• Welcome aboard HomebuiltAirplanes.com, your destination for connecting with a thriving community of more than 10,000 active members, all passionate about home-built aviation. Dive into our comprehensive repository of knowledge, exchange technical insights, arrange get-togethers, and trade aircrafts/parts with like-minded enthusiasts. Unearth a wide-ranging collection of general and kit plane aviation subjects, enriched with engaging imagery, in-depth technical manuals, and rare archives.

    For a nominal fee of $99.99/year or $12.99/month, you can immerse yourself in this dynamic community and unparalleled treasure-trove of aviation knowledge.

    Embark on your journey now!

    Click Here to Become a Premium Member and Experience Homebuilt Airplanes to the Fullest!

Stall Recovery vs Tail/Fuselage design

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

stankap

Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2009
Messages
10
Location
Paxinos, PA, USA
Another question to stir up some thoughts.
In most aircraft design texts it shows the typical 60deg/30deg unstable air profile for the leading and trailing edges of the horizontal stabilizer relative to the vertical stabilizer/rudder. The point of the diagram is in correctly locating the horiz stab to keep a portion of the rudder surface outside this area in the clean airflow.

My questions is this.
Most aircraft designs I see do not take this into consideration and some are spinable and recoverable. During my instructor training we did spins in the C-150 and recovered fine, but in looking at the C-150 tail design the rule above does not look like it applies to the cessna design.

Also,
I read in several texts that a flat bottom on the fuselage aft of the cockpit actually will make it more difficult to get out of spins, yet I see more designs than not with this sort of aft fuselage geometry. Is it OK or not?

Thanks,
Stan
 
Back
Top