T-Tails, Anhedral and the C-5
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Above the Gay Bar
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
T-Tails, Anhedral and the C-5
Tech gurus and aerodynamicists:
I am having a spot of trouble finding an accurate answer to the following questions:
Why would a designer use a T-Tail? (In light of the negative stall characteristics of T-Tails)
What does a T-Tail do to stability, and why?
Why does the C-5 have a high wing?
Is the stability influence of the T-Tail the reason for the anhedral on the C-5?
Thanks in advance for your answers.
I am having a spot of trouble finding an accurate answer to the following questions:
Why would a designer use a T-Tail? (In light of the negative stall characteristics of T-Tails)
What does a T-Tail do to stability, and why?
Why does the C-5 have a high wing?
Is the stability influence of the T-Tail the reason for the anhedral on the C-5?
Thanks in advance for your answers.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Oz
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My opinion only:
I believe the C5 was designed with a high wing to allow lower fuselage sill height for cargo loading. The limiting factor for obtaining low loading height on a low wing aircraft is the engine position so by utilising a high wing configuration the designers ensure the engines have sufficient ground clearance while still achieving the lower sill heights for cargo loading. The lower heights allow vehicular loading with the integeral ramps rather than relying on additional equipment.
I hope this helps!
TH
I believe the C5 was designed with a high wing to allow lower fuselage sill height for cargo loading. The limiting factor for obtaining low loading height on a low wing aircraft is the engine position so by utilising a high wing configuration the designers ensure the engines have sufficient ground clearance while still achieving the lower sill heights for cargo loading. The lower heights allow vehicular loading with the integeral ramps rather than relying on additional equipment.
I hope this helps!
TH
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Above the Gay Bar
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
T-tails
Trash-Hauler - thanks - that sounds entirely reasonable. Hey - I used to haul trash too. Maybe we've eaten burnt frozos on the same flight deck!
Anyone got answers for the T-Tail/Stability/Anhedral questions.
Anyone got answers for the T-Tail/Stability/Anhedral questions.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd say the anhedral is there to reduce the high roll stability induced by the high wings (not the t-tail)
And the high t-tail made to be out of the way of the disrupted airflow behind the engines?
And the high t-tail made to be out of the way of the disrupted airflow behind the engines?
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Estonia
Posts: 834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by JonaLX
And the high t-tail made to be out of the way of the disrupted airflow behind the engines?
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: La Belle Province
Posts: 2,179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why would a designer use a T-Tail? (In light of the negative stall characteristics of T-Tails)
- Because, for various reasons, there's nowhere on the aft fuselage to put a tail (aft mounted engines, for example, or a rear cargo door) OR because the downwash field directly behind the wing is unfavourable and its better to get the tail up and out of the flow, even at the expense of deep stall
- also, if the fin is swept, a T-tail can end up further aft, so gaining 'free' tailplane moment arm.
What does a T-Tail do to stability, and why?
- changes rudder and fin effectiveness (endplate effect)
- causes mach issues with the fin/tail junction
Why does the C-5 have a high wing?
- underwing engines & low cargo floor
Is the stability influence of the T-Tail the reason for the anhedral on the C-5?
- may be loading. rolling moments induced by tail on fin can be significant; tail anhedral can reduce this effect
- Because, for various reasons, there's nowhere on the aft fuselage to put a tail (aft mounted engines, for example, or a rear cargo door) OR because the downwash field directly behind the wing is unfavourable and its better to get the tail up and out of the flow, even at the expense of deep stall
- also, if the fin is swept, a T-tail can end up further aft, so gaining 'free' tailplane moment arm.
What does a T-Tail do to stability, and why?
- changes rudder and fin effectiveness (endplate effect)
- causes mach issues with the fin/tail junction
Why does the C-5 have a high wing?
- underwing engines & low cargo floor
Is the stability influence of the T-Tail the reason for the anhedral on the C-5?
- may be loading. rolling moments induced by tail on fin can be significant; tail anhedral can reduce this effect
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: NY
Posts: 278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mad (Flt) Scientist:
I always thought there was deep stall qualities on a low wing T-tails only, like a DC-9,...how does having a high wing compare? it it the same, nastier or more conventional (nose drop)?...thanks in advance
rhov
I always thought there was deep stall qualities on a low wing T-tails only, like a DC-9,...how does having a high wing compare? it it the same, nastier or more conventional (nose drop)?...thanks in advance
rhov
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: La Belle Province
Posts: 2,179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by rhovsquared
Mad (Flt) Scientist:
I always thought there was deep stall qualities on a low wing T-tails only, like a DC-9,...how does having a high wing compare? it it the same, nastier or more conventional (nose drop)?...thanks in advance
rhov
I always thought there was deep stall qualities on a low wing T-tails only, like a DC-9,...how does having a high wing compare? it it the same, nastier or more conventional (nose drop)?...thanks in advance
rhov
In fact, I suspect that the bigger player is going to be other things that change when you swap from low wing to high. For example, I'm not sure where the engines are going to end up with the high wing (all the high wings that come to mind have underwing engines) - in which case the engine/pylon effects on wing behaviour at the stall may be dominant.
While the geometry of the "floor loading" in the C-5 case, certainly dictated the high-wing configuration; do NOT discount engineering fashion on the T-tail. Every airplane in the late sixties, save the 747 was T-tailed. Rear-mounted engines also was an influence in planes with them, but another fashion that has gone by the boards.
Back to the C-5, if I could have changed anything thing on the plane--a low-mounted tail would have been numero UNO! De-icing the beast was difficult at bases with the equipment (very few, only MAC bases) or impossible elsewhere. Not many airports have de-icing equipment with 70 foot reach, other than the terminal window-washing stands. Bloody pain. Good place to watch an airshow crew--- commanders!!
The wing anhedral was definitely a design requirement to suppress the strong stability caused by the high-wing, check out the C-141, B-47, B-52 and all the Russian military freighters. Tupolev Bear, also.
GF
Back to the C-5, if I could have changed anything thing on the plane--a low-mounted tail would have been numero UNO! De-icing the beast was difficult at bases with the equipment (very few, only MAC bases) or impossible elsewhere. Not many airports have de-icing equipment with 70 foot reach, other than the terminal window-washing stands. Bloody pain. Good place to watch an airshow crew--- commanders!!
The wing anhedral was definitely a design requirement to suppress the strong stability caused by the high-wing, check out the C-141, B-47, B-52 and all the Russian military freighters. Tupolev Bear, also.
GF
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: KDEN
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by galaxy flyer
The wing anhedral was definitely a design requirement to suppress the strong stability caused by the high-wing, check out the C-141, B-47, B-52 and all the Russian military freighters. Tupolev Bear, also.
GF
GF
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by luvmuhud
Why does the C-5 have a high wing?
Perhaps also to keep the engines higher (rough field use)?
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: La Belle Province
Posts: 2,179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Cardinal
Glad somebody finally said it. Any high wing configuration has "built in" dihedral from an aeroynamic standpoint.....
Be wary of planes with low wings and anhedral (several Russian types, for example) - dihedral effect also comes from wing sweep as well as high/low position....
While having the wing spar above the cargo "box" is an advantage of the C-5, it is not a necessary product of the high-wing design. The C-17 has a restrictive height under it wing center-box that imposes some real problems for high loads like helos. Full height end-to-end in the Galaxy!! The only height restriction is for aft loading and that is mostly due to ramp cresting.
The high wing anhedral also caused the engines to be mounted closer in than optimum for wing bending relief. The 747 engines are notablely further outboard and the outers also have greater ground clearance. I think the whole high-wing design was required by the "roll-on, roll-off" cargo requirements. Kneeling landing gear was installed for the loading issue.
The high wing anhedral also caused the engines to be mounted closer in than optimum for wing bending relief. The 747 engines are notablely further outboard and the outers also have greater ground clearance. I think the whole high-wing design was required by the "roll-on, roll-off" cargo requirements. Kneeling landing gear was installed for the loading issue.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Estonia
Posts: 834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by galaxy flyer
Back to the C-5, if I could have changed anything thing on the plane--a low-mounted tail would have been numero UNO! De-icing the beast was difficult at bases with the equipment (very few, only MAC bases) or impossible elsewhere. Not many airports have de-icing equipment with 70 foot reach, other than the terminal window-washing stands. Bloody pain. Good place to watch an airshow crew--- commanders!!
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: flyover country USA
Age: 82
Posts: 4,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There was once a 1930's high-wing private ship with no dihedral - but the lines of the aft fuselage made it appear that the the wings drooped. The designer felt this was a marketing disadvantage, so in a later version, he added about a 1/2 degree dihedral to "correct" this illusion.
(Yes, I got this straight from the designer's mouth in a little Chinese restaurant in California 36 years ago.)
(Yes, I got this straight from the designer's mouth in a little Chinese restaurant in California 36 years ago.)
Originally Posted by chornedsnorkack
As mentioned - this you can do by flying Ruslan!
GF