PDA

View Full Version : Re: twin tail questions


Kevin Horton
August 4th 03, 07:50 PM
On Mon, 04 Aug 2003 18:13:25 +0000, Chris W wrote:

> I got such a good answer on my question about flap design I thought I
> would ask another design question. why would a plane that has two
> engines have two vertical stabilizers. No in the case of the Aircoupe I
> always thought the reason for the twin tail was so that the helical prop
> wash wouldn't induce a yaw tendency from the prop wash hitting the
> vertical stabilizer/rudder. It is my understanding that the Aircoupe
> was designed so you wouldn't need rudder pedals, and the twin tail I
> think would have helped that. But on a twin engine, what's the point?
> having two vertical stabilizers and two rudders seems significantly more
> complicated both structurally and mechanically so why do it if there
> isn't some advantage? There must be one I don't know about.
>
>
> --
> Chris Woodhouse
>
>
Planes may have multiple vertical stabs for several different reasons.
Some (e.g. the Lockheed Constellation) may have them to facilitate fitting
them in existing hangars without hitting the top of the door opening.

Some multiple engine designs have multiple vertical tails so that one
portion is directly in the prop wash of the operating engine which may
help reduce the minimum control speed following an engine failure. At
least that is what Kelly Johnson says about the twin vertical tails of the
first Lockheed Electra (More Than My Share of it All, Kelly Johnson, pg.
24). And he says that they also acted as end plates on the horizontal
tail, which increased its effectiveness, and improved the static
longitudinal stability - same book, same page).

--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/

Bill Daniels
August 4th 03, 07:52 PM
"Chris W" > wrote in message
...
> I got such a good answer on my question about flap design I thought I
> would ask another design question. why would a plane that has two
> engines have two vertical stabilizers. No in the case of the Aircoupe I
> always thought the reason for the twin tail was so that the helical prop
> wash wouldn't induce a yaw tendency from the prop wash hitting the
> vertical stabilizer/rudder. It is my understanding that the Aircoupe
> was designed so you wouldn't need rudder pedals, and the twin tail I
> think would have helped that. But on a twin engine, what's the point?
> having two vertical stabilizers and two rudders seems significantly more
> complicated both structurally and mechanically so why do it if there
> isn't some advantage? There must be one I don't know about.
>
>
> --
> Chris Woodhouse

There used to be an argument that, in the event of an engine failure, a
twin-tail twin would have one fin and rudder directly behind the operating
engine, in the prop wash, where it would be more effective.

The more likely reason that the '30s and '40's saw a number of twin and
triple tail aircraft had to do with the low vertical clearance of hangar
doors. A multi-vertical tail aircraft would more likely be able to pass
through the low door opening where a single tail would have to be much
higher and have to be left outside.

Bill Daniels

Frederick Wilson
August 5th 03, 12:21 PM
So why did the P-38 have a twin tail. I think it is a pretty cool
looking bird. I think the bird the "Doolittle Raiders" flew had a twin
tail too.

Fred

Chris W wrote:
> I got such a good answer on my question about flap design I thought I
> would ask another design question. why would a plane that has two
> engines have two vertical stabilizers. No in the case of the Aircoupe I
> always thought the reason for the twin tail was so that the helical prop
> wash wouldn't induce a yaw tendency from the prop wash hitting the
> vertical stabilizer/rudder. It is my understanding that the Aircoupe
> was designed so you wouldn't need rudder pedals, and the twin tail I
> think would have helped that. But on a twin engine, what's the point?
> having two vertical stabilizers and two rudders seems significantly more
> complicated both structurally and mechanically so why do it if there
> isn't some advantage? There must be one I don't know about.
>
>
> --
> Chris Woodhouse
> 3147 SW 127th St.
> Oklahoma City, OK 73170
> 405-691-5206
>
> N35° 20.492'
> W97° 34.342'
>
> "They that can give up essential liberty
> to obtain a little temporary safety
> deserve neither liberty nor safety."
> -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759 Historical Review of Pennsylvania
>
>

Morgans
August 5th 03, 12:45 PM
"Frederick Wilson" > wrote in message
et...
> So why did the P-38 have a twin tail. I think it is a pretty cool
> looking bird. I think the bird the "Doolittle Raiders" flew had a twin
> tail too.
>
> Fred

The Doolittle raiders flew B-25's, and yes, they had twin tails.

I was not in the head of the designers of the P-38, but as it ended up,
there are a few reasons that they ended up with twin booms (different than
most other twin tails of the time).

In the P-38, everything went towards speed and low drag. They made as
skinny frontal profile as possible. To get lots of HP, thery also wanted it
turbo (or was it super) charged. They put the intercooler (and perhaps the
turbocharger) back behind the engine, and it made it so long, they must have
figured they were halfway back to the tailplane, so why not contine it, and
connect to the tail, and leave off the fuselage. Works for me! <G>
--
---Jim in NC---

Morgans
August 5th 03, 03:28 PM
"Barnyard BOb --" > wrote in message
...
>
> Morgans wrote:
>
> >> So why did the P-38 have a twin tail. I think it is a pretty cool
> >> looking bird. I think the bird the "Doolittle Raiders" flew had a twin
> >> tail too.
> >>
> >> Fred
> >
> > The Doolittle raiders flew B-25's, and yes, they had twin tails.
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> Bzzzzzt.
>
> B-25's have TWIN RUDDERS, not twin tails.
>
> If you do not agree...
> The Ercoupe, C-45 and C-60 have twin tails, too.
>
>
> Barnyard BOb - there is a difference
*****************************
Bzzzzzt.

They have more than twin rudders. Last I looked, they had twin vertical
stabilizers, too.

It all depends how picky you want to get. In one since, the P-38 does not
have twin tails, either. Since the horizontal is connected to both tail
booms, it could be called a Siameese twin tail.(I know that is spelled
wrong, but I am in bed recovering from surgery, and am not getting up to
look it up)

In the end, I will say that the Ercoupe and C-45 and many others have twin
tails, too. <g>
--
---Jim in NC---

Ed Sullivan
August 5th 03, 08:12 PM
Barnyard BOb -- > wrote in message >...
> "Morgans" <post/the/group.here.net> wrote:
>
> >Bzzzzzt.
> >
> > They have more than twin rudders. Last I looked, they had twin vertical
> >stabilizers, too.
> >
> >It all depends how picky you want to get.
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> Don't ever call me "picky" !


Pedantic perhaps?, also I would tend to define the referred to twin
tails as semi-twin empennages since they do share a single horizontal
elevator and stabilizer...so there!

Ed Sullivan, old enough to be anything I want to be.
>
> PETTY is more like it.
>
> ======
> PICKY -
> Excessively meticulous; fussy.
>
> PETTY -
> 1.Of small importance; trivial: a petty grievance.
> 2.Marked by narrowness of mind, ideas, or views.
> 3.Marked by meanness or lack of generosity,
> especially in trifling matters.
>
>
> Barnyard BOb -

Big John
August 5th 03, 10:00 PM
BOb

Here we go again. Disagree/agree but no cussing <G>

Your right, the B-25 had two of those wiggly things (called rudders).
They also had two verticl stablizers just ahead of the rudders that
did not move.

Your going to confuse some of these young scallywags with your
termonoligy <G>

Big John


On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 09:04:41 -0500, Barnyard BOb -- >
wrote:

>
>Morgans wrote:
>
>>> So why did the P-38 have a twin tail. I think it is a pretty cool
>>> looking bird. I think the bird the "Doolittle Raiders" flew had a twin
>>> tail too.
>>>
>>> Fred
>>
>> The Doolittle raiders flew B-25's, and yes, they had twin tails.
>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>Bzzzzzt.
>
>B-25's have TWIN RUDDERS, not twin tails.
>
>If you do not agree...
>The Ercoupe, C-45 and C-60 have twin tails, too.
>
>
>Barnyard BOb - there is a difference

BernadetteTS
August 5th 03, 10:30 PM
In article >,
Big John > wrote:

> Your right, the B-25 had two of those wiggly things (called rudders).
> They also had two verticl stablizers just ahead of the rudders that
> did not move.
>
> Your going to confuse some of these young scallywags with your
> termonoligy <G>
>
> Big John
>
So what are they if they are on something like an F-15 or F-18?

Bernadette

B2431
August 6th 03, 03:07 AM
>Your right, the B-25 had two of those wiggly things

You have to careful of using technical terminology like that. I have seen twin
wiggly things in mony aircraft, but enough about my wife.

Rumour has it the USAF got rid of the C-121 Constelation because the newer
pilots couldn't handle 3 pieces of tail at the same time.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

Ken Sandyeggo
August 6th 03, 06:54 AM
BernadetteTS > wrote in message >...
> In article >,
> Big John > wrote:
>
> > Your right, the B-25 had two of those wiggly things (called rudders).
> > They also had two verticl stablizers just ahead of the rudders that
> > did not move.
> >
> > Your going to confuse some of these young scallywags with your
> > termonoligy <G>
> >
> > Big John
> >
> So what are they if they are on something like an F-15 or F-18?
>
> Bernadette

They're not "homebuilt," so no one here will probably care :>)

Ken J. - Sandy, Egg Ho

Frederick Wilson
August 6th 03, 01:20 PM
My wife even liked this one. But you know us helicopter pilots are
really good because we can handle 4 wiggly tails spinning in a circle.

My poor attempt at humor.


B2431 wrote:
>>Your right, the B-25 had two of those wiggly things
>
>
> You have to careful of using technical terminology like that. I have seen twin
> wiggly things in mony aircraft, but enough about my wife.
>
> Rumour has it the USAF got rid of the C-121 Constelation because the newer
> pilots couldn't handle 3 pieces of tail at the same time.
>
> Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

January 1st 04, 03:59 AM
On Mon, 04 Aug 2003 17:13:25 GMT, Chris W > wrote:

>I got such a good answer on my question about flap design I thought I
>would ask another design question. why would a plane that has two
>engines have two vertical stabilizers. No in the case of the Aircoupe I
>always thought the reason for the twin tail was so that the helical prop
>wash wouldn't induce a yaw tendency from the prop wash hitting the
>vertical stabilizer/rudder. It is my understanding that the Aircoupe
>was designed so you wouldn't need rudder pedals, and the twin tail I
>think would have helped that. But on a twin engine, what's the point?
>having two vertical stabilizers and two rudders seems significantly more
>complicated both structurally and mechanically so why do it if there
>isn't some advantage? There must be one I don't know about.
So many smart answers to averything but the question.
If the tail assembly is in the prop awsh, the low and no-speed
response is much greater. ie ground and taxi.
The tradeoff is the crosswind component induced by the spinning prop,
which the Ercoup didn't want, so the put the rudders outboard of the
prop and pu on a kickass main gear system to keep the thing straight.
Mr Knowital.

Wright1902Glider
January 2nd 04, 04:21 PM
In the case of some Navy jets, the issue was one of space. The vertical
surface area desired on a plane like an F-14 would have required a single tail
too tall to fit inside the hangar deck. Or so I have heard it explained by the
"Aviator" types.

Harry "first effective rudder" Frey
Wright 1902 glider, etc.

Google