I've built, rebuilt and been the over signing inspector on countless Taylor Monoplanes and built and over signed many KR2. Looking at the KR1, the wing attachments, contols and dimensions are identical. The 5/8th spruce and ply skin construction is identical. The KR1 is basically a Taylor Monoplane with a few changes, including obviously a change of wing profile and material. The tailplane attachment is also different. The Taylor Titch wing attachment is totally different to the Monoplane and has no resemblance to the KR1, yet it has an 0-200 similar to the heavier KR2's.
So the Taylor Monoplane is the forerunner to the KR1 which led to the KR2. End of. I am presently rebuilding the Taylor Monoplane N1GM which was built by George Somebody (its on the data tag, but I can't remember right now) and his friend Richard Van Grunsven. It has undercarriage similar to the RV and a few other Vans mods. [Image] [1971 Van's RV-3 - N17RV] Vans aircraft then created the RV3, which is basically a larger more powerful aluminium Taylor Monoplane. It has the same wing plan and tips as the Monoplane N1GM. So basically, the Taylor Monoplane is the forerunner for all KR aircraft and all Vans aircraft. Quite an achievement for a tiny aircraft, built in the upstairs lounge of John Taylor's double storey terrace house in Illford, Greater London. It took a mere 17 months to complete, the wings and fuselage were lowered by ropes from the 4.5 meter high second storey lounge window to the street below where his family and neighbours waited with a crew of British Pathe News to recorded the occasion for prosperity. I can copy anyone the Monoplane drawings to compare similarities with the KR1 if you like. CH. controls I've had it in my head for years that the KR is somehow "modeled upon" or somehow closely related to the Taylor Monoplane. Finally taking a close look at a Taylor Monoplane, other than them both using VW engines and having the same same overall dimensions, I don't see any similarities in particular. Wing loading on the Taylor is just over 9 lbs/sq.ft whereas my 1½, when it had the original 1835 engine, was something over 13. Fully developed KR-2's could easily be into the 15's, especially with Corvairs or O-200's. Just from its eagerness to get off the ground and its reluctance to get back on it, my KR has always seemed to have a very light wing loading. A 9 lb./sq.ft. loading would be light as a feather. Building materials comparing the two planes are completely different, other than where wood is used in some places. It has an open cockpit with a windscreen, like Ken's original KR, but other than these three things - VW engine, wingspan & fuselage length, and open cockpit . . . I'm left wondering how the KR ever got associated with the Taylor Monoplane? The Monoplane even has a different airfoil, and RAF 35. Mike KSEE
-- KRnet mailing list KRnet@list.krnet.org https://list.krnet.org/mailman/listinfo/krnet
