![]() |
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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
For a while I have been wondering why there seem to be no
airplanes with a low wing and a high tail. Say for instance with a fuselage and epenage like the Zodiac 701, but with a low wing instead of the high wing. Then I read about deep stall, as illustrated he http://www.answers.com/topic/deep-stall-png Here deep stall is defined as a condition in which the main wing is stalled and the stabilizer is enveloped in the turbulent wake of the stalled wing so that the pilot has lost pitch control and thus cannot lower the nose to recover. For certain airframe geometries, (such as the illustration above) that condition can occur even if the aircraft is within the proper CG limits. My question regards the orientation that immediately precedes the deep stall. If the angle of attack at stall is exactly the same as the angle that puts the stabilizer in the shadow of the wing, that will precipitate a deep stall, right? What if the wing stalls at a lower AOA? Would the stabilizer then drop into the wake? ISTM that if the AOA that stalls the wing is higher than the AOA that puts the stabilizer in the wake of the wing then that aircraft is immune to this sort of deep stall, so long as it is flying within the CG limits, right? -- FF |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in message
oups.com... For a while I have been wondering why there seem to be no airplanes with a low wing and a high tail. Like This? http://www.kesnat.com/DSC06717.JPG ISTM ..... ISTM???? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sep 5, 6:39 pm, "El Maximo" wrote:
"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in ooglegroups.com... For a while I have been wondering why there seem to be no airplanes with a low wing and a high tail. [rest of description deleted by EM] Like This? http://www.kesnat.com/DSC06717.JPG Not quite. I was thinking of a conventional tail with the fin and rudder extending above the stabilizer, rather than a T-tail with the stabilizer perched on top of the fin. That is why I described it as being like a Zodiac 701, but with the wing dropped down to a low-wing position. ISTM ..... ISTM???? It Seems To Me. -- FF |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sep 5, 11:29 am, Fred the Red Shirt
wrote: For a while I have been wondering why there seem to be no airplanes with a low wing and a high tail. Duchess and Seminole come to mind. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sep 5, 12:45 pm, Fred the Red Shirt
wrote: On Sep 5, 6:39 pm, "El Maximo" wrote: "Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in ooglegroups.com... For a while I have been wondering why there seem to be no airplanes with a low wing and a high tail. [rest of description deleted by EM] Like This? http://www.kesnat.com/DSC06717.JPG Not quite. I was thinking of a conventional tail with the fin and rudder extending above the stabilizer, rather than a T-tail with the stabilizer perched on top of the fin. That is why I described it as being like a Zodiac 701, but with the wing dropped down to a low-wing position. ISTM ..... ISTM???? It Seems To Me. -- FF Commander 112 is sort of like this if I understand what you describing. http://www.commander.org/ Biran |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sep 5, 11:29 am, Fred the Red Shirt
wrote: For a while I have been wondering why there seem to be no airplanes with a low wing and a high tail. Tomahawk. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 05 Sep 2007 21:18:53 -0700, Airbus wrote:
In article . com, says... On Sep 5, 11:29 am, Fred the Red Shirt wrote: For a while I have been wondering why there seem to be no airplanes with a low wing and a high tail. Duchess and Seminole come to mind. Not to mention the DC-9 and MDxx variants or the KingAir200 And the Lockheed military transports. AFIK, the only plane that had a problem with it ws the BAC 111, That was Braniff 250 in August of 1966. But that was a case of a severe T-storm ripping the tail off. Don |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Fred the Red Shirt" wrote: For a while I have been wondering why there seem to be no airplanes with a low wing and a high tail. http://tinyurl.com/2oefh6 |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 05 Sep 2007 12:06:01 -0700, cjcampbell
wrote: On Sep 5, 11:29 am, Fred the Red Shirt wrote: For a while I have been wondering why there seem to be no airplanes with a low wing and a high tail. Duchess and Seminole come to mind. doesn't have to be a "high tail". ever heard of the Cheyenne II's stability augmentation system? didn't really do a whole lot for controllability, primarily made it feel like there was airflow over the elevator when there wasn't much... one has to be exploring the edges of the envelope, but other PA31's are able to place the tail into "bad" air also. TC |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
An early model of the experimental Velocity developed this problem
during testing - ended up pancaking into a canal, iirc. Pilot suffered back injuries but survived. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Car and Deep Cycle Battery FAQ | Bill Darden | Home Built | 0 | May 28th 07 11:57 AM |
ILS approaching help | Syucomm | Simulators | 8 | December 13th 06 09:58 PM |
deep hole | Randall Robertson | Simulators | 9 | April 22nd 04 07:51 PM |
German AUV "Deep C" | robert arndt | Military Aviation | 0 | November 25th 03 04:07 PM |
Approaching BFM... | Craig Prouse | Piloting | 5 | September 26th 03 04:50 AM |