![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[Warning: somewhat long off-topic ramble ahead]
Earlier, Doug Hoffman wrote: The V-Tail setup is less likely to cause fuse damage in a ground loop. That's my experience as well, but I think that it has more to do with the lightweight-yet-rugged aluminum semi-monocoque aft fuselages that Dick Schreder hung on his gliders. ![]() Schreder aft fuselage crumpled aft of about the wing root; and yet I've seen plenty of composite tailbooms broken at or near the fin root. One of the substantial issues is how you mass-balance the controls, and how much. It's easy to look at the centroids of a pair of diagonal surfaces, and note that it is closer to the fuselage axis than the centroid of a pair of T-tail surfaces. However, the weight of the actual tail surfaces often has very little correspondence with the centroid. With the Schreder V-tail surfaces in particular, the chunks of mass-balance lead on the ruddervator end plates move the center of mass of the combined stabilizer/ruddervator pretty far from the axis of the fuselage. With a T-tail, the envelope of the vertical fin gives you some good opportunities to move the balance masses closer to the axis of the fuselage. With the rudder, you can concentrate the mass near the lower hinge. And for the elevator you can either locate the mass balance at the bellcrank at the fin root, or as in the case of the later LS gliders just use the elevator push-pull tube itself as the mass balance. Of course, the most effective (some might say the only effective) mass balance is to distribute the counterweight along the hinge line of the surface. However, the practical experience of the European manufacturers seems to be that concentrated mass balances can be adequate if implemented correctly on relatively stiff control surfaces. On the other hand, and I think this is what Doug is pointing out, the thing to watch out for is not necessarily the distance between the center of mass of the tail surfaces and the fuselage axis. For groundloop resistance, the distance between the center of mass of the tail surfaces and the plane of the waterline of the fuselage gets important. That's the plane (plus and minus a few degrees for dihedral and wing flex, of course) in which lateral groundloop forces are applied to the tailwheel. And with a V-tail, the center of mass will be closer to the waterline plane than to the fuselage axis (by a factor of .707 for a 90-degree included angle like Dick always used). As an aside, when Stan Hall located the balance masses at the outboard ends of the tail surfaces on his pretty little Ibex, he experienced a flutter mode in which the slender tailboom flexed in torsion. Since he was using all-moving tail surfaces, he was able to fix the problem by moving the mass balance weights to the inboard ends of the stabilizers. His tailboom was more slender than Dick's RS-15 boom, and much more slender than Dick's semi-monocoque tails, though, so I don't consider his experience to be particular cause for worry in the HP world. Thanks, and best regards to all Bob K. http://www.hpaircraft.com/hp-24 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Tail Skid Help / Advice | Ray Lovinggood | Soaring | 3 | January 2nd 04 08:16 PM |
AH64 tail rotor | CivetOne | Rotorcraft | 3 | October 23rd 03 07:18 PM |
Oshkosh Get together Roster - Sign in, please! | Bruce E. Butts | Owning | 1 | July 26th 03 11:34 AM |
Oshkosh Get together Roster - Sign in, please! | Bruce E. Butts | Piloting | 1 | July 26th 03 11:34 AM |
The prone postion for tail gunners versus turrets. | The Enlightenment | Military Aviation | 8 | July 22nd 03 11:01 PM |