RFJ

I know it was and I don't wish to get involved in that again [sm=47_47.gif]

Ray

kingaltair

My Feedback: (4)

Like the "zipper smiley".

Sorry for the earlier reference, but I couldn't resist. All in good fun..right?

pimmnz

Yeah..right! But seriously...as much fun as it was, I don't actually think that this one has as many unknowns, or subtle clues etc. to turn into that particular fiasco. It does have some previously unpublished but well documented subjects, and with enough eyewitnesses to satisfy the most demanding of 'historians'...or at least I have to hope so...Plans, Duane this is also stuff that needs to be preserved somehow. It is, after all, your own model flying history. Seems you have become, by default at least, the archiver of local modelling history. More power to your pen.

Evan.
(ps, sorry about the jibe about beam mounts, just trying to keep these old models as they really were. I have seen enough 'lite-ply mush' and other ARF nasties littering the flying fields to know that things haven't improved with the advent of radial mounts and other 'labour saving' ideas)

WEDJ

LMFAO!

kingaltair

My Feedback: (4)

I don't think I'll be accused of "making up" eyewitness testimony as I was before; Helen Brett is personally following this thread, (Dennis Hunt was not personally involved or interested in following the Taurus thread), and Helen will keep me honest, (if anyone has doubts about it in the earlier thread).

About your second comment, one of my goals in this thread is to document as much as I can the modeling history of Tom Brett along with detailing his designs, (especially the ones that were not published). With Helen's help, I am trying to make this thread the most authoritative source of information about Tom...for now and for future readers. You never know if there is enough material that the modeling magazines might consider to be worth publishing, but for the time-being, we can document R/C pattern history in our own "BLOG" on RCU.

The early 60s was an interesting era, with interesting personalities and diverse designs. Today we have many R/C personalities who "design" their own planes, but the design process has become so standardized that today's designs tend to look very similar. Back in the early days of R/C pattern, the pattern leaders were true pioneers blazing a new trail for the rest of us Sunday flyers to follow. It seems the approach was much more experimental and sometimes even leaning toward educated trial and error as in the case of Ed's designs. There was a lot of diversity and "pushing the envelope" back then as equipment became more reliable and engines more powerful.

More to come..........see the enclosed pictures. A little surprising.[X(]
Duane

Free Bird

Duane, I couldn't agree with you more about the models from that era. There's just so much out there that we know very little about. Threads like this (and your efforts) are just so important to those of us that really like to dig into the history of early pattern and your bringing forth many unknown pictures and facts is truly priceless!

Now, those pictures are a real surprise!!!! Hope to learn more very soon!

FB

Michaelj2k

Cool. deBolt retracts and gear doors. I wonder why he didn't use bolts instead of bands on the wing. That was an idea just coming into vogue.

kingaltair

My Feedback: (4)

Timing is everything....it has everything to do with the date each plane was designed. Wait for NIMBUS III, (but first we will talk about Cirrus).

Duane

kingaltair

My Feedback: (4)

I've been holding a letter from Helen to our buddy from California Chuck Winter. Remember we have Chuck to thank for getting the ball rolling for this whole thread when he started talking, (in the Taurus thread), about his home movies of the Detroit Invitationals. One thing led to another, and now ..here we are.

Chuck is still hard at work on expanding his video. He has located footage documenting the 1962 FAI Championship in England, and now Helen is going to provide him with more information from the family photos and movies. Way to go Chuck.

A few weeks ago Chuck asked Helen for a biography of Tom for his video. With her permission, I am posting that letter to share this information with Tom's 2009 fans:

Hello Chuck,

I'm sorry to take so long to answer your request for more info about Tom. I still can't believe how many people are interested or remember him and his planes.

Tom was born July 1, 1926 in Fort Wayne, Indiana. On graduation from High School he went into the Navy V5 program in Glenview, Illinois, schooled at Purdue and Corpus Christi, Texas. He flew SNJ's and Aeronca T's. I think it was a two year enlistment, and he was discharged in July of '46. I met him in Sept. '46 and the rest is history of another kind. He did a lot of pleasure flying between '46 and '49 Waco's, PT 13, PT 19's and a Globe Swift. He really liked that little plane. We were married in 1947 and had two small children and I selfishly requested he give up flying until the girls were older. We took up golf for awhile and then he got into photography.

I think in Sept. '46 he began college at Indiana Tech in Fort Wayne studying [to be an] Aeronautical engineer, then switched to Mechanical and graduated in 1948. While in school he worked for his fathers' sheetmetal company and one of the Fort Wayne newspapers. In 1949 he started at International Harvester as an engineer and was there until he interviewed with General Motors in 1953. After we moved to Detroit, then St Clair Shores photography was his vice. He built a darkroom in our St. Clair Shores home and even did color slides, I think. I was making copper enameled jewelry and we went shopping for a new kiln where he saw the r/c models and heard about the RCCD. He bought a Piper TriPacer kit and the rest is history. That was 1956.

In the winter of '56 he designed the Beast, and from there on every winter was design and build, fly Spring and summer. In '57 the Owl, rudder only: '58 Beast II: an aileron only in '59: Nimbus in '60, then Nimbus II in August '61 after the original crashed soon after the Nats. In [late]'61 [to early '62] came Apogee and Perigee for the '62 FAI. He designed Cirrus in [Jan] '63 to fly with Don Brown Proportional, but the equipment gave him fits and he went back to flying A&P. TBX-1 came in [Jan] '65 and flew at the Nats in '65, as you know. Nimbus III was in [Oct] '65. It had a larger wingspan than I and II. I think it would have had a better flight log had we not decided the time had come for me to live up to my promise to learn to fly full size. He finished the plane in February and I had my first lesson March 5. We bought our Cessna 172 before the end of March. He was going for a Commercial license while I worked on my private and there wasn't much time on week-ends.

By the way Chuck, I still have the [Chuck's Tauri from the video] Tauri in the hangar. Had fun with it and didn't damage it too much.

I'm getting crosseyed so I'm going to knock it off for now

Oh yes, Tom passed away Dec 29, 1974. Like I said the sparkle went out of my life, but life goes on.

Anything else you want to know give me a note. I have a big scrapbook and a pretty good memory of some of the best times of my life.

Always, Helen

Nothing like eye-witness accounts don't you think?

Duane

pimmnz

Wow, I mean, what else can you say? Wow.
And Cirrus with retracts, then N3, another wow. Reckon you need something a bit more permanent to record this stuff than this ephemeral, pixelated medium. But I know you will do your best.
Evan.

RFJ

What a nice memoir. Helen and Tom must have been a very close team. I know if you asked my wife what models I was flying twenty years ago she would not have a clue Actually, come to think of it, I can't remember either.

Ray

Tango Juliet

I knew there was something about this guy that I could connect with. I grew up just east of Ft. Wayne, IN, in New Haven .

Free Bird

How has Chuck been doing, he's been very quite lately. Last night, I again watched the DVD that Chuck made, so far I haven't gotten bored watching it. Can't wait for the next one to be released.

After reading Helen's info from above, I can really understand the next to last sentence of her note. She's truly a gem! I for one have been a Tom Brett fan for many years, and now with all of this new info, models and plans coming forth, I've haven't been this excited about modeling for many years. (Like when Duane first visited Helen!) Now that my Perigee is amost finished, and after I finish some of the the "other" projects I have hanging around, I'm going to break out the Nimbus II plans I have and start making chips. Thanks Helen, I appreciate your generosity and the sharing of Tom's knowledge with the R/C community! And let's not forget Duane's efforts also!

FB

WEDJ

This is a note to Helen: (who I hope reads this forum)

I was just a 15-yo kid when Tom wrote his Perigee article. However, it inspired me, and I dreamed of one day flying a plane like that. I have always kept that magazine, and it is dog-eared from the many readings I did back then.

Time passed, and in my 20's and 30's designed my own pattern planes (Peppermint Pattie) but Tom, and also Ed K. were my idols.

Now I'm 60, and a year ago was able to build a Perigee, as I always have wanted. It flies great!

Your husband was an insiration to many, you should be very proud. Doing the math, you only had 18 short years together. My wife and I are coming up on 20 years, I would not want to loose her so soon.

Nic D.

CHARLES WINTER

Hi Helen, Freebird, Duane, and all the Historians. A quick note that blew my mind is that my Tauri that I built in 1963 is still alive and hangared with Tom Brett's airplanes. I totally forget about the Tauri that Tom got from me to teach Helen how to fly. My Tauri is in the opening of my movie. What a small world. I am reviewing the movies that Helen sent me and hope to use some of the flying that took place during the 1962 Internationals in England. (A note to Helen) You sure looked lovely and happy during your stay and touring England and France. You must have some beautiful memories. I believe Tom's genius is really coming to light now. I am working on Part 2 of my movie and it is very challenging. I am taking many of the still pictures and giving them an effect of moving. I would love to obtain more movies but that's a tall order. I'll keep pressing ahead. Col. Chuck Winter

kingaltair

My Feedback: (4)

Just returned from a trip to Muncie to attend the Kaz Taurus donation. Before returning to the Cirrus, I'd like to make mention of the fact the Taurus is hung in the museum right next to Perigee. This was for all intents and purposes the Taurus that inspired the kit, (for those of you finiky about small details, note that the wing on the VR/CS Taurus donated to the museum is not the same as the NATS Taurus wing in the 1962 picture; this can be proven, but I hope you take my word for it). It is a little ironic that we saw this picture earlier that shows these great pioneers of R/C posing together with their planes some 47 years ago. Perigee and Taurus have come full circle.

kingaltair

My Feedback: (4)

CIRRUS:

A few days ago we took a "sneak peek" at a little known design of Toms's from 1963 named Cirrus. This plane was specifically designed to fly on a DB proportional radio. Helen has stated that all Tom's designs were designed around the size of the radio, and this was no exception. Cirrus was larger than Perigee, but has a similar look to it. Most noteworthy, Cirrus is Tom's only plane designed with retractable landing gear.[X(] As you can see from the pictures above, workmanship and finish was magnificent. Helen says that Tom frequently would win well-deserved awards for the best finished model at the prestigious Toledo shows held each winter.

More details later, but for now, take a look at the rest of the pictures of Cirrus. Also pictured is a slightly younger version of Willie McMath with his own Cirrus, sporting a more "Perigee-like" paint scheme...don't know if Willie's had retracts or not.

Duane

Free Bird

Those are some very nice pics Duane. What I find the most interesting is that Tom used doors on the retracts to cover the openings to really reduce drag, they're even bulged to accomodate the wheels. The retract trend in the 70's just left the wells open. I think this goes to show how detail oriented Tom was. The trim scheme looks some what similar to the TBX.

FB

kingaltair

My Feedback: (4)

CIRRUS Cont:

Beside the retracts, Cirrus held other surprises. After looking at the plans twice, it finally dawned on me that Tom's wonderful practice of signing and dating each sheet left a mystery. The Cirrus scroll is made up of many individual sheets....8 in all. At first I saw the dates on a couple of the sheets and took for granted that all sheets were dated the same, but no...that's not the case. Five sheets bear the date 1-18-63, and the remaining 3 sheets say 9-14-63. The drawings associated with the wing bear the September date. Additionally, the January sheets are numbered 1 through 7, WITH SHEETS 3 AND 4 MISSING.[X(] The September sheets are numbered 1 through 3. One more mystery "wrinkle" is the name Cirrus changed from January to September where it became "Cirrus 850".

My first thought was that Cirrus might have been originally designed with fixed gear, and the wing plan with retracts added later...but not so. Sheet 7 dated January 18th, was a detail drawing of the retracts from the side, so there went that idea. I have no idea where January sheets 3 and 4 are, nor do I know exactly when Cirrus was constructed or first flown. My hope is that Helen may be able to search her memory, and provide some answers.

One more interesting drawing included in the set was a full wiring schematic of the B-D "Quadruplex" proportional radio with a March 1st date.

I'll scan some of these drawings later.

Duane

stuntflyr

That Cirrus with the retracts and wheel doors is beautiful. I'm glad the plans to that one still exist! Nice...
Chris...

kingaltair

My Feedback: (4)

CIRRUS Cont:

The mystery has been solved...at least mostly solved. Today I received an e-mail from Helen. I must admit my first fear was that she might "kill me" (or threaten to), for losing sheets 3 and 4 . Instead this was her response:

[i]I hope I can clear up the mystery. When searching for plans for Cirrus I found two wing plans. I measured the wing in the basement and sent the plans for that wing. The other wing was flown in June of 1963, and combined with radio problems I guess he decided to go for a larger wing. The #3 and #4 of January are here. The Jan wing is 64", I believe, and the wing taper is different. The Sept. plans flew in early 1964, and the radio problems still remained so Tom continued to fly Apogee and Perigee. We started building our new home in April of "64 and Tom got busy building the workshop and the drafting room, so no new plans until TBX. I tried calling Willie a bit ago to find out if he used retracts or not. .........His answering machine picked up, so he'll get back with me. Sheet #3 is the wing and #4 is the ribs.....Did I mention previously that the wing to Cirrus is damaged? Had a landing with only one wheel down and tore one landing gear out. Not a happy landing.[/i]

To be Continued...

kingaltair

My Feedback: (4)

Based on Helen's response, things are now looking clearer; I think I can draw some conclusions about the two wings, and the pictures above. I'll repost those pictures below for better reference.

The color pictures were taken of the original plane with the 64" wingspan. You can see the picture of Cirrus on its wingtip shows a wing design with a straight leading edge like Perigee, with a much greater taper to the trailing edge. This would make sense since Perigee and Apogee were designed and constructed about a year earlier, and it would follow that the wing design would be similar. When you look closely, I think it is obvious that this wing does NOT have the larger wingspan of the later wing. Looks like 64 inches was not enough wing area, (I'm not sure of course, but it originally may have been a real "lead sled"; the later wing design increases wing area, (reduces wing loading), to handle the extra weight of the retracts and early proportional radio.

The later wing designed in September 1963 has a wingspan of 74 inches...significantly larger. The maximum width at the wing root rib is 14 inches. It also has DOUBLE-TAPERED leading and trailing edges similar to my Daddy Rabbit (BTW-The man in the picture with the long ears is not me...I would not "stoop" to be photographed like that).

I originally didn't pick-up on the differences in the wings in the pictures, but when you look closer, I believe you can see the double taper. I think all the black and white pictures show the later 74" wing version that flew in 1964 including the close-up pictures of the inverted wing. Although not obvious, I think it becomes apparent when you look for it. Apparently both had retracts. Willie's Cirrus also looks like it has the later version double-tapered wing.

Both wings have the typical Perigee-style elliptical cut-outs in the wing sheeting with yellow fabric on cap strips. Along with the swooped vertical fin, this feature of Tom's wings is one of my favorites, and it makes a very elegant styling statement.

Duane

Taurus Flyer

?



Cees

dhal22

i think he means the last picture in post 222. you know, the obvious one with the fake rabbit ears on the guy's head.[sm=bananahead.gif]

Taurus Flyer

Thanks, dhall22, clear,

I didn't understand the word "stoop" , In dutch -"bukken" and is like squat, crouch or cower ?

stoop is also in Dutch (bend)

buigen
overhellen
hellen
gebukt lopen
aflopen
vooroverlopen


"Bukken" is translated back in "stoop" and "bend"


Cees