Gents,

I already did show you a lot of pictures, to compare, with dashes and squares or circles, black and white, color etc.
Is somebody interested in the picture with the black oval on a colorless piece of wood with some red and white paint?
Of course it has to do with the Oldest Taurus on Earth.
Cees

Oh, no. Please no.

Don’t worry Nic, only a warning.

“Floating can give your Orion a clipped wing!”

Ed of course did experience the disadvantage of floating just as we still do, read several posts of it.

Advantage: very soft landings, nearly no problems for me to keep the short retracts alive, even on grass.
Disadvantage: You nearly cannot point the plane on a spot, it is always a looooong dash.

Our (for me new) field is small with a short and long diagonal. Last flight I did have to use the short diagonal for the first time to land but still with some crosswind. See picture 1
Last flight, (the max engine RPM was 10300 on the ground) was very, very well.
So that could be a controlled landing too, with a trottled engine to have some speed for the controllability of the crosswind on a low final.
Yesss that floating forces you to make low finals, so be carefull and do not hit the wires!! No, no problem they are more to the left!!!

See picture 2 and 3 , this was the fourth flight for me on this field, first on this diagonal.
Who did park his Spruce Goose over there? I did not see that!!

So the next back stage project for me is: “Redesign and reconstruction of the Oldest Orion of me.”
Picture 4 to do list:
1 New wing aileron sections, light weight, so both sides with symmetrical wing tip airfoil.
2 New design lower weight retracts was already on the list after a lot of modifications.
3 Probably no frise ailerons.
4 Clipped wings, one section of 7,5 cm both sides
5 Flaps

Why this all? Just to learn from my “Experimental Orion”.

Floating you also can reduce by lowering the tail cone angle I know, but the fuselage is still oké and I do not want to make a Taurus from that Orion. (On topic again, it did has to do with one of the reasons Ed did design the Taurus!)

See also this video, 1 min 40 sec. The nice tricycle Orion from Hillville. My tail wheel Orion is much lower near the ground so also floats more!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-Qtz39-sf0

So Nic , Oh Yes, I like designing and building. I never have a lot of planes, only a lot of work on a few of them.

Cees

Gents,

Again pictures with dashes, squares etc.

Les Fruh and were does your Taurus came from?
But first, the proportions to archive.

I did make a picture of the Oldest Taurus on Earth, result of the reconstruction of the crate picture of April 1962, with reconstructed, the same Point of View as the Les Fruh Taurus picture. See picture 1 and 2.

Understand there is only one “same Point of View” and finding this point gives the possibility to combine all the parts of the two planes.
So, top of the fuselage, some parts of the tail and the wingtips are replaced in the Les Fruh picture to measure.

I am not looking for distances in the corners in the picture so the distortion of the pictures is minimal and partly compensated too.

The Oldest Taurus on Earth has bar line on the fuselage with cm dashes on the important positions and again the markers for the wing saddle and firewall.

What is the result of the combined picture 3, comparing the Les Fruh Taurus and the Oldest.
1 Tail cone of the “Les Fruh” Taurus is 12,5 cm (5 inches) longer, see the .”open green square”
2 Wing LE 1 cm to the front.”Blue closed square”, probably the result of swept back and result of that a little longer root saddle.
3 Les Fruh Stab has probably a normal Taurus span, ”green closed square” (but I can measure that later also with reference dashes on the stab).
4 The Les Fruh wing is a Taurus wing with straight TE, some more span than the OTOE. (I think 2 inch more, but I can measure that later also with references dashes on the wingtips).

So again, “Les Fruh were did ypur Taurus came from?”
The Les Fruh Taurus is a fixation of a moment in the evolution process of the contest Taurus over many years that started in April, May, 1961 and ended in 1965.
Still thinking about building also the “Les Fruh” in the future.
At least I will have enough Taurusses to fly, exact, no experimental, that’s Les and Ed did already for me

I discovered also a third person, so more to come!!!
Last picture, Ed and Les know each other very well !!

Cees

Gents,
I still did have one study picture.

While reconstructing my Oldest Taurus on Earth I want to position of de propeller of my engine on the same position as the original prototype, contest Taurus of Ed Kazmirski, but my engine was a little longer (Webra).

To compare with the Les Fruh Taurus we can see this Taurus is also designed for the K & B 45 RC.
On the picture this plane is equipped with probably a VECO 45 RC, and for that we see the engine in a forward position. The carburetor and front ball bearing are visible.

All the other dashes, green and blue are to show and how I measure the distances to make my new drawings of the Les Fruh Taurus.

Most important of all the pictures? The thrust line has the same position and that’s the important part of detailing the plans.

Cees

Gents, have a brake to win the NATS.



A transformer from an old Philips amplifier.

Some pictures of my attempt to make a MODERN brushless (nose) wheel brake to use on the Oldest Taurus on Earth and other planes in the future.
Same principle as the brushless motors, only used as a brake/generator.
I will try this brake to compare with the other principles.

Some technical bla bla.

12 nuts, 16 neodymium magnets. “star” connecting of the coils. The four coils of each phase switched parallel so I can use probably the relative thin transformer wire and try also other diagrams. (Cheap!)

Wiring through the hollow axle of ¼" / 6 mm diameter to a proportional brake controller. (maybe 8 mm axle)

Profits:

With the right controller(s) I even can pick up the points for "proto taxi" after a "dead stick", because why no use a four quadrant variable speed drive (so with brake) on the mains? And then I even can taxi "backwards" if I want.

There is no mechanical connection needed so I can use these also on the retracts of the Orion and switch them with the tailwheel switch to prevent “nose over”. So only generate brake power with ground contact of the tail wheel.

Better and adjustable synchronizing of left and right main wheel brake when used on mainwheels

Brake power? Maybe feed back in the battery when used electrical propulsion in the future just as the brake power of the propulsion engine. I my situation a resistor and/or power transistors will consume the power.
Taurus, (and Orion) still going strong.


Oh BTW Rusty, when you read this post!
I did find this post of you in the thread: "Ed Kazmirski's Taurus", post 1866, date 28 - 9 - 2009.

I think you did want to ask me "Cees am I right?"
My answer is :
"No Rusty, read post 647 of Ed Kazmirski’s Taurus!"


Cees

Gents,

Classic pattern flying,

When flying an original Taurus or Orion you better mount the elastics in the direction from LE dowel to TE dowel of the wings.

In an inverted loop, the forces of the elastic bands near the LE of the wing to keep the wing on the fuse is much more, so mounting your elastics this way, (see picture 2) there is less change of separation between fuselage and wing.

These modern pilots, picture 1, do show us how NOT to do this.

In this situation, for a while, we do not have attention for the personal protection gloves, visible on this picture (powdered?). Maybe next time.

Cees

Actually, Cees, it is best to alternate front-to-rear and rear-to-front just as you alternate left-to-left/right-to-right and left-to-right/right-to-left. This provides a more consistent hold for the entire wing chord.

Taking pot shots at guys like that is pretty low.

Andy

Properly positioned (equalizing the stretch) it matters not whether the rubber band was placed from the front or the rear.

The key is to adjust the rubber band after mounting.

Redesign and reconstruction of the world... according to Cees

RCU members and guests are quite fortunate to have access to modeling tips, design ideas, discussion of aerodynamics, the use of various materials, the complex physics behind "flight", chemistry, artistic design, the proper use of footnotes and the finest contributors provide insight and explore the most subtle strategies/techniques to radio controlled flight...for this I am both humbled by their greatness and marvel at their ability to chose language with such precision and clarity.

RCU might consider helping the less experienced RCU participant a quick and easy method to identify such modeling genius...maybe an exclusive "avatar" to those RCU "Real Men of Genius" type contributors. Maybe some kind of voting could be arranged to chose from examples below?


Rusty Dose
Humbled by Greatness

Andy, WEDJ

About that elastic bands there is not an universal rule I think, only experience.

With acrobat flying, I want more tension near the LE of the wing than the TE because of the lift forces near the 0,25 % of MAC. The forces near the LE are twice when compare with the rear.

Separation on the LE will result in a greater AOA (inverted loop?) and that’s dangerous even for the wing spars .
That’s the reason I always (did) mount the elastics myself and from front to rear side.

So I have a better control over the tension on the front side and it’s never less than the rear side.
I always mount the elastic bands with some more tension (nut much) on the front side.
For the normal Taurus wing, not straight TE or swept back!!

I also never use crossed , but 2 small elastic bands over front dowels, left to right and (not always or smaller!) over the back dowels so the elastic bands cannot release themselves easy. In case of too much forces or a crash the backside always releases first.

I like to keep all the parts together but in case of an immergence, this is MY system!!
Just as anything with modeling, it is whatever you want.

About your second point Andy, I will talk about that when I have dinner with Taurusty. (ROFL)

Cees

Gents,

Maybe there will be a question to make a second crate picture in the near future, both Taurusses are ready for that.
For that it seems to be not clever to fly with any of both Taurusses this year anymore.

And for the Orion? I am designing a new “clipped” wing and new retracts, that will take some time.

For that I spend my time on the airfield to do some research with an electrical glider and one of the wireless varios I did built. (thermal sniffer?)

Measuring with different Total Energy tubes on the wingtip, far away from the propeller slipstream and compare with the method to calculate the Total Energy of the airplane with the use of the airspeed measuring on the other wingtip.

Which method is the best, that‘s I want to know.

The measuring of the total energy of the airplane can be interesting to use with air speed controlled landings, I already do, and optimum glide path with the use of flaps. (Orion?)
So waiting for information and collecting data for the last flyable period this year.
Plane. redesigned Sagitta 900 with MH32 airforil.

The pictures of today, flying with some drizzle.

Cees

Gents,
I did quote the complete post 1876 of the Ed Kazmirski's Taurus.

The story of the wings of course was known, only different, the 68 inch is the original, old known span. (American Modeler Annual 1962)
But, there were a lot of posts in my thread about the fuselage length of Ed Kazmirski’s Top Flite (preproduction / VR/CS) Taurus: 237, 243, 244, 292, 313, 399, 433, etc
See also the Ed Kazmirski’s Taurus thread, I did not count them.
For that I want to archive this post in my thread:

For me, there was no doubt, I already did find eleven remarkable details in the pictures of the VR/CS Taurus to prove myself it was a “preproduction” Top Flite Taurus, we only have one important detail more on this moment. It is officially known now that also the fuselage length seems to be the same.

More to come?

Cees

BTW postnumber / 4 is near the page number.

Gents,

http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_9140124/tm.htm

Phoenix resurrection, for who is interested in “Taurus’ little brother crash investigation.”

The Orion has plywood ribs and spruce spars. The result of the crash is, one wing and the complete centre section is without any damage and the “impact” section complete fractionized.
The aileron of the undamaged side was still complete functional.

I will rebuilt both sides with lighter material, balsa plywood and the span of the wing will be reduced, 2 x 3 inch, see the study picture.
Study of damage is interesting and important to think over new construction methods.

Last picture is of the past. Complete destroyed midsection and the rubber bands still remarkably well equalized on the dowels? Clean spinner?
For me the servos are from high value, that’s one of the reasons I still mount them in the centre section far away from any impact, the mass of the pushrods of elevator and rudder is my enemy for the servo gear.

I did forget to tell about mounting elastic bands. When you also fly with gliders there is one more reason to mount the rubber bands from front to backside. The TE of the wings of a glider are more fragile. So “over tension” before equalizing can damage them. It is whatever you want.

Cees

Gents,

After this post I think I have to show you Rusty is true with an example.

I read in aerodynamics: Anti Yaw Device

http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_9117587/tm.htm

When you want to fly with Horten planes, see picture 1, (Northrop Wings for the USA) then you need a computerized transmitter to control the direction of the plane.
I did build a calculator in my transmitter to calculate the feed forward control of the drag rudders with analog electronic, operational amplifiers.

To make the multiplier functions, I use light dependent resistors (LDRs) in the feedback of some operational amplifiers, eight total. The elevator channel controls these LEDs that shine there light on the LDR’s. The signal of these amplifiers is used to control the drag rudders of the plane. The input signal of these amplifiers are the channels of the ailerons. Some diodes, resistors etc. to adjust the relationship like expo, also in inverted flight because of the use of the bi-convex airfoils.

This devise was special designed to fly with the Horten plane.

Now I also use this after recalibration to fly the Taurus, so a selectable part of the rudder deflection is calculated from the input of ailerons and the elevator. Of course I can still control that rudder for the second part of deflection. During flight I switch over in two levels or off.

With this device the differential of the ailerons is overruled, so I do not use that.

The profit is, during inverted flight it is still functional in the right direction.

I think this is an example of what Berusty did want to tell, because let us be honest, who does still fly a classic pattern plane with electrical lights “in” his transmitter as with the old radio tubes in the past? Taurus Flyer.
The electronics I have to make black again (see the orange circle), because, also my GRID LEAKS, it only can be light from outside in and then my plane will make an uncontrolled spin.

Cees


Glue on the components,to keep them on the right place (LOL)

So is it just me or is it the lanuage barrier thing ? Is this guy going out of his way to be a jerk, or am I miss reading it ? If he is tring to be a jerk, why hasn't RCU booted him ?

Gents,

I did make a lot of pictures in the past to make things clear of the Crate Picture.
This, was the comparison of the Top Flite Taurus - and Frank Myers Taurus plans with the crate picture, look for post 341 page 14, 3/5/2009.

http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8547382

You can see in this post that the Taurus on the right side of the crate cannot be a Frank Myers plan Taurus, the proportions simple do not fit.
This was the last story, It would ba a Frank Myers plan Taurus!, we can read in the Ed Kazmirski’s Taurus thread and what is want us do believe!

I show the both pictures again of the both plans, 1 and 2.

I also did read this in the Ed Kazmirski’s Taurus thread and I think it is a very good idea:

Post 1843 of the Ed Kazmirski's Taurus thread, so 1843/25 = 73 + 18 = page 74

http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9048945

This is the most important part of that tread and without doing this all the posts of that Ed Kazmirski’s Taurus thread were for nothing and there only left behind questions marks and doubt.
Of course I am already finished with that action in my Taurus Construction and Flying Schedule and I can check any post about this in the future if you want. I have all my data and conclusions ready to publice!

Third picture!
I am already busy with my Orion modifications. As normally I only make sketches of the “to do” parts.

Cees

Items of dispute (you know who) could even be included, and flagged as ''disputed'' and we only accept the proven facts!!!!! ACTION

Gents,

I am waiting for response from the AMA about the Taurus so a little update about the retracts of the Orion.

See picture 1,

Right side, old main leg, central mounting flange with double ball bearing. Shaft 8 mm.
The flange was mounted with two 5 mm hex bolts on a massive multiply adaptor glued on the main spars and between 2 ribs.

Left side first prototype of the new leg first parts.
The new system designed to safe weight. Two pivots, 6 mm shaft with one brass bushings (front 10 mm) and one ball bearing (rear) on the shaft with a length of 60 mm. The pivots will be integrated in the wooden structure of the wing with some reinforcement.

The lock system of the new system I can give more “over” dimension because they are positioned more to the rear in the wing.

Both legs are connected with one continue cable with the central single cylinder pneumatic system. Fail safe for cable failures and too low pressure by spring return of the legs and the cilinder. Working pressure 3 bar (45 PSI), enough for more than 6 times activating of the retracts.

The pneumatic system is a totally plumbed brass system in the centre section of the wing, the capacity in the wing, left side.
Total amount of “O” rings: 3

Picture 2 old situation, with the "Frises" and no "anti yaw" device, see post 615, this page. Perfect plane but NOT inverted.
Picture 3 "Ed Kazmirski about the Orion"

More to come

Cees

Gents,

The frise ailerons of the Orion (Leslie George Frise)

My frise aileron I did discover without any damage on the impact location so I could make this picture, very valuable see the picture.

Some details.

Pressure difference over the wing to generate the airflow through the “calibrated ” slot and over the aileron top surface.
Position of the pivot and slot is important so the airflow increases when the aileron is deflected to lift the wing. (red position)
Drag is generated with the LE of the bottom when the TE of aileron is deflected upwards. (orange position)
To have the right compensation of yaw I did have to adjust that slot.
Have attention for the complicated construction and dimensions when compare with the later strip aileron even when compare with the Top Flite ailerons of the Orion.
The pushrod did disconnect after it was bend and that's oké.

Every frise is different, there are dozens of types designed in all these years.
Did people know these secret details before the World championships in 1960?
I think we can compare that with the situation now, read.

Only the real top pattern pilots did have very special attention for that.

I did fly glider contests in the past (1975) and already did use my own designed TE variometers. See the orange circle, the ventury tube for TE compensation.
People did smile when they saw that litle toy on the nose of my paintless plane. Sometime it isn’t difficult to keep details secret, they simple do not believe it!! (picture 2)

I am familiar with the way of thinking of the “man in the street”, that's why I am only interested in "What's the real story from.........." because I do fly Orion and Taurus for many years.

I am designing now the internal linkages for the barn doors to keep the Orion BLP (Belly Landing Proof) in case of emergency touchdown.
I do not want any visible linkage on top or bottom of the wing, just as the frises so I keep the system secret.
I hope I can let them believe I still use my frises so I can keep my anti yaw device also secret for a while.!

Cees

Rusty, I am spitting out of my nose whatever I was drinking right now! That is sooooo funny. I hope I get back to the midwest to meet you sometime soon. You sound like my kind of guy! LOL!
Chris...

Berusty, Stuntflyer,

Can you learn anything of my thread?
No, it isn’t a normal build thread, is a demonstration of the building of a replica of a "forgotten" Taurus.
I could have done that build also back stage.

The past.

I was triggered to make this show already when I did see the movie of Belgium Genk, 1963, of RC Halloffame.
In that period I was already familiar to fly a copy of the Taurus for several years. It did have my special interest.
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7673938
See also that picture, post 47, and you find the link to the movie on that page, the post of neilreher (43).

That movie, combined with the plane in the crate?

“What is the real story of Belgium?”

Of course, because, when you lose the game you do want to know why! We are not different in the way of thinking , see this thread:

http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_90..._1/key_/tm.htm

Any person has the right to find out.
For that it is no problem I work alone.
For that I do not have to live in the USA.

So gents,
When you read my posts, try to learn what you can, but not forget, all is Out of Time and history in this period of digitals, lipo’s and titanium.

That old plane I only needed for my investigation and to collect material and data.
Next action in the near future of course will be flying. Flying with the first known contest Taurus of Ed.
Kazmirski because he is ARTF.
Flying also to collect data to answer the question: “What is the real story of Belgium?”

I will try if I can, fly the plane of the piano wire man and you are going to read this thread because I think you are need:
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_9137587/tm.htm
More to come

Cees

Gents,

For some reason the Oldest Taurus on Earth is called a “pencil with wings” when compare with the modern aerobatic planes.

Immediately I did have to think about the period we discovered the later Simla Of Ed Kazmirski was a 150 % copy of the Oldest Taurus on Earth.
Dimensions were indeed correct, only the Simla has some more swept back wing. Also it was a shoulder wing with side mounted engine.

I did a photo shopping in the past to know how the Oldest Taurus on Earth would look like with a side mounted engine.
The picture again, because I think some members will show up in my thread.

ONLY THE SIDEMOUNTED ENGINE AND THE STRETCHED CANOPY ARE PHOTOSHOPPED.

This discovery also did give me the definitive information the rudder could have been had somee more surface, that wasn't visible on the crate picture.

Oh, And about that post of me, with the “blimp’, believe me, that statement in that first post in that thread is wrong because I was forced to visualize the plane just as anybody else and that picture was really there in my mind after 2 seconds. Of course I will do this never again!!

I avoid these problems by showing my pictures, procedures, plans etc, because people not always are able to visualize these complex matters in the right direction and that was also a reason not to hesitate to post.

"The Pencil with wings".

Cees

Gents, a short message, I expect visitors.

Ed was one of the known modelers who did a lot of research with a the thick wing (of the Taurus) to reduce the speed of the plane in vertical downwards going maneuvers.
I do design my equipment to make one more step to maintain constant speed and I did tell this before.

Now there maybe is some doubt I can use the propeller as a brake.
That’s the reason of this short story.

My roots were in Heer-Hugowaard a “polder” in The Netherlands, true but.

WARNING A JOKE,

Jan Adriaensz Leeghwater (1575-1650) was born in De Rijp and was able to show the world the bottom of the sea using propellers and wind energy. One of the biggest problems is the environmental effects, because of the brake power these windmills were generating, the speed of rotation of the globe has been reduced in 100 years (were did I read 100 years before?). Our days are 1 % longer for us than for Wilbur and Orville Wright,
So when we can use the propeller as a brake for the world, why not for such a little plane?

BTW The distance between Heer-Hugowaard and is De Rijp 22,6 km, 14 miles, so you see small country!

BUT TRUE
Yes, we are able to use the propeller as a brake.

What to do?

Always the angle of attack has to be within the limits to prevent stall, stall during propulsion, stall during braking. To have a usable brake range-ability, it is better to use (more) symmetrical airfoils. You cannot buy them, have to make them.
To prevent stall the airspeed controller system has to be designed to do the job.
Several tricks are known in my profession to use in these systems, mostly too complicated to explain.

The easy way to explain the stall function is saying:
You also can fly inverted, only using an asymmetrical airfoil for that does make the wing stall easier so that's not clever, also to prevent stall in inverted flight you have to maintain a certain flight speed, so to brake you have to maintain a certain revs of the engine compare with the measured flight speed, so a controlled negative AOA of the prop.

For me is extra

Controlling the "appearance" of constant speed flying F3A is relatively easy . . we have a throttle stick . It's the manoeuvres that give us trouble . As for the constant speed on vertical down lines . . I believe it is really about motor and prop choices, AND
induced drag designed into the airframe.

like using an activated parking brake while trying to maintain a controlled speed by using a manual throttle powered car, driving downhill.

So for sure not a constant speed.
When you do not understand this? Let not make the know how of Leeghwater be my problem!
Think about this, the next step can be reload the brakepower in the battery, that's possible with a varable speed drive.

BTW: When you use electrical propulsion the constant speed (rpm, brussless!!!) of the propeller can result in a proportional controlled speed within the stall limits of the rotating prop, so not bad but not perfect (loadfactor!) . When you have to add engine power to go downwards also this proportional control loop is history.
Cees

Cees, I am just a bit curious about how your system works.
Surely you realise that "constant speed" in F3A is relative to the ground and not measured airspeed?
So aiming for 50 mph constant speed in a 20 mph wind, you want to fly 70 mph upwind and 30 mph downwind.

Magne,

I did replace this post to my own thread because it was "off topic" in another thread.
There was a question about air speed control I use in my Top Flite Taurus but also to use in the Oldest Taurus on Earth in the near future after first flight primair data logging of the performance..


Airspeed control. "öff topic"

When I fly my Taurus and switch on my "cruise controller" , stick on 50 %, within the limits of plane and power the speed is 75 km/h, 46 mph.
Which speed? Measured airspeed by the airspeed transmitter.
Stiick 0 procent , airspeed is adjustable with trim above stall speed, for example 35 or 40 km/h.
Lowest speed to fly safe is 33 km/h , 20 mph.
The engine is continu manupulated by the controller because of the measured variations of airspeed.
Of course I do use my stick, only my info is speed and not throttle.
Also my plane naver stalls as long as the engine is working in normals conditions, interesting when turning from upwind to downwind.
When I want to fly downwind with an unflyable low speed (below stall speed) the controller will prevent that because my lowest possible setpoint I do adjust with the trim.
To land I do preselect to switch off the controller to manual control on moment of touch down. So the plane will stop and not maintain speed while rolling. Because of the windgradient the rolling speed would be much much higher!
Touch and go and starting I do with cruisecontrol "auto"

Cees




Hide Signatures

(in reply to Magne)

"The World According to Cees...?"

Request: Cees, have you considered using the RCU video post thingy ma dooh dah to illustrate some of your points?

Observation: It seems to me that less "translation tracking error", [the error created when a technical subject is first written in one language and then translated into a different language creating subtle/not so subtle complex and sometimes incoherent results causing an "error" (as measured by the brains of the reader, never by the writer) that can be measured not in miles but by moments of confusion)]?

Example: Cees, I am sometimes confused by your posts.

Solution: Create "Video Cees"...or..."Ask Cees"...or my favorite..."The World According to Cees...?"

Sample script of potential "Cees-TaurWester Video Volume 1, number One: Flight!"

Concept Goal: Show that the model flies!

Medium: Video to be offered on RCU video thingy post area.

Frame One: Show Cees WesterTaurus up close and fade back to model runway with title above.

Frame Two: Cees explaining that model looks like a Taurus and will sooon fly.

Frame Three: Cees starts motor and flies model.

Frame Four: Cees smiles at camera and provides pithy comments about "whate ever"

Frame Five: Close-up of Cees Taurus fading into Kazmirski image montage...


Just a thought,

Rusty Dose
Team Futaba