07 Jan 2026, 02:40 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 05 Jan 2015, 17:31 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 11/11/12 Posts: 1605 Post Likes: +843 Location: san francisco (KHAF)
Aircraft: C55 baron
|
|
Username Protected wrote: "The V-shaped tail means it's a lot easier to control the aircraft for beginner pilots." WTF?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 05 Jan 2015, 17:35 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 12/27/08 Posts: 6058 Post Likes: +1031 Location: St Louis, MO
Aircraft: Out of airplane biz
|
|
Username Protected wrote: "The V-shaped tail means it's a lot easier to control the aircraft for beginner pilots." WTF?
_________________ User 963
There's no difference between those that refuse to learn and those that can't learn!
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 05 Jan 2015, 23:57 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 11/10/11 Posts: 283 Post Likes: +112 Company: J&J Aviation LLC Location: KGMU
Aircraft: 95-A55
|
|
Username Protected wrote: "The V-shaped tail means it's a lot easier to control the aircraft for beginner pilots." WTF? So a twin with a V- tail would be the SAFEST airplane. Bay had it right years ago...
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 06 Jan 2015, 11:33 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 21004 Post Likes: +26481 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: It is a mighty poor pilot that can only handle two pieces of tail. The SF50 has FOUR pieces of tail. It isn't a V tail, it is an X tail. It appears the production airplane has control surfaces on the LOWER surfaces which is unusual. Are they only for trim? Do they move with the main surfaces? Also note the incredibly large ruddervators and the very large trim tabs they have. There is a lot of complicated stuff going on in the tail of this airplane. Mike C.
Please login or Register for a free account via the link in the red bar above to download files.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 06 Jan 2015, 12:20 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 11/21/09 Posts: 12545 Post Likes: +17303 Location: Albany, TX
Aircraft: Prior SR22T,V35B,182
|
|
Username Protected wrote: It isn't a V tail, it is an X tail.
Not THAT is cool! OK, Tim, he's kicking it up again. Go ahead. 
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 06 Jan 2015, 12:38 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 11/06/10 Posts: 12201 Post Likes: +3086 Company: Looking Location: Outside Boston, or some hotel somewhere
Aircraft: None
|
|
Username Protected wrote: It isn't a V tail, it is an X tail.
Not THAT is cool! OK, Tim, he's kicking it up again. Go ahead. 
Start with the simple ones. -- Why does ruddervator surface area matter? -- Without weight and balance information, specifically the lift and the weight information there is no way to know if Cirrus replicated standard airplane configuration with CG in front of CL and the tail providing downward force. Or if the followed the original V-Tail and made the tail an actual flying surface. In which case a large tail makes a lot of sense. -- Why does trim size matter?
Tim
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 06 Jan 2015, 12:55 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 08/25/13 Posts: 615 Post Likes: +128
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I was always told "size doesn't matter"  Was it then followed by "we can still be friends"?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 06 Jan 2015, 12:57 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 05/17/11 Posts: 1878 Post Likes: +1322 Location: KFRG
Aircraft: 421C
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I was always told "size doesn't matter"  Was it then followed by "we can still be friends"?
More like, "So tell me about your job again"
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 06 Jan 2015, 13:24 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 08/05/11 Posts: 5248 Post Likes: +2426
Aircraft: BE-55
|
|
Username Protected wrote: It isn't a V tail, it is an X tail.
Not THAT is cool! OK, Tim, he's kicking it up again. Go ahead. 
_________________ “ Embrace the Suck”
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 06 Jan 2015, 14:06 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 21004 Post Likes: +26481 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: -- Why does ruddervator surface area matter? Larger is an indication of needing more control authority, an indication of the fixed portion of the surface being somewhat undersize despite how large they already are. Larger is heavier control forces, higher control friction, and higher surface inertia. This is particularly an issue with needing an elevator/rudder mixer which adds to all of that. The additional linkage to the nosewheel steering further adds to it as well. Larger control surfaces are more susceptible to flutter. Larger surfaces make the plane heavier just from being larger, but also from needing heavier balance weights. Larger will affect the yaw damper requirements. The heavier surface means slower response and less yaw damping benefit. Perhaps the ventral surfaces are there only for the yaw damper just for that reason, at added complexity, weight, and cost. Quote: -- Without weight and balance information, specifically the lift and the weight information there is no way to know if Cirrus replicated standard airplane configuration with CG in front of CL and the tail providing downward force. Or if the followed the original V-Tail and made the tail an actual flying surface. In which case a large tail makes a lot of sense. For every pound of lift you can get on the tail (be it up OR down), only a percentage of that is in the direction of gravity (pitch trim) and the remainder has to be balanced by an opposite lift on the other side. Thus the V or X tail creates more lift and induced drag for any given vertical lift required. If you are looking for lift from the tail, using a V tail is a bad way to do it. Quote: -- Why does trim size matter? Further indicates control surface needs lots of deflection to handle trim requirements. A plane that has a large speed range needs lots of trim authority. No one outside Cirrus has flown an SF50 so no one outside Cirrus knows how it handles. Now the production aircraft has larger ventrals with moving control surfaces. Indicates to me that they are trying to solve some stability problems they did not expect. I will be very curious to hear how it rides in turbulence. The large bulbous nose has divergent properties that the oversize tail has to overcome. I could easily see the plane wandering around in turbulence uncomfortably. Mike C.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cirrus SF50 Posted: 06 Jan 2015, 14:16 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 01/11/10 Posts: 3833 Post Likes: +4140 Location: (KADS) Dallas, TX
|
|
|
I love it, this thing just keeps getting more awesome.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us
BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a
forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include
the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner,
Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.
BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates.
Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.
Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2026
|
|
|
|