Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
*lets On Tailplane?  
User currently offlinemoriarty From Sweden, joined Jan 2006, 188 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 11 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 5499 times:

As I understand it, winglets/sharklets is not only about saving fuel but also a matter of design (fashion?).

But why isn't there any similar devices on the tailplane of aircrafts? If I would make a guess it¨s because it wouldn't make that big of a difference. Even on large wings the effect of *lets is small. Smaller area -> even smaller effect, not justifying the extra cost/weight. Or?

I personally think winglets, sharlets and by all means raked wingtips add much to the attitude of an aircraft, and makes them even more interesting and appealing to look at. They fascinate me. Hence, my thought.

edit: hmm. totally forgot about the 1900D, but that would be the exception that defines the rule, sort of

[Edited 2012-11-23 14:04:34]


Proud to part of www.novelair.com.
23 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31110 posts, RR: 85
Reply 1, posted (1 year 11 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 5401 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting moriarty (Thread starter):
As I understand it, winglets/sharklets is not only about saving fuel but also a matter of design (fashion?).

The only reason winglets exist is because it improves fuel burn. Aesthetics or fashion has nothing to do with it.  


User currently offlinestarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17068 posts, RR: 66
Reply 2, posted (1 year 11 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 5348 times:

Quoting moriarty (Thread starter):
But why isn't there any similar devices on the tailplane of aircrafts? If I would make a guess it¨s because it wouldn't make that big of a difference. Even on large wings the effect of *lets is small. Smaller area -> even smaller effect, not justifying the extra cost/weight. Or?

Yes, but also if more tailplane span is needed, all you have to do is make the tailplane bigger since there is no span restriction. Winglets would be a costly and heavy way to do so for very little benefit. Many winglets are an alternative to wider wingspan. For example Airbus would probably have given the 380 a bigger wingspan if it hadn't been for the 80x80 meter rule.

Quoting moriarty (Thread starter):
edit: hmm. totally forgot about the 1900D, but that would be the exception that defines the rule, sort of

AFAIK the 1900D fins on the tailplane are not winglets at all and do not perform a drag reducing function. They serve to increase longitudinal stability.



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15781 posts, RR: 27
Reply 3, posted (1 year 11 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 5286 times:

Quoting moriarty (Thread starter):
But why isn't there any similar devices on the tailplane of aircrafts?

It's not worth it. You don't want the tailplane to be creating much lift, because it is generally downward which is counterproductive. As such the vortices will not be especially strong on the tailplane.

But, it should be noted that the horizontal stabilizer on a T-tail actually does act similarly to a wing fence. The endplate effect does make the vertical tail somewhat more effective.

Quoting starlionblue (Reply 2):
AFAIK the 1900D fins on the tailplane are not winglets at all and do not perform a drag reducing function. They serve to increase longitudinal stability

   It also has a pair of ventral fins.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineKELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 6407 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (1 year 11 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 5265 times:

Quoting starlionblue (Reply 2):
AFAIK the 1900D fins on the tailplane are not winglets at all and do not perform a drag reducing function. They serve to increase longitudinal stability.

And allowed Beechcraft to use a King Air 350 tail on the 1900D   (well, with modification-being the extra vertical surfaces).



Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 5, posted (1 year 11 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 5107 times:

Quoting moriarty (Thread starter):
As I understand it, winglets/sharklets is not only about saving fuel but also a matter of design (fashion?).

There is a little bit of history behind that, but nobody does winglets for aesthetics anymore. Fuel is just too pricey. You only put them on if you need them today.

Quoting moriarty (Thread starter):
But why isn't there any similar devices on the tailplane of aircrafts?

Aerodynamically, you're always better off to increase span than to add winglets. So you only do winglets when you have a span limit or you're retrofittting (winglets don't add as much load to the primary structure as a span extension). For a tail you "never" have a span restriction so you just make it as wide as it should be and don't worry about winglets.

Tom.


User currently offlinemoriarty From Sweden, joined Jan 2006, 188 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (1 year 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 4752 times:

Thanks for the input. Pretty much what I thought.

One thing I still ponder about is the aesthetics aspect. If that was not something that was taken into account why all the different variations of winglets? Now even Airbus does sharklets with the XWB, yet 380 has their old design. Boeing goes for the raked wing tips for the 787. I guess this is off topic under the current subject and that it has been widely discussed elsewhere.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 5):
Aerodynamically, you're always better off to increase span than to add winglets. So you only do winglets when you have a span limit or you're retrofittting (winglets don't add as much load to the primary structure as a span extension). For a tail you "never" have a span restriction so you just make it as wide as it should be and don't worry about winglets.

That makes sense I guess. So for the tailplane case, it's a matter of designing it well enough to minimize drag. This whole question popped up when I saw a beautiful pic with vortexes visible from both wing tips and tailplane, not exactly these pics but something similar:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Tim de Groot - AirTeamImages
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Josh May




Proud to part of www.novelair.com.
User currently offlinestarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17068 posts, RR: 66
Reply 7, posted (1 year 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 4739 times:

Quoting moriarty (Reply 6):
Now even Airbus does sharklets with the XWB, yet 380 has their old design. Boeing goes for the raked wing tips for the 787. I guess this is off topic under the current subject and that it has been widely discussed elsewhere.

As I mentioned before, the A380 is span limited to 80 meters, but ideally the wingspan should be greater. Airbus had to go with the greatest possible wingspan and tack a vertical wingtip device on it. In this case the ideal one was the fence type. If they hadn't had the span limitation they would have used something else.

787 is not span limited to 80 meters so they can use raked wingtips. If memory serves there are patent issues as well.



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15781 posts, RR: 27
Reply 8, posted (1 year 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 4739 times:

Quoting moriarty (Reply 6):
If that was not something that was taken into account why all the different variations of winglets?

The aesthetic appeal is because of the function. Years ago, they were just funny things on the wingtips. Eventually as people began to learn what they were for, and with the increasing fuel prices and environmental movement airlines (and Aviation Partners themselves) used them for marketing purposes as well in the context of "We have winglets because we want to be efficient and environmentally friendly." That's how they got their appeal to passengers who began to associate them with modern, efficient airliners.

Variation in wingtip device types and design is based on the constraints of a given aircraft and technological advances.

Quoting moriarty (Reply 6):
Boeing goes for the raked wing tips for the 787.

Raked wingtips are better aerodynamically but they add span and also lift which may make them unsuitable for retrofit applications.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 9, posted (1 year 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 4734 times:

Sorry for being very ignorant here but what's a *let, in the title of the thread? "Starlet"?


A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently offlineDavid L From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 9524 posts, RR: 42
Reply 10, posted (1 year 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 4715 times:

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 9):
Sorry for being very ignorant here but what's a *let, in the title of the thread? "Starlet"?

A "place-holder" for more than one name, describing similar things, that end in "-let". e.g. "winglet", "sharklet", somethinglet". etc?


User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 11, posted (1 year 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 4683 times:

Quoting moriarty (Reply 6):
One thing I still ponder about is the aesthetics aspect. If that was not something that was taken into account why all the different variations of winglets?

The analysis of wingtip devices is relatively difficult. Early wingtip treatments were as complicated as the OEM's could analyze with any hope of getting a good result at the time...that's why the early stuff was just fences. The full huge blended winglet is a major design undertaking and really easy to get wrong. It wasn't until about 20 years ago that they really figured out how to do it right.

Quoting moriarty (Reply 6):
This whole question popped up when I saw a beautiful pic with vortexes visible from both wing tips and tailplane, not exactly these pics but something similar:

As long as a surface is producing lift, it will generate a vortex. The presence or absence of a vortex doesn't change with wingtip devices. The strength and distribution of vorticity do change with a properly designed wingtip treatment.

Tom.


User currently offlineWestern727 From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 751 posts, RR: 4
Reply 12, posted (1 year 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 4638 times:

Quoting KELPkid (Reply 4):
And allowed Beechcraft to use a King Air 350 tail on the 1900D

Thank you, KELPkid!! You've answered a nagging question I'd always forgotten to seek the answer for...for decades.  



Jack @ AUS
User currently offlinemoriarty From Sweden, joined Jan 2006, 188 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (1 year 10 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 4511 times:

Thank you for the answers. The span issue for the A380 I completely undestand. And as pointed out, the 1900D tailplane has little to do with fuel economics but more to get appropriate tail area when reusing a tail from another design. That's cool to know actually.

Sorry for the * in the title but I honestly didn't know what to put there. Being a programmer I just used what came to my mind   But yes. insert whatever you want instead of the *. I should have written sharlets/winglets/raked wing tips instead. Or something like that.

Great to get so many good and serious answers to a, more or less, pointless question  



Proud to part of www.novelair.com.
User currently offlineSkydrol From Canada, joined Oct 2003, 975 posts, RR: 10
Reply 14, posted (1 year 10 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 4437 times:

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 9):
Sorry for being very ignorant here but what's a *let, in the title of the thread?



On the B1900D tail, they are 'toilets', seen clearly here:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Michael Fritz



Also, on B1900D, as described to me by a CMA pilot, there are 'delta fins' (aft bottom) and 'stabilons' (aft sides). This is a good view of all the fins from below:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Kevin Wachter






LD4



∙ ---{--« ∙ ----{--« ∙ --{-« ∙ ---{--« ∙ --{--« ∙ --{-« ∙ ----{--« ∙
User currently offlinedlednicer From United States of America, joined May 2005, 544 posts, RR: 7
Reply 15, posted (1 year 10 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 4409 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR

Quoting starlionblue (Reply 2):
AFAIK the 1900D fins on the tailplane are not winglets at all and do not perform a drag reducing function. They serve to increase longitudinal stability.

They increase directional stability, not longitudinal.

Quoting KELPkid (Reply 4):
And allowed Beechcraft to use a King Air 350 tail on the 1900D   (well, with modification-being the extra vertical surfaces).

The 1900 and 1900C use a King Air 200C aft fuselage and tail. The additional horizontal surfaces increase longitudinal stability. When the 1900D was developed (by adding a horizontal plug to the fuselage), dual ventral fins were added, replacing the single centerline ventral fin. They 1900D ventral fins are different than the ventral fins used on the Beech 1300 and the 350ER MP:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jason Whitebird
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mark Kwiatkowski


Raisbeck Dual Aft Body Strakes:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Joost de Wit


1900C and 1900D:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Trevor Nelson
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Szabo Gabor



Horizontal tails in cruise are usually only lightly loaded, so fancy tips won't help much. However, the Diamond DA-42 does have anhedral tips on the horizontal tail:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © AirSpeed
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Trevor Thornton



[Edited 2012-11-27 22:38:12]

User currently offlineKELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 6407 posts, RR: 3
Reply 16, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 4183 times:

Quoting Western727 (Reply 12):
Thank you, KELPkid!! You've answered a nagging question I'd always forgotten to seek the answer for...for decades.

No prob. Although I was, in spirit, correct, my facts were a little muddled (it is actually a King Air 200 tail!)  ...

Quoting dlednicer (Reply 15):
The 1900 and 1900C use a King Air 200C aft fuselage and tail.



Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
User currently offlinebjorn14 From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 3559 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 3584 times:

I wonder if *lets work on over the wing turboprops (i.e. Q400)?


"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17068 posts, RR: 66
Reply 18, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 3582 times:

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 17):
I wonder if *lets work on over the wing turboprops (i.e. Q400)?

Sure. Why not? There are high wing prop planes with winglets. For example the Tecnam P2006T.



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6724 posts, RR: 12
Reply 19, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 3531 times:

Well I'm not sure why everyone seems to like winglets, I certainly don't. The wing fences are better, and the small winglets on the 744/A330/A340 are OK too, but the bigger things look wrong to me.


New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19938 posts, RR: 59
Reply 20, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 3527 times:

Quoting dlednicer (Reply 15):
They increase directional stability, not longitudinal.

What is the difference?

Quoting Aesma (Reply 19):
Well I'm not sure why everyone seems to like winglets, I certainly don't.

Well, yes, but...you're wrong.   Winglets are awesome. They even make the A320 series look attractive, which is a thing to achieve.


User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17068 posts, RR: 66
Reply 21, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 3463 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 20):
Quoting dlednicer (Reply 15):
They increase directional stability, not longitudinal.

What is the difference?

My terminology mistake there. The devices increase stability around the yaw axis (goes vertically through the aircraft), not the longitudinal (roll) axis (goes horizontally through the aircraft from nose to tail).



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlinedlednicer From United States of America, joined May 2005, 544 posts, RR: 7
Reply 22, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 3399 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 20):
Quoting dlednicer (Reply 15):
They increase directional stability, not longitudinal.

What is the difference?

Directional stability is about the vertical axis and longitudinal stability is about the lateral axis:



User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6724 posts, RR: 12
Reply 23, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 3388 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 20):
Well, yes, but...you're wrong. Winglets are awesome. They even make the A320 series look attractive, which is a thing to achieve.

I like natural looking things and the winglets as an afterthought are certainly not that. Some sailplanes have wings that taper up and those are awesome, they look like bird wings.



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic *lets On Tailplane?
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
What Is New On The 747-8? posted Thu Nov 15 2012 10:35:26 by horstroad
Cones On The Wings: 787 posted Wed Nov 14 2012 00:06:41 by dlramp4life
Dash 8 Spoilers On Line-up posted Mon Nov 12 2012 19:51:32 by HarryStanhope
Location Of Life Vest On FlyDubai 737-800? posted Thu Nov 1 2012 21:32:26 by flyingdoc787
Orphan Types Used Once A Week On A Flight posted Mon Oct 29 2012 19:06:34 by BreninTW
Headwinds On Approach And Landing posted Sun Oct 28 2012 12:59:22 by LU9092
LH MUC-YVR Nonstop On 333? posted Fri Oct 26 2012 05:22:04 by Ferroviarius
APU On The Dreamlifter? posted Sun Oct 21 2012 22:25:05 by seahawks7757
Engines Under Wing Or On Fuselage posted Thu Oct 18 2012 08:02:59 by Extra300
Intermittent Flashing Red Beacon On Aircraft posted Thu Oct 18 2012 07:26:10 by AviRaider

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format