Flaps and V-Tails of Death

I think that some folks got it right on the money
when they say that flapped ships are just different.
At some flap deflection (maybe 20, 30, 45 deg) the
wing may be better than 0 flap for floating down the
runway. So 0 flap or 90 flap may be great
for landing while something in between may cause
lots of floating.

Seems to make sense intellectually, but may take a little
getting used to. I'm glad someone mentioned
the PIK-20, we have one at our club and we
have a newer pilot getting used to it, but things
were quite different from the Blanik (our only flapped
trainer).

I was always under the impression that Fowler flaps
reduced stall speed, but didn't think plain flaps
did much other than just add drag. On the
Katana, AA-1 Grumman, and Tomahawk (all power planes)
they seem to do nothing but add drag. Interesting
to hear these experiences, and I'll certainly
look at the next HP I come across more carefully.

As far as V-tails go, anything to reduce wetted area
is good, right? ;-P

"Mark James Boyd" wrote in message
news:3fbc8231$1@darkstar...
As far as V-tails go, anything to reduce wetted area
is good, right? ;-P

I was under the impression that V tails don't reduce wetted area......
There is a number called tail volume coefficient. Distribution
of this area in a V ot T planform results in the same wetted area.
You might make the case that the V tails are of a higher aspect ratio
and "better" but you also have to account for crosswind performance.
The max crosswind you can land in is determined by rudder effectiveness.
(I'll skip the wing low attitude/long wing problem) A V tail reduces up
elevator authority as the crosswind component grows. So it appears that
a V tail gliders minimum approach speed go's up as a function of the
crosswind. There may be insufficient "elevator" area or pitch authority
to flare as opposed to straight line flight where both elevons/elevators
will be moving "up".

Scott

I was under the impression that V tails don't reduce wetted area......
There is a number called tail volume coefficient. Distribution
of this area in a V ot T planform results in the same wetted area.
You might make the case that the V tails are of a higher aspect ratio
and "better" but you also have to account for crosswind performance.
The max crosswind you can land in is determined by rudder effectiveness.
(I'll skip the wing low attitude/long wing problem) A V tail reduces up
elevator authority as the crosswind component grows. So it appears that
a V tail gliders minimum approach speed go's up as a function of the
crosswind. There may be insufficient "elevator" area or pitch authority
to flare as opposed to straight line flight where both elevons/elevators
will be moving "up".

Scott
I would like to add,
If the V tail has a fixed stab the moving elements have to be large, because
of that, the airfoil can not achieve its aero dynamic potential. In the
case of
the HP 18, the hinge line at the root is at 45% and at the tip at 55%.
With
an all flying V tail this could be improved.
Over all the T-tail is the most effective, as each element can be optimized
for the function in term of size and aero dynamically generally and
specifically
having different airfoil for the Horizontal and vertical stab.

Udo

(Mark James Boyd) wrote in message news:3fbc8231$1@darkstar...

I was always under the impression that Fowler flaps
reduced stall speed, but didn't think plain flaps
did much other than just add drag. On the
Katana, AA-1 Grumman, and Tomahawk (all power planes)
they seem to do nothing but add drag. Interesting
to hear these experiences, and I'll certainly
look at the next HP I come across more carefully.

All flaps will lower stall speed at small settings - even split flaps.
That's why you usually have a takeoff setting for soft and/or short
fields.

Boy, I havn't flown an AA-1 (the original, American Aviation Yankee,
with the "hot" wing) in a LONG time (32 years!) but I seem to remember
it's flaps didn't do much at all - at least compared to any Cessna.
Sure was a fun little thing to buzz around in, though!

As far as V-tails go, anything to reduce wetted area
is good, right? ;-P

This is a bit of a myth, I think. You still need the same tail volume
regardless of tail configuration, so you end up with basically the
same wetted area. If you cut down the size of the tails, you start
having stability problems (the Bonanza was originally a bit marginal,
I think), which is probably how V-tails on gliders got their bad
reputation in the first place. HPs apparently got it right from the
start. The theoretical saving is in reduced interference drag due to
fewer intersections (less of an advantage compared to T-tails) and
reduced weight (a big advantage compared to T-tails). Then there is
the rudder-elevator mixer issue...

They do look nicely retro, though. And the Fouga Magister proves that
the V tail can work beautifully in a relatively high performance fully
aerobatic jet trainer.

Finally, let's face it, V-tails were a fashion for a while in the late
40s and 50s (Bonanza, Magister, SHKs, Sisu, HPs, etc.) Now, T-tails
are the "cool" tail - which probably has a lot to do with why the poor
little PW-5 is dissed so much.

Kirk

Kirk Stant wrote:

They do look nicely retro, though. And the Fouga Magister proves that
the V tail can work beautifully in a relatively high performance fully
aerobatic jet trainer.

And I'm told the Salto does quite well as a Vee tailed aerobatic glider.


--
-----
Replace "SPAM" with "charter" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

From: (Kirk Stant)

As far as V-tails go, anything to reduce wetted area
is good, right? ;-P

This is a bit of a myth, I think. You still need the same tail volume
regardless of tail configuration, so you end up with basically the
same wetted area. If you cut down the size of the tails, you start
having stability problems (the Bonanza was originally a bit marginal,
I think), which is probably how V-tails on gliders got their bad
reputation in the first place. HPs apparently got it right from the
start. The theoretical saving is in reduced interference drag due to
fewer intersections (less of an advantage compared to T-tails) and
reduced weight (a big advantage compared to T-tails).

Right. Also, according to Dick Schreder, the V-tail shares the T-tail's
advantage of being up out of harm's way if landing in tall crop. The
conventional tail suffers there. Dick also spoke of the advantage of the
V-tail for the metal home builder, which obviously applies to the HPs. Just
build 2 identical parts, mirror imaged.

-Doug

( "Flaps and V-Tails of Death", you gotta love that subject title)