Gentlemen,

This is a very good action,
I did try to make a time sheet for myself, but you have all the Input with your magazines.
I have to look through all the posts



Cees

Ray,

I did you explain some differences between Orion and Taurus why you simple cannot step from Orion to Taurus.
It is educative to show when you want to use the Orion inverted for acrobatics
Maybe you all know this, but I use your question for some education!!
And maybe I did not understand your question ?

Ray,
>>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>
It is interesting to me as it shows a stage in how the Orion and then the Taurus came about.
>>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>


We all remember it is a 100% taildragger!! So not a tricycle plane with tailgear as you see often now.

When the angle of attack of a surface is more than 8 degrees, than you can expect turbulence.
I think the big problem is the bottomside of the fuse of the Orion (LET ME EXPLAIN LATER WHY I THINK THE TAURUSSUS OF ED AND LES ARE THE TOP FOR THAT MOMENT}

In the drawing I did draw the flightpad of the Orion inverted.
NACA 2419 is a a-symmetrical airfoil so the effective angle of attack is about the difference between the blue and red line (Ask me when you do not understand this!) to get enough lift.

The angle of attack of the bottomside of the fuselage is about 15 degrees on this moment now.
So a big airflow wiil go around the fuselage (from near cockpit position) and give a lot of turbulences and so drag. I did sign with blue paint!

So, when you do not change the angles of wings and stab and tailside of the fuselage when you mount a tricycle gear, the Orion you will never can use for good acrobat/slow roll/upside down/ atc.

When you do all change this, you automaticly see the MAN Magazine Taurus in only one transformation step

BTW, the Orion has a "high" thrustline of the motor, this can be a positive element because of the high drag of the wings inverted, so you will not directly stall the stab with extreme elevator "down"angles.

In the whole story you may not forget the less power they have in that period, so the angles of attack and so drag factors were high.

This is my experience with the Orion so, reponse please when I tell you something wrong, or it is not clear!!

I still wait for my picture so I have time left!!

Cees

Duane,

Michael, Post 367 did write:

The posted photos were taken after the 1963 California Nats.


Can this give us a better indication of the carrier flights, because the date aug is printdate of the picture as said before by others!

Cees

Crank. See posts #276 & #278 This thread is becoming rather too long now and duplication is inevitable.

avlwilsons. Yes August is right - forgot about post #353

Cess. If you want information about what models/radio Ed had at the Belgium W/C you could try an e mail to Jerry Nelson. He was there and might remember. Be warned though that I have e mailed him with questions about his older designs and received no reply. www.nelsonhobby.com

Ray

Gentlemen,

But also Ray, thanks for you last message, I will think it over!

For several years there was a thread on RCUniverse "Top Flite Taurus".
That was the right name and for me the start of my Taurus activities.

Now we have our thread "Ed Kazmirski's Taurus", so I think I have freedom to try to recontruct the way, I think, Ed Kazmirski did.
I also think this is the moment. There will not be a second change and I have to go further with it, so!

We have seen a lot of pictures, we have all our stories and memories.
The Taurus as we all know hem is maybe the oldest mostly used multy radio controlled model airplane.

What is my goal?

Try to find out the thoughts of Ed Kazmirski by reconstructing the history, and check them with the pictures we have.

More times I did tell that maybe the "Crate Taurus" of Africa was the basic of "our modern" Taurus.
There are several details I did not talk about in the past, but they still do feed my thinking.
Maybe because of the fact I built models for more then 42 years now and also design them.
A pro is that I was also a glider pilot and instrumentation, control and electronic engineer.

The facts

Picture 1
We all see the 4 holes in the fuse? Ones I did thought it had to do with replacement of the internal equipment because of the CG and swept backwards wings????
Wrong I think, there can be more!
I think It has more to do with the volume of the proportional radio in the past,
So, the fuselage was designed for the reeds receiver in the first place.
In 1963 Ed get his proportional and has to make space in the fuselage .
But,

Picture 2
Replace the two switches was not enough of course:
Also the front side if the centresection of the wing had to give his space so, the remakable open frontside of the wings.
This is a risky case because the strongness of the wing will be a lot less. This you only do when you have to modificate a plane!! Not basicly!

For me it is a indication that the two wingsets we know now, from auction 2 (picture 2)
but also the 3th wingset both were used with proportional radio. (picture 3)

A second indication that the fuselage of the "Oldest Taurus" could be the fuse of auction 2!
When you design a new model airplane, you do not want the "design specific situation" that you use the space in the D centresection of the wings (Set your knife in it!).
So in the basics the fuselage of auction 2 did fly with a wingset with closed centresection and so with reeds I still think!!
When it did fly with reeds than it can be with the wings of auction 1 because these wingset still has a closed centresection (picture 4) and do not belonge to the fuse in the first place.
If this was true, than I will see on a day this Taurus of Ed with reeds in the past.

Is it possible to check this these days with the fuselage of aution 2, so a question?
Is there room enough for a reeds receiver and servo's (relailess of course), with maybe the batterie beneath the fuel tank?
Because there we have that remarkable low bottomline of the tankcompartiment!

If it is possible than still that can be in the period that the crate picture is taken, because there we see probably the wings of auction 1 on the left side and the fuse of auction 2 on the right side.
The other wing on the right side is a pobably a MAN Magazine / Top Flite / circulating plan wing, with closed centresection!
On that picture there is no antanna (receiver) in the fuse on the right side.

Next time we are going to think what Ed has to do to design the Top Flite / Man Magazine / circulating plan Taurus


Cees

Great idea, Ray! Nitpickingly, I added the RCM&E publication and the 1959 Nats 2nd. That brought me to the question, what happened on the 1961 Nats? Answered the question by revisiting Ed's AMA biography (from Ed's memory, phone interview 2003): won with modified Orion. But this is not true according to other sources. In the RCM&E article, Ed mentioned the useage of an "experimental" Taurus, but without any success.

Hello UStik,

"April 1962 Eds Africa tour. Taurus used. "

Will that be correct?

Does not this has to be 1963.

When I did try to make a timesheet for myself, this was also a question for myself!

Is the message of Ray about the Africa Tour our only reference, post 298 Page 12?


Cees

Yes, page 12, post #298.

Sorry UStik,

I was editing my message with your answer on the same moment.

Ed would have the crate already with the 2 different Taurusses?

Cees

Seems so, all crate pictures we've seen so far are exactly the same (I mean there's only this single crate picture).

Yes UStik I know we have only one crate picture, but I cannot believe the crate already exists in april 1962!

I do have a reference.

This message from pimmnz page 6 message 148

Who can check this? Who can find this article in The Aeromodeller? Wich year?

pimmnz did mean the Aeremodeller the article 'Over the waves' and NOT Oct 1962 RCM&E

Then we know for sure, !

Cees

I found this strange also as it means that the Africa trip was the first "public" appearance of the Taurus (two of them in fact) but here is the complete magazine page showing the date published. Further on in the article the start date of the trip is given as 17th April ie. before the US Nats

UStik - Thanks, those are useful additions to the time line.

Cess - ref pimmnz pics: "Over the Waves" is from Aeromodeller July 1962 and " The Champ Chats" is from RCM&E october 1962

Ray

Gentlemen,

That's amazing!!

The date is correct we see, december 1962 but>>>>>>>>>>>&gt ;

but, I did not see the Leon before I did speek a lot of!

Repeat (message 299 page 12!!!!!!!!!!!!!!):
May-be a lion bite in the MAN Taurus wing , so Ed had to use the other wing out of the box in Belgium?

(And of course it was a joke, "Over the waves", not even a scratch, in Africa!)


Cees

But Cees, when you look at the fuselage side view you may imagine that Ed had to bite the bullet and open the D-tube on the swept wing, even with reeds. Thicker airfoil (22% ?), longer root chord, flatter fuse, there's very little room left.

UStik,

Our thread is still hot, and I am happy for that.

I did make some homework and we have to reseach some things.

I did rebuild the carrier fuse to a normal fuse, to look how much room it makes.

Look with me, every red dash is a repositioning, of motor, wing and tail.

Second question is the foam, in the fuselage of auction 2, something to do with fixing the receiver?

But indeed UStik it is a very important question, the room for the reed equipment, who could help us, Orbit 10 channel receiver, relailess, dimensions.
Do I talk about servo's with amplifiers inside also? And above the foam, is the topdeck maximal curved out (again coal English) ?

BTW, look at the anhedral/dihedral of the both wings, I did rebuild the carrier Taurus but the anhe-/dihedral of the wings is not enough now!, result, Bad knive edge!


Cees

Well, yes and no. Not a lot of input recently from our American friends, birthplace of the Taurus.

Cess - dimensions of an Orbit 12 relayless RX (I expect the 10 was much the same) 2 7/8" X 2 1/8" X 1" You can do the coversion to those crazy metric units.

Ray

Thank you Ray,

I have some homework to do!
Transmite servo's did had amplifiers inside I assume.
What do you use in Ireland no crazy metric units?
We also did not use those crazy calimba reeds, but "Schumacher filters", UStik has to know, he is a German!


Cees

BTW Guess were these reeds came from, from the streets from Edinburgh!

Cees/Ray/Pimmnz

I just got off the phone this afternoon with Dennis Hunt, and he confirmed the S. Africa trip was in April of 1962. It was a three week trip throughout Africa that Dennis had been working to arrange with Top Flite since 1960.

Apparently in the beginning, there was no guarantee that Ed would be able to ship his planes there, so Ed worked directly WITH Dennis as the Taurus was being designed and built so Dennis would have an exact duplicate there waiting for him when he arrived. He sent Dennis drawings, (most of them very crude on brown paper), and told Dennis what to do to build his properly. The picture on post #298 shows Dennis posing with his own exact Taurus duplicate. The specs of the crate, and arrangements for transporting it were handled by Dennis.

I hope you folks are sitting down. Dennis recalls the two Taurus models that traveled to S. Africa as being IDENTICAL if his memory serves correctly.[X(][X(] I don't know if other evidence presented in this thread may serve to refresh his memory; it would be interesting to get further commentary after he reads the whole thread.

If the two planes were identical, it means the second Taurus fuselage on the right side of the crate with the military pilot and more streamlined fuselage was built at a later time, most likely after the 1962 Nats, and before the 1963 World Championships. Pictures dated August 1963 (Carrier photos), clearly show the Taurus 2 with wing #3. As has been proposed by Cees, an earlier wing was modified to produce the "carrier wing", and maybe the striped wing, (alternate wing paint scheme). Both Taurus versions were most likely present in Belgium...one with reeds and one with proportional. It has been discussed previously that Ed chose to fly his "reed" Taurus, (now the VR/CS Taurus), because of the windy conditions in Belgium.

Dennis states that Ed was always making changes and learning from experience. My own best guess is that the striped wing, (alternate paint scheme wing) was built/modified last, as it shows up in later photos, and has more modern hinged control surfaces. Ed kept these two Taurus versions after he left R/C since they were the most important to him, and held the most memories. The Taurus 2 probably became his primary plane after the 1963 "worlds". I don't see any evidence of pictures after 1963 in Belgium of the original VR/CS Taurus. I think it was "retired" after the World Championships.

I know there is still a lot of speculation, but please go "easy on me" everybody.

Hopefiully Dennis will catch up on the thread, and respond himself at a later time.

Duane

I can confirm that the Transmite servos which were designed for use with relayless reed receivers, did have a transistorized amplifier in the case. I may still have some parts from one in my shop.

John W.

Duane, I did copy your message so I could put notes in it!



>>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>&gt ;
Cees/Ray/Pimmnz

I just got off the phone this afternoon with Dennis Hunt, and he confirmed the S. Africa trip was in April of 1962. It was a three week trip throughout Africa that Dennis had been working to arrange with Top Flite since 1960.

Apparently in the beginning, there was no guarantee that Ed would be able to ship his planes there, so Ed worked directly WITH Dennis as the Taurus was being designed and built so Dennis would have an exact duplicate there waiting for him when he arrived. He sent Dennis drawings, (most of them very crude on brown paper), and told Dennis what to do to build his properly. The picture on post #298 shows Dennis posing with his own exact Taurus duplicate. The specs of the crate, and arrangements for transporting it were handled by Dennis. (Comment 1,2,3,4)

I hope you folks are sitting down. Dennis recalls the two Taurus models that traveled to S. Africa as being IDENTICAL if his memory serves correctly. I don't know if other evidence presented in this thread may serve to refresh his memory; it would be interesting to get further commentary after he reads the whole thread. (Comment 3)

If the two planes were identical, it means the second Taurus fuselage on the right side of the crate with the military pilot and more streamlined fuselage was built at a later time, most likely after the 1962 Nats, and before the 1963 World Championships. Pictures dated August 1963 (Carrier photos), clearly show the Taurus 2 with wing #3. As has been proposed by Cees, an earlier wing was modified to produce the "carrier wing", and maybe the striped wing, (alternate wing paint scheme). Both Taurus versions were most likely present in Belgium...one with reeds and one with proportional. It has been discussed previously that Ed chose to fly his "reed" Taurus, (now the VR/CS Taurus), because of the windy conditions in Belgium. (Comment 5,6)

Dennis states that Ed was always making changes and learning from experience. My own best guess is that the striped wing, (alternate paint scheme wing) was built/modified last, as it shows up in later photos, and has more modern hinged control surfaces. Ed kept these two Taurus versions after he left R/C since they were the most important to him, and held the most memories. The Taurus 2 probably became his primary plane after the 1963 "worlds". I don't see any evidence of pictures after 1963 in Belgium of the original VR/CS Taurus. I think it was "retired" after the World Championships. (Comment 7)

I know there is still a lot of speculation, but please go "easy on me" everybody.

Hopefiully Dennis will catch up on the thread, and respond himself at a later time.

Duane
>>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>


Oké Duane, easy!


Comment 1
I show you a message from me from post 274 page 11
>>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>&gt ;
Ed did get (one of) the first new Taurus(sus), that's I did say in earlier messages a "preproduction" Taurus, They did use this Taurus to promote the kit when travelling over the world.
It is possible that Ed did not built this Taurus himself, but Top Flite did!
>>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>&gt ;
So, true, the fuselage of the Taurus from auction 1 is not built by Ed Kazmirski, but by Dennis Hunt.


Comment 2
Dennis designed the aileron hanging with 4 sewings, Ed did use 3 hangings in the first place!
repeat>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >
He sent Dennis drawings, (most of them very crude on brown paper), and told Dennis what to do to build his properly.
>>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>&gt ;
You cannot make two exact copies this way, so Ed did built his Taurus, scratch as we did see.


Comment 3
Duane, we read the next phrase:
repeat>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >
He sent Dennis drawings,
>>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>&gt ;
When you speak Dennis Hunt again, ask him, or Ed Kazmirski also send that cockpit label with these drawings.
Because both labels in the crate were written by Ed Kazmirski!


Comment 4
repeat>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>&gt ;
Dennis recalls the two Taurus models that traveled to S. Africa as being IDENTICAL if his memory serves correctly
>>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
Within wide borders (Dutch) the were the same, but we know the details. Only the names were the same.


Comment 5
repeat>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>&gt ;
If the two planes were identical, it means the second Taurus fuselage on the right side of the crate with the military pilot and more streamlined fuselage was built at a later time
>>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
And this is pertinent not true Duane: THE ARE BOTH IN THE CRATE. THE CRATE DENNIS HUNT DID MAKE FOR AFRICA!
So what you see in the crate is the Taurus van Dennis Hunt and the Taurus from Ed Kazmirski!
It was my goal to prove the fuselage on the right side was from the Oldest and Orginal Taurus. Now we know for sure it is, also the only fuse that was built by Ed himself.
They are built at the same time, Dennis Hunt prepaired a kit version. Ed Kazmirski a contest version.


Comment 6
repeat>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >
As has been proposed by Cees, an earlier wing was modified to produce the "carrier wing", and maybe the striped wing, (alternate wing paint scheme).
>>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>&gt ;
I did not say that Duane. Maybe you mean post 393 from UStik!

I think Ed would never have do that, it is dangerous and cost you more time than making a new one.
This is the reason Ed still did had his 3 own most valuable wings!
The wings Dennis Hunt built are gone, and Ed did not use them in Belgium. Now I think I know the reason why.


Comment 7
And here, Dennis Hunt is absolutly right,
repeat>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>&gt ;
Dennis states that Ed was always making changes and learning from experience.
>>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
Because Ed was an inventor, and did built his own Taurus as we have seen now. Ed did remove also the silk covered (diamand) tailplane and fin.
We see the balsa sheeted tailplanes now so, look at the pictures
On the right side the plane from Ed Kazmirski
The combined picture accentuates the difference with the MAN Magazine/TOP Flite/circulating plan Taurus (Dennis Hunt), with red dashes.



QUOD ERAT DEMONSTRANDUM


Duane, the big problem in this thread is the unbelievable story. You have to live on the other side of the world to be objective. With NO PRESS.
I did not have your magazines, only a copie of the MAN Magazine article.
You first need a story, and wait ,and wait, and wait,>>>>>>>>>>>& gt;

And then look to the pictures!
And defend your story.

When you say I am right, remember, I do built more than 42 years modelairplanes, also tip-tip and design them the way Ed did I think!.




Cees

Good grief! Cees, for me you're jumping to conclusions. I would fully agree with Duane and not doubt anything without having an afterthought.

BTW, I'm not versed in electronics and I only know for sure that our receivers had no reeds. Maybe the Graupner/Grundig receivers had Schumacher filters because Hans Schumacher had quite a name in Germany and made the Bellamatic/ServoAutoMatic servos for Graupner (there's a "HS" logo on them). He is listed as entry #15 on the 1963 WC model analysis table, where the (older Graupner) Bellaphon transistor 10 transmitter (made by Hans Schumacher as well) seems to be mistaken as proportional. (Or he had a "dithering" device imitating the manual dither and letting the Bellamatics act like proportionals. Would be possible without reeds and relays.) And these servos were rather small without electronics (only gear and friction clutch) but instead the receivers were bigger.

John,

but also UStik

Thank you!

BTW,
Do you know these servor's?

METZ, two channel relais.
Ed would have known them I think because it is from the photograpic equipment, German manufacturer.

Cees

Cees;

Regarding post 470, I had replied to your comments, however my "session" timed out, so it was lost. I will respond again later when I am not at work. Let's just say for now, that your response shows you didn't read what I said carefully enough...please re-read.

Basically Dennis had HIS OWN PLANE, and Dennis's plane was never in the crate. It was built just IN CASE Ed was not able to ship his own plane/s to Africa, (a major undertaking in 1962). The two plane in the crate picture fromm the article both came from the US.

I will respond to each comment later

Duane

UStik,





I repeat your phrase from your last message:
>>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>
Good grief! Cees, for me you're jumping to conclusions. I would fully agree with Duane and not doubt anything without having an afterthought.
>>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>
but remember your phrase in the message above!
>>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>
But I'm not waiting just for that last missing piece of the puzzle.
>>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>


I was waiting for that last missing piece of the puzzle and that was this:

Our American friends did forget the MAN Magazine/TOP FLITE first Taurus was not made by Ed Kazmirski, but by Dennis Hunt.
And thats the answer of every question from me.

The characters of the wing, the scratch built "other" fuse, the mixed plane in Belgium, The different Taurus of Les Fruh, The 3 sewings on wings Ed did use, the both different Taurusses in the crate of Africa, the labels on the wings and fuses, the carrier Taurus, why we see not back the wings from Dennis Hunt, etc, etc,

Most important, Seeing al the pictures also from the auctions I did learn the style, The style of the way Ed Kazmirski did built his Taurus.
And knowing his style I can say now it is not the Taurus from Ed I fly with these days, that is the Taurus from Dennis Hunt.

And that has nothing to do with Duane, he also did his very best to get it all clear.
But I think nobody expected such a simple answer!!!!



Cees


While I was writing this message I saw Duane also did react so I will read the messages again!

Cees, are you serious, or just having "fun" with us. See my post #473

Just in case there is still misunderstanding, the picture of the Taurus with Dennis posing by it....that is Dennis' Taurus. He built it in Africa during the same period Ed was building his in the US. The planes in the crate are Ed's planes, or at least were made in the US, and shipped to Africa. Dennis's plane was intended to be an EXACT DUPLICATE of Ed's plane, (except for the sewn hinges, which Dennis didn't like). It was meant to be a plane for Ed to fly if he was unable to bring his OWN planes.

Ed gave Dennis detailed instructions on the construction and finish of his plane, and probably sent pictures for the finish.

The ONLY time you see Dennis's plane is in the picture with Dennis. This is NOT the piece you've been looking for, and it doesn't answer any questions other than pointing out EXACTLY what Ed's original Taurus was supposed to look like.

Why are you so sure that the kit version of the Taurus was not the same plane that Ed originally designed, and flew at the 1962 Nats?

Duane