Making your passenger sit in the rear seat makes it land real niceI always thought that the three surface airplane config was so that you could use high very lift devices on the wing, have another "balance" flying surface with high lift devices to deal with all that main wing hi-lift pitching moment, and then have a lightly loaded control surface in the back.
For example, the Cessna 100 series and its huge flaps creates a situation where you can easily run out of elevator authority on landing. The tail is plenty big enough to push down with only 20 degrees of flap and/or mid-range CG... but when you go to 40 degrees of flap at a forward CG, you're not able to keep the nose off the ground on flare/landing. So people have to carry extra engine power, to put enough air on the elevator, to force the tail down.
So Peterson mounted a nice size canard on the engine mount, with its own control surface. This canard lifts the nose from the front, instead of overloading the tail at the back, leaving the tail with plenty of reserve power to flare and/or maneuver.
Same in this part of globe. Especially for side by side two seater in ul category, then your main load weights 40-45% of mtow. But if building your design is crazy - building you design from non tradicional planform is crazy^2. But, yes, its allow you to have best view possible... And some extra wing vortices for more dragThe primary reason for designing 3- surfaces revolves around the cabin.
Thanks. It looks like you controlled pitch using elevators on the rear surface. A point made by advocates of the 3 surface design is that pitch control is more positive for the 3 surface plane at high AoA, compared to a 2 surface canard. If we force the nose up past the critical AoA of the front surface and stall it, the tail is still flying and can be used to control pitch rate change though the nose will still drop when the front canard loses lift.Flights from the test model look promising. But scaling it up for manned flight is a whole other ballgame. Lots of details in a tight space.
Here’s some in flight pics of the model for inspiration.
Interesting. The web site reports the development through about 2014, I hope they've continued to make progress. If the front surface pivots and has an AoA unrelated to that of the main wing, I'm not sure if/how the plane can have the "stallproof" attributes of the now-typical canard aircraft.
All stopped due to financial issues.Interesting. The web site reports the development through about 2014, I hope they've continued to make progress. If the front surface pivots and has an AoA unrelated to that of the main wing, I'm not sure if/how the plane can have the "stallproof" attributes of the now-typical canard aircraft.
When one of those Piaggio’s flies over at 30,000 I can usually distinguish it from everything else because of the noise it makes. The test model makes plenty of noise too. I’ve tried 3 blade props to see and it wasn’t noticeably quieter.I saw a lot of Piaggio take off, or land, and a very odd (prop?), strong noise is produced.
You probably know French designer Albessard and his Triavion built in 1926, with the pursuit of safety,