susquach

My Feedback: (1)

Over the years there have been a number of excellent articles dealing with general proportions and placement of conventional cruciform tail groups. The late Chuck Cunningham dealt with the subject a number of times in his RCM column(s). Those articles certainly opened the door for lots of folks who enjoy conjuring up designs to fit their personal tasts and criteria.

But among the articles I've read, I've never seen one that dealt with V-tail design. That is, general area (as a ratio of wing area), degrees of seperation, relative elevator area, etc. Nor have I seen a discussion of the relative merits/drawbacks of V as compared to cruciform design. I've noted the high number of V-tail designs that have appeared in RCM over the years....so one would assume that the design has some compelling merits.

How 'bout it...Anybody have suggestions about general design criteria and merits of the popular V-tail ?

Tall Paul

Start here:

http://www.charlesriverrc.org/articl...ganthology.htm

susquach

My Feedback: (1)

Thanks for the link....lots of information. A couple things not said is a preference for flat, symetrical, or clark Y airfoil. Also assuming that if overall area is the same as a conventional empanage, that the area dedicated to rudder/elevator is also the same. Safe to assume???

Tall Paul

The only reason to use a cambered horizontal tail would be if you wanted an aft c.g. and a very speed stable plane, like a free-flight.
Flat and symmetrical are basically the same thing in effect.
This is a large all-flying symmetrical vee-tail.