[NSRCA-discussion] FAT Rudder

[Bob Richards]

Exactly! I would also add that, along with the lack of side area below the engine and in front of the CG, it had a very large canopy right behind the engine so there was lots of side area above the thrustline and in front of the CG.


--- On Mon, 8/24/09, Dave <DaveL322 at comcast.net> wrote:









The EU1 had a relatively short rudder and fin, with the addition of a fairly big ventral strake into the bottom of the rudder, so the asymmetry of the rudder was reduced (not as much side area aft of the CG above the thrust line), reducing the need for right thrust.  The EU1 also had minimal side area below the thrustline ahead of the CG (also minimizing the need for right thrust) as the bottom of the plane was pretty close to the bottom of the spinner.  The great big chins on so many of the modern designs exacerbate the need for right thrust.  The need for right thrust is reduced on some of the modern electric designs as the chin is substantially reduced – Beryll, Azurit, Bravo, for example.
 
Regards,
 
Dave
 
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20090824/083f01b7/attachment.html>