RCU Forums - View Single Post - flaperons and spolerones
View Single Post
Old 06-14-2013 | 07:59 AM
  #30  
Top_Gunn
My Feedback: (6)
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,344
Received 6 Likes on 5 Posts
From: Granger, IN
Default RE: flaperons and spolerones


ORIGINAL: Andy_S


ORIGINAL: Top_Gunn

however in the interest of terms..... ''Spoilers'' are used predominantly on sailplanes to reduce lift.
Yes. But on some planes, one spoiler can be raised while the other isn't, to induce roll. In full-scale aviation, that's called a ''spoileron.'' In RC, people seem to use the term''spoileron'' to refer to ailerons that can both be raised at the same time, to reduce lift. So the question is, are we using the same term - ''spoileron'' - to refer to two very different things, or is there another term for ailerons that can both be raised at once? It's not unheard of to use one term to refer to different things, and since nobody has offered anything different, maybe that's what's going on here.
I think you made that distinction clear earlier in the thread.

I think the real source of the ambiguity stems from whether the primary purpose of the ''spoileron'' is generating symmetrical lift, or asymmetrical lift. In the case of full scale aviation, spoilerons seem to be spoilers which only extend above the top of the wing. In RC, typically they refer to ailerons with a flap>mix program which can obviously deflect below or above (in the case of inverted flight) the wing. Maybe RC-specific spoilerons ought to be referred to as a negative flap mix, or reversed flap mix?

Respectfully,
Andy
Well, I tried to make it clear but kept getting responses that just told me what spoilers are.[]

I'm coming around to what I read you as suggesting: the RC terminology is to use "spoileron" for ailerons that can both be raised while the full-scale terminology is different. I don't know of any full-scale plane that uses the kind of spoileron that the RC people seem to be referring to (though there probably are some somewhere) so maybe using the same term for two different things won't cause undue confusion.