3 ms·
Concerning the horizontal stabiliser providing negative lift: it's possible and frequently so, but not necessary for stable flight. (If I understand correctly,
by FabHK 7y ago
Concerning the horizontal stabiliser providing negative lift: it's possible and frequently so, but not necessary for stable flight.
(If I understand correctly, what is required is that its angle of attack is lower than the one of the main wing, or equivalently (if the wings have the same shape) its wing loading.)
See section 6.1 here, for example:
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/aoastab.html#sec-basic-stability http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/aoastab.html#sec-basic-stability
- nabla9 7y agoYes. That's not theoretical requirement for tailplane. But as the source you provides say: "indeed most aircraft operate with negative tail lift most of the time." In practice all commercial aircraft have the center of mass so much forward that require negative lift for stability. If you look at the cross section of the horizontal stabilizer, it's like wing upside down.
- FabHK 7y agoMy understanding is that airlines like to load their planes such that the CG is such that the tail contributes basically no lift, to minimise drag and fuel consumption. See also: https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/34963/is-a380s-center-of-gravity-really-too-far-back/ https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/34963/is-a380s-... https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/30400/will-optimising-the-weight-distribution-of-a-commercial-flight-save-fuel https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/30400/will-opti...