The concept transport / airliner VLST design had a modified V type of tail in place of a traditional cruiciform or high T-tail. Was wondering about how failsafe such a tail design is or could be or if v-tails are appropriate for possible airplanes capable of transporting upward of 1000 passengers? Any thoughts? Of course this airplane doesn't make economic sense given the situation today and probably would never leave the concept stage.
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/37/76/8b ... 676a58.gif
Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Re: Lockheed Martin Very Large Subsonic Airplane V type of -Tail
Well, since the V-tail Bonanza was the only semi-success, it doesn't seem to have been highly thought of.
-
- GalaxyFlyer
- Posts: 9408
- Joined:
Re: Lockheed Martin Very Large Subsonic Airplane V type of -Tail
johns624 wrote:Well, since the V-tail Bonanza was the only semi-success, it doesn't seem to have been highly thought of.
Better than semi-successful—in production for 35 years with thousands built, many still flying. I’d agree I’d rather have a BE 33 than the V-tail.
Re: Lockheed Martin Very Large Subsonic Airplane V type of -Tail
Don’t forget Cirrus offers the Vision Jet….a Vtail single engine jet. It’s a relatively new offer but here in SDL there are several based. Quite popular for the Scottsdale crowd who seem to have $2M to burn on a new toy.
And the Fouga Magister. Possibly the coolest Looking v tail ever. 1950s Euro Military trainer.
And the Fouga Magister. Possibly the coolest Looking v tail ever. 1950s Euro Military trainer.
Re: Lockheed Martin Very Large Subsonic Airplane V type of -Tail
GalaxyFlyer wrote:johns624 wrote:Well, since the V-tail Bonanza was the only semi-success, it doesn't seem to have been highly thought of.
Better than semi-successful—in production for 35 years with thousands built, many still flying. I’d agree I’d rather have a BE 33 than the V-tail.
Of which the V tail Bonanza made up a very small percentage of sales, that’s the point