A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Mechanics of Elevator Trim. In Detail.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #9  
Old June 11th 08, 11:28 AM posted to rec.aviation.student,rec.aviation.piloting
Tina
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 500
Default Mechanics of Elevator Trim. In Detail.

On Jun 11, 12:45 am, Ron wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 11:24:39 -0700 (PDT), Tina
wrote:

Thanks again. My intelligent but ignorant guess is designing canards
so that they stall first should not take a genius, but there may be
traps I don't see. The world is safe, though, since I don't design
airplane.


The landing issue you raised is pretty neat, since most of us --
especially Mooney drivers -- are careful about airspeed on final and
in the flare, and like to land with the wings almost stalled. But in
the case of a canard if that stalls first I think the airplane would
very enthusiastically want to pitch forward hard enough to bend the
nosewheel!


I haven't flown a canard, but my son has done a lot of flying in one
that was under development. You are right... you don't want to stall
the canard on landing. You fly it all the way to the ground. Three
problems with the canard, as my son saw it, was lack of forward
visibility on landing, drag from the canard in cruise flight (a fixed
canard has to have its AOA greater than the wing and enough surface to
generate lift) and ice shedding off the wings through the propelllor.
Piaggio solved the drag problem, partially, with a three surface
aircraft and a relatively small canard. I believe Beechcraft
attempted to solve it with a variable sweep canard, but I could be
wrong.



At least with the stabilizer still flying the nose might be able to be
put down more gently. You've provided some nice insights, thanks.


My son says canard landings are like the "Little girl with the curl in
the middle of her forehead"... when they are good, they are very very
good, but when they are bad they are horrid. :-)

Ron Kelley


Yes, it seems to me (again, ignorant of the reality) that the airplane
has to be flown onto the runway, rather than stalled onto it. When we
land the airplane is done flying, period, but flying it on means it's
fast enough to take off again.

The higher angle of attack causing drag in cruise trade-off is a bit
of a surprise since what is gained is aerodynamic positive lift from
those little wings in front of the airplane, instead of the negative
lift from those wings most of us have on the back end that are
increasing the aerodynamic load.

Fun discussion, thanks.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
F-100 detail Pjmac35 Aviation Photos 0 July 26th 07 10:29 AM
Finding "Neutral" Position on Piper Elevator/Trim Tab [email protected] Owning 10 December 7th 06 01:43 PM
Detail pops in too late in FS2004 CatharticF1 Simulators 0 August 27th 03 03:25 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:16 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.