Re: Control surface configurations (was: Typhoon)

[Michael B Holt <michaelbholt@juno.com>]

On Sun, 11 Jul 1999 15:30:48 -0700 Dick Morrisson writes:
>Michael B Holt wrote:
>> Disadvantages are complexity and overcrowding of hardware at the
>> stern and an interaction when turning which produces a vertical
>> movement when only horizontal movement is desired.
>
>A properly designed and functioning "X" tail should be balanced, and not
>result in horizontal movement during vertical commands or vice-versa.

I wished I could talk back to them.   I wanted to point out that aircraft
don't seem to have that problem.

I should quote the relevant sentences of the book.   Anyone want to see
all of it?

>Even a half "X" like the Beechcraft Bonanza airplane is balanced!  The
key 
>words are "properly designed".  If you need some help with this concept,
let me 
>know, I can provide more detailed info.

OK, let's do it.   Tell us more. 

Is it possible that the Bonanza moves properly because it does not have
the lower component?    If the tail of the airplane deflects a bit, that
might
make less difference than the same deflection in a much smaller 
submarine.

I can't think of any manned aircraft to use the X-stern design (I'll
probably remember all of them right after I send this).

Can we really use the shape, as our speeds are so low?



Mike Holt
-- 

___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.