Tail Damage - Opening can of worms...

[Chalenge]

When the tail of your plane is damaged and the stab and elevator on one side appears to be missing there should be a rolling component to any input of elevator... but there isnt.

[JunkyII]

I'm not sure what should happen, but I don't think there is enough of a decline in flight efficiency after you lose the one side.

[BrownBaron]

Hm...never really thought about it, but i think you are right..the increased drag on one side of the plae should create a rolling effect, just like alierons do...good catch..

[guncrasher]

with both elevators gone should airplane actually go down, instead of pushing up like it does now.  I have lost both of them and my spit8 kept climbing was able to keep control if i kept it on a slow turn.  I believe i gained about 10k in altitude till i got bored and augured.


semp

[AKDogg]

with both elevators gone should airplane actually go down, instead of pushing up like it does now.  I have lost both of them and my spit8 kept climbing was able to keep control if i kept it on a slow turn.  I believe i gained about 10k in altitude till i got bored and augured.


semp

Actually it depends on speed.  Your wings produce lift and will cause the plane to nose up with speed.  Elevators only control pitch when u want it to.  If you notice on most if not all planes, when in level flight at speed, your trim is actually in the - (elevator down) some to keep the plane level and to counterack the lift of the main wings.

[Chalenge]

with both elevators gone should airplane actually go down, instead of pushing up like it does now.  I have lost both of them and my spit8 kept climbing was able to keep control if i kept it on a slow turn.  I believe i gained about 10k in altitude till i got bored and augured.

If there were negative lift generated on the horizontal stabilizer (holding the nose 'up') then there would be a double induced drag penalty which designers of the era were certainly aware of and I would say this was avoided in all of the cases of aircraft in AH. It is not a requirement of course and it is possible that some aircraft were designed with negative lift but I find it highly doubtful that any designer of a successful war plane would design anything that inefficient. That said most airplanes carry some negative lift over a small portion of their flight envelope. If you should lose a tail in one of those portions of flight your nose will drop very rapidly.

If you accept this (and I think you will) then you will realize that mostly the tails generate positive lift and so when a piece of a tail comes off then the nose becomes more likely to rise (tail heavy) and when the entire tail is gone the nose balloons (which is how the game represents things). If you fly an airplane with an elevator partially missing (one side gone) you should see more drag generated on that side and the airplane will tend to fly tail heavy with a slight yaw (less positive lift on the tail and unequal drag). AH represents that as expected.

Where the representation does not agree with what I expect is when you apply elevator in either direction with the stab and elevator surface missing on one side. I would expect that the aircraft would roll with a slight yaw tendency as well. Of course I could be mistaken but I still thought it best to bring it up so that if I am right and the representation is off this little bit then it can be corrected and AH will be even more accurate which is something I think we all want.

[guncrasher]

If there were negative lift generated on the horizontal stabilizer (holding the nose 'up') then there would be a double induced drag penalty which designers of the era were certainly aware of and I would say this was avoided in all of the cases of aircraft in AH. It is not a requirement of course and it is possible that some aircraft were designed with negative lift but I find it highly doubtful that any designer of a successful war plane would design anything that inefficient. That said most airplanes carry some negative lift over a small portion of their flight envelope. If you should lose a tail in one of those portions of flight your nose will drop very rapidly.

If you accept this (and I think you will) then you will realize that mostly the tails generate positive lift and so when a piece of a tail comes off then the nose becomes more likely to rise (tail heavy) and when the entire tail is gone the nose balloons (which is how the game represents things). If you fly an airplane with an elevator partially missing (one side gone) you should see more drag generated on that side and the airplane will tend to fly tail heavy with a slight yaw (less positive lift on the tail and unequal drag). AH represents that as expected.

Where the representation does not agree with what I expect is when you apply elevator in either direction with the stab and elevator surface missing on one side. I would expect that the aircraft would roll with a slight yaw tendency as well. Of course I could be mistaken but I still thought it best to bring it up so that if I am right and the representation is off this little bit then it can be corrected and AH will be even more accurate which is something I think we all want.

just saying with elevators gone plane should go down.  a big commercial airplane crashed a couple of years ago, its elevators where gone and it flipped and nosed down streight into the water.  now i am no expert, but i dont think it is any different with ww2 fiters.  elevators are used to keep airplane going up or down, if they are gone then the airplane will go down trying to catch them  . 

but in honesty plane still flying with both elevators gone is one of those thing that only happen in ah, kinnda like a plane flying at full speed with 1/2 a wing gone.

semp

[Chalenge]

I think that after the forces all stabilize that aircraft in AH act exactly like the airliner you mentioned and they will go straight down.

[Krusty]

There is actually unfortunate footage of an airshow crash showing similar nose-up tendency when stabilizers break off. It was a Blenheim or something.

Also, you ever try building paper planes and such as a kid? I remember trying flying wings and stuff I built. They don't just glide, they spiral all over (often leading edge flipping up).

I buy that the nose would go up after a slight pause. I think that's right.

I also agree that you should roll with 1 stab gone. It's like a rudder. Also, using rudder and that elevator so that both pointed towards each other (like in a coordinated turn) would horribly push your tail at a 45-degree down angle toward the missing stab.

[Stoney]

The question Krusty, is how conspicuous will the resulting rolling moment be, in conjunction with the rest of the forces on the plane.  I'd contend that it would be very small--perhaps even imperceptible in-game.  Doesn't mean its not there--just too light to matter.

Guncrasher, there are some excellent primers about aerodynamics out there.  I suggest you find one that will explain the forces involved in flight, and use your question/notion about the pitching tendencies of aircraft after losing elevator authority to guide your study.

[Chalenge]

I have had this happen with a scale model and I would not express the effect as 'imperceptible' at all. The real question I have is whether the representation of the stabilizer and elevator as missing indicates they are actually gone (removed completely) or if they have been reduced to swiss cheese surfaces. I really think HT isnt through making the changes to tail damages and we have more to see yet.

[Krusty]

The question Krusty, is how conspicuous will the resulting rolling moment be, in conjunction with the rest of the forces on the plane.  I'd contend that it would be very small--perhaps even imperceptible in-game.  Doesn't mean its not there--just too light to matter.

Guncrasher, there are some excellent primers about aerodynamics out there.  I suggest you find one that will explain the forces involved in flight, and use your question/notion about the pitching tendencies of aircraft after losing elevator authority to guide your study.

I disagree entirely. Is the kick from a rudder insignificant? Most times folks are jamming that elevator, and it would roll you just as hard as a rudder, if not more (usually more surface on elevators).

It's a rudder, just mounted at a different angle. Why would the forces be any different?

[FLS]

I disagree entirely. Is the kick from a rudder insignificant? Most times folks are jamming that elevator, and it would roll you just as hard as a rudder, if not more (usually more surface on elevators).

It's a rudder, just mounted at a different angle. Why would the forces be any different?

The fact that the rudder is perpendicular to the wing seems like a significant difference.

[Krusty]

Nope. It's a control surface. There are such things as V-tail setups as well. They work in conjunction with each other, and when both are deflected into each other, the force combines.

So, similar to an off-set-vtail, the single h-stab should work just like a rudder because it has nothing on the other side balancing the forces out. Same as a rudder. Doesn't matter what way the rudder is angled.

[Chilli]

Interesting, are we talking WWI or WW2 aircraft?  IIRC, damage effects in WWI were given an update that was said to be carried over into WW2 craft in possible future updates. 

Good food for thought, opening a can of chili