Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Piper's Beloved Stabilator  
User currently offlineJzucker From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 100 posts, RR: 0
Posted (12 years 1 month 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 4375 times:

Hi All...

Just wondering the aerodynamic advantages to the Stabilator the Piper uses on all of its light aircraft. Their engineers must have a reason to choose it over the conventional elevator. I assumer the stab. is more complex, as it requires an anti servo tab to provide control feel.

Thanks a lot!

6 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineDufo From Slovenia, joined May 1999, 798 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (12 years 1 month 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 4373 times:

The piper selection of the stabilator instead of the conventional stabilizer/elevator configuration was done for several reasons. The stabilator gives a wider range of pitch control over all flight speeds. The stabilator is lighter with lower drag. The use of the anti-servo trim design causes the tab to move with the stabilator but the combination requires more pilot input with any increase in speed or deflection. . The stabilator utilizes an "antiservo" tab that deflects upward on the trailing edge of the stabilator as the controls come back. This antiservo tab generates the necessary control feel and feedback to the pilot to maintain the necessary "stick force per G" to keep a hamfisted pilot from easily breaking the airplane with excessive control movement. This is a safety device improves longitudinal stability while at the same time limiting the pilot ability to cause structural damage.

The "stabilator" affects flight exactly the same as an elevator. However, stability is more difficult to attain with the stabilator because its larger effective surface increases sensitivity. There are two different sizes of stabilators on PA 28 aircraft. One is over three feet less than the other. The control effectiveness of these in landings makes it very important that the pilot be aware of which stabilator is on the aircraft. There are distinctive skills required for proper flying of the older Hershey bar wing with the small stabilator. The older (smaller) stabilator will run out of effectiveness at slower speeds. This is especially critical when the aircraft is loaded toward the aft limits. The stall under these conditions will be unlike any usual Piper stall. It will be abrupt, violent and give a spin all in the same moment. Fuel consumption will cause a gradual rearward movement in the weight and balance envelope. Pipers at gross tend to fly tail low with much greater fuel consumption.

(from www.whittsflying.com)

Regards,
Jernej



I seriously think I just creamed my pants without any influence from any outside variables.
User currently offlineJETPILOT From United States of America, joined May 1999, 3130 posts, RR: 29
Reply 2, posted (12 years 1 month 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 4356 times:

Locheed thought a stabilator was such a good idea they put it on the L1011.

JET


User currently offlineDL_Mech From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 1924 posts, RR: 9
Reply 3, posted (12 years 1 month 3 days ago) and read 4349 times:

And Cessna on the C-177 Cardinal........


This plane is built to withstand anything... except a bad pilot.
User currently offlineJetguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (12 years 1 month 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 4341 times:

But don't forget the original Cardinal stabilator was a disaster. Cessna had to recall the entire production up to that date and install slots in the leading edge. I flew an early one w/o the slots for a little while. It could get real nasty.

Jetguy


User currently offlineJETPILOT From United States of America, joined May 1999, 3130 posts, RR: 29
Reply 5, posted (12 years 1 month 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 4322 times:

Nasty? How so?

JET


User currently offlineJetguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (12 years 1 month 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 4297 times:

Jet...
I had the opportunity to fly one of the very first C177s back when they first came out. At the time, I had about 200 hours, most of it in Champs and Cessna 170s. It was a real hand full. The Cardinal was introduced back in 1968 as the 172 Skyhawk replacement. The first year they built nearly 1,200 airplanes! The original airplanes had several problems:

1. They were under powered - it had only 150 HP. Additionally it had 50 pounds less useful load and bigger fuel tanks than a C172, so it was very easy to overload.

2. The originally, the C177 had the "high performance" NACA 6400 series airfoil - the same one used on the Learjet. It's a great airfoil on the Lear, but it tends to build up drag quickly at high angle of attack and low airspeeds - not a particularly good trait for an airplane flown by low-time, step-up pilots. Additionally, the stall speed was higher than the Skyhawk's. The stall and rate of climb "book numbers" don't look too bad, but they were pretty "optimistic" - a common problem with light aircraft performance data from that era. In the real world, the airplane climbed very poorly under the best of conditions, and if the pilot got the nose up a little too high, the drag built up quickly and the climb rate sagged even more.

3. The "final straw" so to say, was the fact that the airplane was very sensitive on the controls - particularly in pitch. The stabilator had a tendency to stall in the landing flare, resulting in a sudden loss of tailpower which dropped the nosewheel onto the runway. Porpoising,wheel-barrowing, and bounced landings, and the damage they cause, were very common.

Overall, because of its tricky landing traits, overloading tendency, and doggy climb performance made it a real handful for the typical Skyhawk pilot.

To fix the problems, in 1969, Cessna recalled all of the 1968 C177s and modified the stabilator by adding slots to the leading edge. This cured the pitch and porpoising problem. In 1969 Cessna changed the designation to the C177A. This airplane had the stabilator slots and a 180 HP Lycoming. Additionally, there were a couple of aircraft modifiers who made a pretty good living retrofitting 180 HP engines into the 150 HP airplanes. In 1970, Cessna came out with the C177B. This was a 180 HP airplane, with a slotted stabilator and a new wing. The new airfoil was a NACA series 2400 similar to the Skyhawk's.

I've got quite a bit of time in the newer "B" airplanes (and the "RG" model too). The mods really made a difference and the newer airplane are very nice to fly. I hope this answers your questions.

Jetguy


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Piper's Beloved Stabilator
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...
Does Anyone Here Fly The Piper Aztec posted Sun Oct 29 2006 03:58:45 by Vio
Piper J3 Landing Experiment. posted Fri Jun 9 2006 15:46:06 by HAWK21M
Embraer/Piper Hybrid Aircraft? posted Tue May 23 2006 21:17:35 by Bio15
Question About Piper Cheyenne Aileron posted Mon May 15 2006 02:24:54 by VirginFlyer
Cessna 150 Vs Piper Warrior posted Mon Mar 27 2006 04:49:47 by Tornado82
Piper Archer - What Instrument Type Is This? posted Sun Jan 29 2006 14:58:57 by Mr Spaceman
Stall Warning Tab On PA-44 Piper Seminole posted Wed Aug 24 2005 20:26:32 by Skihigh2002
Piper Aircraft Manuals Online posted Wed Jul 27 2005 18:00:06 by LimaFoxTango
Piper Seneca Powersettings? posted Fri Oct 1 2004 12:49:15 by Setjet
New Build Piper Cubs posted Fri Jul 23 2004 21:20:40 by Flyf15

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format