On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 01:53:34 -0800, Francois VG wrote:

20+ years ago, I flew this Speed Canard (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gyroflug_Speed_Canard ) . No tail
stabilizer, no FBW, and flying it didn't require any special skill (I've
never had any ;-) ). Nice to fly. It actually even wouldn't stall.
I guess this proves that instability is actually not a problem. Indeed,
if the speeds unwillingly increases, we don't wait for stability to
correct, we pitch up ourself well before !
Or do I get it wrong ?

As I understand it, the main problem with flying wings is that, contrary
to popular superstition, they are not particularly efficient due to the
reflexed wing sections that are often used on flying plank designs, i.e.
no or minimal sweepback, and the often extreme amounts of wash-out that
many swept wing designs need to be stable.

In the competition free flight model world, which requires models to be
auto-stable since they are not remotely controlled, you never see flying
wings in competition with conventional layouts and the designs flown in
specialist tailless competition classes have clearly inferior performance.

Its also noticeable that contemporary 'tailless' high performance gliders
and light aircraft such as the Genesis II, Gyroflug Speed Canard and
VariEZE are *not* tailless designs.

If anybody on the list has flown a true tailless glider, such as the
Hortens or the French Fauvel designs, it would be interesting to hear how
they rate their performance against similar conventional designs.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |