ORIGINAL: dick Hanson
On models -- where the servos are individual per aileron-- the servo has to hold aileron in position -against airloads .
Properly interconnected - a positive/negative G can NOT move the aileron --as one has to go up whilst the other goes down.
The full scale aerobats all use this arrangements --plus counterweights and spades .
So--- the pilot only has to provide desired inputs to ailerons and these are extremely light -being a two finger type force. (referring to EXTRA 300L).
early RC models tried torque rod hookups for ailerons - these were/are very bad. I am extremely familiar with the poor linkages used on some setups.
(Big Snip)
Oh yes - the thick trailing edge -
really no big deal on the model except that the very thick edge does add rigidity and - as practiced on some aerobatic airfoils -- the very thick,blunt edge acts to create a very low pressure - which (theoretically) helps attach air on the ailerons .
I have no experience with building working on big aircraft -such as you apparantly are familiar with.
Just small stuff.
1) I'm not sure what you mean by G can NOT move ailerons, unless you mean the G forces acting directly on the ailerons. That would be true. But the primary cause of flutter is airspeed. Not really related to G forces except that pulling out of a dive at high airspeed involves simultaneous high G. The primary cause, airspeed, is going to move interconnected control surfaces. Interconnected or not.
2) The only thing wrong with torque rods is usually bad design. Remember, if you get down and look under many automobiles, you'll find a torque rod somewhere in the suspension system. It all depends on how they're designed and what they're used for. I think on most small models they're a cheap and fast solution. On larger models they're more expensive and harder to design and implement than clevis and horns, so you only see the cheap, quick failing ones.
3) Which brings me back to one of my favorite harps: You can't make sweeping generalizations about ......well about many things connected with aircraft design. Just like you can't say that the rudder turns the plane. You can only correctly say that the rudder controls the yaw axis of the plane.
In that same way, you can't say that interconnecting ailerons will eliminate flutter. You can only correctly say, that, among other remedies, if the ailerons are interconnected in such a way that the interconnection reduces frequency resonance, that interconnection, eliminates flutter.
And according to the articles referenced above, even NASA finds that the only way to detect and eliminate flutter is, in addition to testing models, to test the actual planes by inducing vibration and observing if that vibration is dampened or amplified at HUNDREDS of different airspeeds and configurations of the aircraft.
Resonance can occur at ANY FREQUENCY. There are multiple cures. But the cures only work when they change the resonant frequency characteristics of the two parts of the system that are analogous to the spring and shock absorber of a car's suspension.
Of course, speaking of favorite expressions, above the door of the church where I go is engraved, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." Also spoken by that prophet was, "If the adjustment you just made cured the problem, its fixed. Who cares why?"
PS.- I thought the only good TE was one you had to be careful not to cut your fingers on?