Re: Wing vs. tail-mounted engines?

Date:         09 Apr 2001 15:37:03 
From:         gbeaman@pei.sympatico.ca (Gord Beaman)
Organization: ISLAND TEL
References:   1 2 3
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

R J Carpenter <rcarpen@erols.com> wrote:
--cut--
>
>Am I naive in thinking that a "flying" tail could support the rear
>engines without any of their weight being supported by the wings???

Yes, I'm afraid so, -all- of any a/c's weight is supported by the
wings (or canards), none is supported by the tail surfaces at
all. They're there -only- to control (along with the ailerons)
the a/c in flight. As a matter of fact, in normal flight, the
horizontal tail surfaces actually have a net downward force which
is used in the 'vertical stability department'.

>The first rear-engined jet, the Caravelle, didn't have a true T-tail.
>The horizontal tail surface was still fairly low on the fin.

The reason for the T tail config is to get the horizontal stab.
up out of the turbulance of the rear mounted engines. When in a
very nose high position the a/c can get into what's known as a
'deep stall' where the elevators are in such turbulent air from
the engines that you cannot get the nose down...this apparently
happened to a Trident (?) in the UK many years ago.