the camera.

The procedure we can call for that is:”Send me the picture and I will show you it doesn’t fit.”


You all know I am inventor, not to win pattern these days but to look if it is possible to let the Taurus be a better plane for that old program.
I do like research and development.
For many years I do the same with my Top FliteTaurus.

Equipped now with, air speed control, fuel level measurement with low level warning by blinking landing light (a beam of high resolution LEDs), engine temperature logging and warning T high with memory, special nose leg, fuel pressure controller, tank pressure controller, data logging of airspeed and RPM for performance study, it is also possible for engine temperature, RPM and fuel tank level.
Of course I can switch on the landing light manual in winter see second picture:
Landing light on because the plane you cannot see in the last glide path lower than the horizon.
Black oil visible, it it is from the breath of the tank pressure controller, as result of ball bearing failure during this flight!

The Oldest Taurus on Earth.
For the Oldest Taurus on Earth I do make a special data log schedule to see how the plane will perform when compare with the standard Taurus,
I use a few data for that:
Throttle position, airspeed, RPM, braking or pulling of the prop and Total Energy of the plane. These measurements will take place under defined flight conditions mentioned in that schedule.
I always study of the relationship between throttle position and power output of the engine and adjust for linear response.

ONE STEP MORE
After I know the measured values I can see if it is possible to use the airspeed controller in the plane and what would be the controller parameters for pulling and braking.
(Ziegler and Nichols)
One step more when compare with the plane Ed did fly.

Taxiing
Also of course I want to know behavior in rolling position on grass, concrete in several wind speed conditions for the best performance in the “Proto Taxi" Procedure.


After all these flight it is time for Video.
BTW, do you know I do make sound recordings to adjust the controller parameters? More important than video during testflying.


Wait for ONE STEP MORE.


Cees

Jeff Boyd 2

As I said . . I did love the Taurus (flew a Kwik Fly 3 then a Bridi Super Kaos myself . . sorry for these swear words ).

I am looking forward to seeing it fly, Cees.

Cheers. JB

Taurus Flyer

Jeff, hi

I did take a look in your Gallery of RCU and did see your glider. Thunderbird 2M Soaring Star
Did find an advertisement and read the airfoil that is used is Eppler 387.

When I did redesign the ASK 18 about 28 years ago ,I did select Eppler 205, 203 193 (root, wing, tip) , I know that in that period Eppler 367 already was known several years.
"So this airfoil is as old as the way to Rome!"
Does your plane has this airfoil also, Eppler 387 ?
For example I use MH32 on a Sagitta 900 (was Eppler 205) but there are much more better airfoils I think.

Picture 3 ASK 18, 2009 Germany
I did fly the plane in the early days with one aileron servo one airbrake servo and without mixers or expo and of course "THUMBING".(span nearly 4,5m, 5 servos, one for the selease hook a NF5 jet inverted safetypin, so we could safety towing the glider behind a motor plane)

Cees

Taurus Flyer

Gents,

A detail of how to not make your pattern plane too heavy.
A part of the plans of Frank Mijers already visible on 9/2/2008 in post 731 in the Ed Kazmirski's thread.
These are details you can find when you know were you have to look for.

They cut away as most as possible to keep the weight low, look the red oval, you recognize the mounting spar of the maingear.

When I show, I only can show it all, do with it wathever you want, but this is classic pattern.


Cees

Jeff Boyd 2

Yes I believe it has a modified E 387 airfoil . . The Soaring Star was a replacement for the Protech Omega (lost in a mid-air with a Hotliner []), which flew MUCH better AFTER I modified it.

The design had a type of Polyhedral wing with the ailerons on the first angle of the polyhedral (the blue sections that plug into the yellow , no dihedral, section of the wing). This design just would NOT turn . . it was terrible. So I removed the dihedral braces from the polyhedral sections, and made the whole wing flat except for the very tips which still had the original and fixed dihedral.

So now the yellow section of the wing and the first blue section (with the ailerons) were completely flat . . and it totally transformed this glider.

This probably doesn't make much sense . .

Wish I could get another, but can not find one anywhere ..

Cheers, JB

Taurus Flyer

Jeff,

For a while "Off Toplc."
(Sort of, redesigned) Sagitta 900 MH32 pylon airfoil, no ailerons. My brother uses this model as glider, it normally is. It's a winner, but not with the old Eppler 205.
I think these planes do have too much dihedral to use ailerons, it also generates induced drag.
I also do not have airbrakes as the Sagitta normally has, I use the Elektrical propulsion also to brake.
No paint, no extra weight, silk and dope.

So, and now again "On topic"

Cheers Cees

Taurus Flyer

FB, Gents


Do not let it be the situation that you all can write anything in this thread, it has to be preliminary “On topic”.

Subject of the thread.

This thread is the description of the reconstruction of the Oldest Taurus on Earth, the first contest Taurus Ed did build to use himself already in 1961.

It is the prototype of the later designed Frank Mijers plan Taurus and the Top Flite Taurus.

I did make this thread to know the dimensions of this Taurus because no other information was found no real plans were found and probably never did exist, as we also know of all other "personnal" planes of Ed Kazmirski.

Ed Kazmirski’s Taurus Thread results:

Proved is on this moment by the results of the step program I did initialize in “Ed Kazmirski’s Taurus” thread:
1. The claim, VR/CS did own the NATS 1962 as is shown on their video presentation on Internet is not true (AMA museum now).

Important international is:
2. The result of that investigation was also, the Taurus, Ed Kazmirski did use during the Internats in 1963 in Genk Belgium, was a mix up of two different Taurus models.

Redesign and reconstruction of the Oldest Taurus on Earth

After reconstructing also the Original Contest Taurus, for this Period called; Wester Taurus / Oldest Taurus on Earth, the dimensions of all the used Taurus models are known by me.
Because the dimensions of the known models is known by me also the mixed up model dimensions are known. For that reason this thread can switch over on “idle”.


Main reason to continue the thread now is to wait for results of the AMA.

In the mean time I will create the possibility to let people try to prove, if they believe, another story, for example as is told by the representatives of VR/CS and SPA my reconstructed Taurus did never exist.
For this input I will give assistance for example by photo comparison with my "High resolution crate picture".

After I do have the results of the AMA, I will take a decision what to do with this thread.
Before that moment I will not fly with the two Taurus models, they will be stored.
I myself will continue constructing the Les Fruh Taurus and Simla.

Cees

kingaltair

My Feedback: (4)

Many of us have already commented at length on each of the claims you listed above...no reason to try to provide further proof that our own time line and conclusions better follow the actual evidence; you have your mind made up. So have you now made your case directly to the AMA, and if so, what was the purpose of doing this? Do you expect the AMA to be convinced by your arguements?

You already know that VR/CS has retracted their original claim that was made in error in their video, that their Taurus, (now donated to the museum) was the original. At the time they believed this to be true, but when the facts were pointed out, the official VR/CS position was changed. They now know based on the available evidence that the fuselage was from the 1962 NATS Taurus, and the entire plane is the one that went to Belgium for the FAI championship in 1963. They now make no other claim. We want to make the record straight on that issue.

I believe there is a great deal of supposition, conjecture, and speculation in the claims you make above. You will never be able to prove them. The burden of proof at this point is really on you to show by means of new factual documentation (ie new photos, eyewitness accounts, or written material), that there ever was a pre-Frank Myers Taurus other than the so-called FLOP supposedly flown at the 1961 NATS that was a pre-Taurus model with a long nose moment and a short tail moment.

If you decide to "recreate" the Simla, the only way you can do it is to borrow heavily on UStik's measurement work already shown in the Ed Kazmirski's Taurus thread. Every scrap of available data we know about the Simla is already contained in that thread. Do you have any other information on Simla? If you do, it would be great if you'd share it with us as we have with you

Duane

Taurus Flyer

Gents, Spare ribs for the winter

A short project update.

With my airfoil program I can redraw any rib of my planes using the data of my database.
For the Orion I have to redesign the wing so I need several new ribs, also on other locations in the wing and recalculated to another airfoil near the tip .

Because I was running the program I already did make the ribs for a second Taurus wing, see the picture. It cost me about three hours work (and no laser cutting).
This wing will get the dihedral of the original wing it did have in Genk Belgium, 1963.

Because I do read some “strange facts about data" in my thread!

All the data I use to reconstruct planes I generate myself because I do need a certain and highest possible accuracy
Because I was forced to argue about the most simple facts in the Ed Kazmirski's Taurus thread in the past I did start this thread especially to show how I did it.
The methodes I use, always do depend of the data and pictures etc. I have.

Some examples of the Ed Kazmriski’s Taurus thread, about the (lack of) accuracy.

Top Flite Taurus
Post 1168

He doesn't have to wait anymore, now we know the fuselage is as long as we see on the Top Flite Taurus drawing.


Taurus T2

Post 1142

http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8634029

Look at the picture 1 , T2 (bottom position) 6 inches height near the LE of the wing? About 15 % too much.


Simla

Last message about the Simla dimensions of Ustik, 1798

http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8951580

As we instrument engineers often say:
It is better to have no data than wrong data!

Cees

Taurus Flyer

Gents, looking to the pictures I also do see Maria VanVreede, right side, and Michael Smith left side – he’s the Museum Director, to make this message complete.
BTW the moderators did tell me not to post in the "Ed Kazmirski's Taurus" anymore, so I hope this is oké.

Cees

Taurus Flyer

Gents, I did get a PM and so a suggestion.

To make a sheeted LE for our Taurus wing can be a problem, but I use an easy (and more heavy) solution.

Make a massive LE stock to cut of from 10 mm sheet balsa, medium quality (3/8 “?)
Make grooves in the LE stock with my saw, 3 mm depth. 2 mm wide on the position of the ribs.
Cut of the first 5 mm from the ribs, see the drawing, green curved front of the rib.

Now it is easy to glue the stock on the ribs nearly without any tape or needles.

After drying of the glue, protect to top and bottom sides of the ribs with tape (yellow!) and cut and sand the LE stock in the same angle as the rib contour near the stock.

After that you can mount the sheeting and sanding. See for that posts :
135, page 6
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8237976
249 page 10
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8353689
And 250 page 10
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8357117

Cees

Taurus Flyer

For the TE of the wing look at post 120, nearly the same construction, 10 mm balsa with grooves for the ribs.

http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8150471

In the position of the hinges we can mount a reinforcement on the TE stock (doubler?).

Cees

Taurus Flyer

Gents

Because I did have some backstage conversation an extra note.
I use plywood birche 3/32" or balsa 1/8" wingribs, that is qhy I make these holes in the ribs to make them less heavy.
Do not make these holes in the standard sheeted balsa wingribs.

Cees

kingaltair

My Feedback: (4)

Cees

Thanks for the museum personnel names in post 639

Duane

Taurus Flyer

Gents,

ZHS did ask for the way I do glue the wood of the Taurusses.
Maybe interesting to give an short extra post only about gluing de way I am doiing
This methode I use for all the Taurusses and Orion.

Look my post 135 on this page:

http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_79..._6/key_/tm.htm

also some others post 64 and 65 of the fuselage. on this page:

http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_79..._3/key_/tm.htm

I do use white PVA glue for all connections without the engine compartment and engine bearers, so normal white wood glue from the do-it-yourself shop.
Wood gluing of the engine compartment I use two component epoxy. fast hardening, in about 10 minutes. For the firewall (3 sheets together) and wooden engine bearers, this is fuel resistant
To glue the sheeting, doublers of the fuselage but also the sheeting of the wing I do make yhe outside of the balsa little bit moist(Y?) with a moisty (water) piece of cloth.
All the wood in the engine compartment I give a finish with the two component epoxy before painting the plane.

Succes, and if you have, show us a picture in the future if you want.

Cees

Taurus Flyer

Gents,

There was some arguing about the linking of elevators.

I show a test I did repeat today on my Top Flite Taurus to make some pictures.
We normally simulate the torque as result of aerodynamic forces of about 86 N.cm / 120 oz.inch on the elevator, that’s about twice the torque the servo can generate.

Data:

Used steel weight,picture 1, is 2,19 kg is 4,8 lbs, 77,3 oz and the elevator is 4 cm wide is 1,57 inch on the points the weight is mounted.

The picture 2 with the weight shows us the deformation of the elevators halves but position is still symmetric.
After I did remove the weight , picture 3, we see the symmetry isn’t changed only the deformation of the elevators is gone.
This picture isn't made on exact the same level because only the "symmetric" indicator is important to see.

Last picture is the overall picture, so the fuse is flat on the table and the weight is hanged with tape at the elevators, the pushrod is strong enough to withstand the torque of the servo with a safety factor of 200 %.

Result:

The test shows us there will not be a unbalance of position of the elevator halves when flying pattern with high loading G-forces.
When the system is overloaded, than the elevator servo will be the limitation, not the linking or pushrod.

For me this is the only way to check this part of the plane is correct designed and build.
Of course I am also interested in the results of a static test with an asymmetrical linking.

Cees


Edit: The tape on the left side is longer but that doesn't influence the result, second point is the elevator pushrod is blocked near the servo.

AndyKunz

Nice work, Cees.

Andy

Taurus Flyer

Thanks Andy,

The Top Flite Taurus is basically designed for the old reed systems and later used for even slower proportional. The engine was a 45 RC.
For that reason I already did these measurements in the past, it gives me a better feeling when flying the plane. This was a sort of photo session.


Cees

Taurus Flyer

Gents,

For who is interested, See also post 601, 603, 614 and 618 .
The Orion has new retracts (spring return) and wing ribs, the spars are repaired (blue oval), so now I can start reconstruct the sheeting of the wing and after that covering and painting.

In April the Orion has to fly again at a vintage meeting in the Netherlands, just as the Top Flite Taurus.

The Oldest Taurus on Earth will be there on a static display.

On the picture, one retract is visible but also the air tank on the background (yellow bottle). All the other equipment for the retracts is build in the centre section of the wing.
The retracts are scratch build and have suspension, the main axles have a diameter of 6 mm and two pivots.
This Orion has a 19 % thick wing just as most Taurusses.

Cees

Taurus Flyer

Gents,
This thread is about reconstruction of the past and we already did speak about the brakes Ed did design for the Orion and Taurus in 1961.
Hal de Bolt did make electrical retracts in 1962 but some historical investigation does show me there also were pneumatic activated sets, see the picture.
Maybe someone already did fly with an Orion or Taurus with pneumatic retracts?
American Modeler, November 1962?
Because of the short nose of the Taurus I think the Simla is a better candidate to try out in the future.
I did use the Orion in the past because it basically is a taildragger so less complicated.

Cees

Taurus Flyer

Gents,

Because classic pattern flying and especially the Taurus, is most interesting for me I collect all information and data from the past.

For bigger models I prefer pneumatic retracts, one pneumatic servomechanism, spring return for the two legs, never did fail for me.
Also electrical is interesting and in several threads I read about electrical retracts of several brands. There is a long thread about Lado.

In my last post I already did give a sign, Hal DeBolt retracts, dMeco, already were on the market in 1962. So (not 30 but!) more than 45 years ago!
The advertisement, plug and play, 1962.
I did ad a schema of a simple switch to activate the retracts. For safety a separate battery was also possible because I think there was no ciurrent limitation!

Cees