Happy-flier From Canada, joined Dec 1999, 299 posts, RR: 0 Posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 4773 times:
For the longest time I have had the desire to understand the physics behind the V-tail design. I like this tail design for the simple reason that it seems to be one of the best configurations for a hypothetical roof-mounted, single-engine jet- (or ducted-fan-) powered version of something like a Lake amphibian. (I'm not designing one, but it never hurts to dream a little ... ). The other ideal tail type for such an aircraft would probably be an ordinary horizontal stabilizer possessing two vertical stabilizers at the end of each stabilizer - kind of like a Connie tail, but obviously without the central fin.
Cancidas From Poland, joined Jul 2003, 4112 posts, RR: 10
Reply 1, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 4702 times:
while i never flew a v-tail aircraft this was once explained to me by a half-drunk pilot out at the airport. according to him, control inputs were the same as they are on an aircraft with conventional control surfaces. the mechanism for those ruddervarots actually handles any differences. i didn't exactly believe him then. wonder if i should at all, anyone have a better explanation?
"...cannot the kingdom of salvation take me home."
QantasA332 From Australia, joined Dec 2003, 1500 posts, RR: 23
Reply 2, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 4646 times:
As far as yaw/pitch control goes, v-tail arrangments require a complex control mixer which the pilot of such an aircraft may be able to explain to you better than I can. I assume such a mixer is just some sort of automatically balanced input-deflection balancer which produces the desired movement.
V-tails are quite prone to dutch roll problems (due to their large effective dihedral), and they impose greater loads on the tail section of aircraft than do normal tail designs. However, V-tails provide good spin-recovery characteristics and produce slightly less drag than conventional tails (through a reduction in interference drag, not parasite drag - after all, the same total surface area is needed to maintain the same stability and control forces).
PPGMD From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 2453 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 4531 times:
You got a better explanation than I did when I first asked how it worked. The MX guy's answer was PFM.
That's exactly how I have seen how the they work in flight. Now there is an issue, the V-tail models have less overall rudder authority than the conventional tail models. Which can be an issue when you are landing at airports with a single runway, sometimes you simple run out of enough rudder to line yourself up.
The V-tails are fun to fly, but there advantages are few, you get at most a couple of knots over the convention tail, smaller engine bonanzas, and they have a knack of flying off in flight (I kid on that one, but there was an issue, that required the issuing of an AD). It is kind of fun flying them, but in the end it's not much different than any other doctor killer, it just looks cool with the V-tail.
Wingscrubber From UK - England, joined Sep 2001, 858 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 4342 times:
I had this explained to me on my aircraft maintenance course at college by a guy who'd worked on bonanzas, leanofpeak is exactly right but you must consider that in terms of the control mixing, the pitch/elevator function of the flight surfaces has priority over the rudder function. I was told that this is achieved through a sprung link in the rudder control, so if pitch and yaw inputs are made at the same time the pitch input can overcome that of the yaw on whichever flight surface is required to move. I did a really cool diagram of how it all works...if I had it I'd scan it in and show you but no idea where it is heh.