Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - a stall between 2 fools

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

a stall between 2 fools

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Kolb-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

vince(at)devonwindmills.c
Guest

Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 9:20 am Post subject: a stall between 2 fools

Dear Pat,

            Do I read you right, you are flying tandem monoplanes ,flying fleas. and canards.? Unfortunately all my life Ive flown proper aeroplanes either with a tail or no tail atall, The only feature that stops them diveing to the ground is either a CofG beyond aft limits ,or the down force aerodynamically generated at the back of the whole caboodle.The tail is behaving like an upside down wing, that is why it is symetric,or flat on top,If it stops sucking down the tail goes up, and the nose goes down, It can stall ,but does so in the upside down sense.Or are you pulling my willy??

                Vnz Wilyflier



Vince Hallam

please phone rather than email for best results!

07941 313141

01803 316191

www.devonwindmills.co.uk

pj.ladd(at)btinternet.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 12:42 pm Post subject: a stall between 2 fools

.The tail is behaving like an upside down wing, that is why it is 

symetric,or flat on top,>>



Hi Vince,



sorry but if it is symmetric the bottom must be like the top, which is flat. 

To generate lift we need a curved surface which the tail plane patently does 

not have.

In theory the tail plane is not needed on a properly balanced aircraft 

except to interfere with the airflow to enable the pilot to change direction 

or correct for unstable air.



I still think the VG`s merely stop the boundary layer from breaking away and 

would still like to see some smoke or tuft tests in a wind tunnel.

By the way, where did you get this Flying Flea stuff from?  I did actually 

see one when I was a kid and was very impressed as what kid woudn`t have 

been. However they were banned in the UK after a few crashes and the many 

planes which were being built in garages all over the place were never 

finished. The problem was that the plane would get into an irrecoverable 

deep stall. They continued to fly on the Continent however and still do 

though the grandson (I think) of the original designer has produced an 

updated but still pretty idiosyncratic replacement. Several usually fly from 

France to the UK in the Spring for our main ultralight gathering. They are 

rather like the deux chevaux car. Very French.



Cheers



Pat



do not archive 



--

a58r(at)verizon.net
Guest

Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 4:35 pm Post subject: a stall between 2 fools

"sorry but if it is symmetric(al) the bottom must be like the top,  

which is flat.

To generate lift we need a curved surface which the tail plane  

patently does

not have."

Mirable scriptu! No lift from a flat plate? Next, the battle of  

Bernoulli vs Newton, or who lifts yer wing?



regards,

Bob N.

http://www.angelfire.com/rpg/ronoy/



do not archive

Steven Green

Joined: 05 Feb 2006
Posts: 118

Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 4:54 pm Post subject: a stall between 2 fools

And paper airplanes can't fly!



do not archive



---

_________________
Steven Green

Kirk Smith

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 78
Location: SE Michigan

Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 5:12 pm Post subject: a stall between 2 fools

which is flat.

 	  Quote: 	
		   To generate lift we need a curved surface which the tail plane  

 patently does

 not have."


	




Unless we bend it in the middle......



Do not archive

John Hauck

Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 4639
Location: Titus, Alabama (hauck's holler)

Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 5:40 pm Post subject: a stall between 2 fools

| And paper airplanes can't fly!

 



Steven G:



Nor a sheet of plywoood.



DO NOT ARCHIVE

_________________
John Hauck
MKIII/912ULS
hauck's holler
Titus, Alabama

Ed in JXN

Joined: 24 Mar 2006
Posts: 122

Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 11:05 pm Post subject: a stall between 2 fools

And Langewiesche is flippin' over about now, too.



Ed in JXN

Do not archive.

---

pj.ladd(at)btinternet.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2006 5:01 am Post subject: a stall between 2 fools

Mirable scriptu! No lift from a flat plate? Next, the battle of  Bernoulli 

vs Newton, or who lifts yer wing?>>



Zounds and forsooth!.What have I got myself into?



Nevertheless, I will try to fight my corner.  Yes, a flat plate, say held 

out of the car window at an angle, will deflect a flow of air and produce an 

opposite force. Held at zero angle of attack it will not. An airofoil 

section  at zero AoA, WILL produce lift.

In each case the lift is produced by changing the direction of the airflow

The tail plane I contend acts like the flat plate and exerts no force until 

the elevator is moved. Then the tailplane and elevator, considered as one, 

take on a roughly airofoil shape and it is this which produces the `lift`, 

deflects the airflow and the resultant force moves the tail up or down. In 

the case of the rudder, which no one normally reckons as producing lift the 

same thing turns  right or left. The rudder after all is only a tailplane 

turned through 90 degrees.



I can hear the bell going for the second round already. Ding ding!



Cheers



Pat



do not archive 



--

Ed in JXN

Joined: 24 Mar 2006
Posts: 122

Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2006 7:59 am Post subject: a stall between 2 fools

Hi Pat,



        I'd guess Bob's statement of "No lift from a flat plate? Next, the 

battle of  Bernoulli vs Newton, or who lifts yer wing?" was meant 

tongue-in-cheek.  Lift does not need an "airfoil shape" to be produced, only 

relative wind and angle-of-attack.  In a tornado, do not houses and other 

large, previously unairworthy objects fly?  I would heartily disagree with 

your statement, "Then the tailplane and elevator, considered as one, take on 

a roughly airofoil shape and it is this which produces the `lift`, deflects 

the airflow and the resultant force moves the tail up or down."  The 

elevator in this case can be said to deflect the air (Newton) more than it 

creates an airfoil with the horizontal stab (Bernoulli).  Combinations of 

principals like these explain why aerobatic aircraft with fully-symmetrical 

surfaces are able to fly.

        I would hold that there are no absolutes in aerodynamics theory, 

only combinations of known principals.



        Where's Topher when you really need him??



Ed in JXN

Do not archive.

---

pj.ladd(at)btinternet.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2006 8:37 am Post subject: a stall between 2 fools

I would hold that there are no absolutes in aerodynamics theory, >>



Hi Ed,

the way I am struggling to hold up my end of this argument I tend to agree. 

After all, bumblebees are airodynamically not supposed to be able to fly.



Sorry but I can not agree that because a gale blows your trailer into the 

next State it can be said that it is flying. I am not sure what it is doing 

mind you.



Regarding the fact that symmetrical wings with no apparent airofoil keep 

high speed fighters in the air I can only assume that they are always at a 

small angle of attack. Then, I would agree that with sufficient power even a 

flat plate will fly.



I still think that my example of the tail fin not producing any force in 

either direction until rudder is applied is valid, and if that is the way it 

works vertically then the same thing will work horizontally.



Anyway I am off to sunny Cyprus in the Mediterranean at sparrows fart 

tomorrow and I hope you have all got this sorted out before I return in a 

weeks time.



Cheers



Pat



do not archive 



--

n79rt(at)kilocharlie.us
Guest

Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2006 12:25 pm Post subject: a stall between 2 fools

Nevertheless, I will try to fight my corner.  Yes, a flat plate, say

held 

out of the car window at an angle, will deflect a flow of air and

produce an 

opposite force. Held at zero angle of attack it will not. An airofoil 

section  at zero AoA, WILL produce lift.

In each case the lift is produced by changing the direction of the

airflow

The tail plane I contend acts like the flat plate and exerts no force

until 

the elevator is moved. Then the tailplane and elevator, considered as

one, 

take on a roughly airofoil shape and it is this which produces the

`lift`, 

deflects the airflow and the resultant force moves the tail up or down.

In 

the case of the rudder, which no one normally reckons as producing lift

the 

same thing turns  right or left. The rudder after all is only a

tailplane 

turned through 90 degrees.



I can hear the bell going for the second round already. Ding ding!



Cheers



Pat



do not archive 



<snip>



Pat you shot down your own argument...your example of the flat plate out

the car window explains it...even if the elevator is perfectly in line

with the horizontal stab they are noticeably nose down relative to the

airflow...so they are indeed generating DOWNFOCE... 



Jeremy Casey

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Kolb-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum