banner
banner

26 Jul 2017, 00:45 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


Concorde Battery (banner)



Reply to topic  [ 66 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: Re: v tail vs debonair
PostPosted: 27 Feb 2012, 13:37 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 11/21/09
Posts: 7216
Post Likes: +2550
Location: Abilene, TX (KABI)
Aircraft: Cessna 182T
I rest my feet on the floor at normal cruise, because in normal cruise, wag is not noticeable. During climb, I'm using right rudder to offset p factor. During decent and turbulence, I rest my foot on the left rudder and it helps offset it.

I, too, find it a non-issue.

Username Protected wrote:
I guess I must be the only guy alive that didn't notice the dreaded "tail wag" when I had my V-tails. I always rested my feet on the rudder pedals while flying. Do others who notice the problem put their feet flat on the floor, or are they just more aware of a little yaw here and there? It reminds me of a story about a princess with a pea under her mattress. :duck:

_________________
Previously, a '78 V35B.


Top

 Post subject: Re: v tail vs debonair
PostPosted: 27 Feb 2012, 14:34 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 11/01/08
Posts: 3127
Post Likes: +292
Location: Tucson, KAVQ - WI, KHYR
Aircraft: A36
Username Protected wrote:
what about any difference in c.g.??? how about tail wag???? thanks chris :doh:

There is no difference in tail wag thats just an old wives tale. I cant speak to CG- everybodies is different and the mods made matter, I know that my useful is 1400lbs and I have never ever not been able to do, carry or go anywhere I wanted too. That was through years of 2 teenagers, and 2 70lb lab retrievers. Will they carry as much as a C-130, no. Its like anything else, figure out your mission, determine compromises that you can and cannot make and pick a plane. They are the same, except one needs the hangar door to go up higher.


Top

 Post subject: Re: v tail vs debonair
PostPosted: 27 Feb 2012, 14:50 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 08/09/08
Posts: 1234
Post Likes: +218
Location: Downers Grove, IL (LL22)
Aircraft: Bonanza S35
Username Protected wrote:
... They are the same, except one needs the hangar door to go up higher.


Hi John-

That is a good observation. I might add that one also takes up more "floor space" in the hangar around the tail of the aircraft.

Regards,

Bob

_________________
Bob Siegfried, II
S35 - IO550
Brookeridge Airpark (LL22)
Downers Grove, IL


Top

 Post subject: Re: v tail vs debonair
PostPosted: 27 Feb 2012, 14:53 
Offline



User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 06/02/10
Posts: 9903
Post Likes: +597
Company: Stratz Farms
Location: Fond du Lac, WI (KFLD)
Aircraft: 1992 Bonanza F33A
Username Protected wrote:
what about any difference in c.g.??? how about tail wag???? thanks chris :doh:


Regarding CG, every individual airframe has different options installed that can greatly effect the empty weight CG before you even start adding a load.
The stations for loading are the same for 33 & 35 series of equal vintage.

Regarding tail wag as you call it, less wag with the 33's in my experience.

_________________
Greg Stratz
Stratz Farms


Top

 Post subject: Re: v tail vs debonair
PostPosted: 27 Feb 2012, 15:14 
Offline



User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: 12/13/07
Posts: 13724
Post Likes: +3028
Location: Seeley Lake, MT (23S)
Aircraft: 1964 Bonanza S35
Username Protected wrote:
what about any difference in c.g.??? how about tail wag???? thanks chris :doh:


I came from 1000 hours in a 182. The tail wag is definitely there and can never be completely eliminated. It can be minimized but it isn't objectionable. Just a characteristic of the plane. Like the 182 being slow. I have no CG issues but that's going to be different with each person. Depends what you do with the plane.

_________________
Want to go here?:
http://tinyurl.com/9smw3xb

tinyurl.com/35som8p


Top

 Post subject: Re: v tail vs debonair
PostPosted: 27 Feb 2012, 16:44 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 12/19/08
Posts: 12873
Post Likes: +3621
Aircraft: C55
I have no problem with the CG; however, the useful load is anemic if you truly want to put 4 people in the plane. My useful load is an honest (plane re-weighed last year) 2340 lbs which gives me a 1060 useful.

With my family right now at 180/125/120/110 we can have 60 gallons fuel and 100 lbs of baggage and still be under gross and within CG.

When the kids get to 150 each we have to go to 75 lbs in bags.

The problem is that I need TKS and that weighs about 100 lbs so it is a no baggage airplane with 60 gallons of fuel. I have a hard time paying $10k or so for tip tanks just to get a useful load increase, no CG benefit, and no real performance increase. A 300-lbs increase with TAT turbo (if it was available) would give me TKS, 74 useable fuel, 100 lbs in bags and still be under gross assuming that the TAT weighs 50 lbs and would take about .5" off the aft loading. At that point I think I would have the ultimate single. Without the gross weight increase I do not.

_________________
The kid gets it all. Just plant us in the damn garden, next to the stupid lion.


Top

 Post subject: Re: v tail vs debonair
PostPosted: 27 Feb 2012, 17:59 
Offline



User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 05/11/10
Posts: 6513
Post Likes: +2634
Location: Indianapolis, IN (KMQJ)
Aircraft: 1970 Bonanza V35B
The SkyWatch box behind my baggage compartment puts my cg further aft than I wish it was. I suppose that'll improve once I have to get ADS-B.

As to tail wag, there's no physical way that it could be worse in a 35 than a 33. Or, if it really is, it has nothing to do with the tail. Splitting the V into vectors, the 35 actually has more vertical surface area than the 33 has (according to Eckalbar, IIRC). I understand that some people swear they can tell a difference. I'd love to blindfold one of them and see if it's true. The truth is that all of the short-bodies wag some, including the short-body Barons.


Top

 Post subject: Re: v tail vs debonair
PostPosted: 27 Feb 2012, 19:15 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 12/05/09
Posts: 1429
Post Likes: +108
Location: Cullman, Alabama
Aircraft: Twin Bonanza D50C
Username Protected wrote:
I have no problem with the CG; however, the useful load is anemic if you truly want to put 4 people in the plane. My useful load is an honest (plane re-weighed last year) 2340 lbs which gives me a 1060 useful.

With my family right now at 180/125/120/110 we can have 60 gallons fuel and 100 lbs of baggage and still be under gross and within CG.

When the kids get to 150 each we have to go to 75 lbs in bags.

The problem is that I need TKS and that weighs about 100 lbs so it is a no baggage airplane with 60 gallons of fuel. I have a hard time paying $10k or so for tip tanks just to get a useful load increase, no CG benefit, and no real performance increase. A 300-lbs increase with TAT turbo (if it was available) would give me TKS, 74 useable fuel, 100 lbs in bags and still be under gross assuming that the TAT weighs 50 lbs and would take about .5" off the aft loading. At that point I think I would have the ultimate single. Without the gross weight increase I do not.

You're lucky to have a light family. Mine's only a little heavier but all of my friends are fat. With any of our friends onboard I have about 50 pounds left over for bags but anything over 20 pounds in the baggage compartment put's me out of CG.


Top

 Post subject: Re: v tail vs debonair
PostPosted: 27 Feb 2012, 19:16 
Offline


 Profile

Joined: 07/20/08
Posts: 1365
Post Likes: +136
Location: KFOK Westhampton, NY
Aircraft: 1978 V35B
Username Protected wrote:
what about any difference in c.g.??? how about tail wag???? thanks chris :doh:


Nate, Sounds just like my V35B

Top

 Post subject: Re: v tail vs debonair
PostPosted: 27 Feb 2012, 19:43 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 12/19/08
Posts: 12873
Post Likes: +3621
Aircraft: C55
Ron,

Yea, that would be a problem. I never have friends with me, so that is not an issue. My standard mission is to SW Florida to NE Indiana with my family and bags. We have some of the worst ice in the country, so I require TKS. That puts me to a 960 useful which would be fine if the kids did not grow any more.

I went on TAT's website and see that they have a gross weight increase for all straight tail versions of the Bonanza, but none for the 35. I cannot understand why they did not go for the 35 right up front. I would seriously consider the conversion for my V35. With TKS and a good useful load I would have a plane that is faster than all non pressurized Barons, better de-ice than boots, and 8 GPH less.

_________________
The kid gets it all. Just plant us in the damn garden, next to the stupid lion.


Top

 Post subject: Re: v tail vs debonair
PostPosted: 28 Feb 2012, 08:45 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 09/24/09
Posts: 687
Post Likes: +201
Company: None
Location: Burlington, NC
Aircraft: 1973 V35B
I remember being on a 757 wagging in turbulance!!!

_________________
1/5th Mech 25th INF Div Vietnam 66-67


Top

 Post subject: Re: v tail vs debonair
PostPosted: 28 Feb 2012, 09:41 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 04/24/10
Posts: 2984
Post Likes: +898
Location: KMKE Milwaukee, WI
Aircraft: '64 S35
You can have a plane that looks like every other plane,
or you can have a V Tail Bonanza.

_________________
I'd rather be at the hangar doin nuttin,
than at home doin sumthin...


Top

 Post subject: Re: v tail vs debonair
PostPosted: 28 Feb 2012, 10:19 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 03/03/10
Posts: 1566
Post Likes: +52
Location: MO
Aircraft: B200
The first passenger I had to toss his cookies was riding in the back of an M35.


Top

 Post subject: Re: v tail vs debonair
PostPosted: 28 Feb 2012, 10:35 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 03/23/11
Posts: 5726
Post Likes: +278
Location: Frederick, MD
Aircraft: V35A TC
Username Protected wrote:
The first passenger I had to toss his cookies was riding in the back of an M35.

Wow....my first passenger to toss 'em was in the back of a 172. :coffee:

_________________
Views represented here are my own.....and do not in anyway reflect my employer's position.


Top

 Post subject: Re: V-Tail (35) vs Debonair (33)
PostPosted: 28 Feb 2012, 10:59 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 12/19/08
Posts: 12873
Post Likes: +3621
Aircraft: C55
Never had anyone get airsick.

_________________
The kid gets it all. Just plant us in the damn garden, next to the stupid lion.


Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 66 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next




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

Jump to:  

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 2007-2017

.ABS-85x100.jpg.
.camguard.jpg.
.wilco.jpg.
.sureflight-85x50.jpg.
.jetacquisitions-85x50.png.
.hpair-85x50.jpg.
.daytona.jpg.
.Contour.jpg.
.avfab-85x50.jpg.
.instar.jpg.
.accuchem-85x50.jpg.
.truecourse.jpg.
.ps_engineering.gif.
.FASTAviation.jpg.
.Showalter.jpg.
.dshannon.jpg.
.brucescustomcovers-85x100-2.jpg.
.Latitude.jpg.
.jaair-85x100.jpg.
.aviationdesigndouble.jpg.
.heartlandsm.jpg.
.WaypointLighting.jpg.
.pwi-85x50.jpg.
.AMS.png.
.kadex-85x50.jpg.
.chairmanaviation-85x50.jpg.
.CiESVer2.jpg.
.KalAir_Black.jpg.
.dbm.jpg.
.squawk-85x50.jpg.
.goodrich-85x150-2017-07-04.jpg.
.bkool-85x50-2014-08-04.jpg.
.flightbox.png.
.Marsh.jpg.
.globalparts-85x50.jpg.
.garmin-85x200-2017-07-07.jpg.
.tempest.jpg.
.EagleFuelCellsTriple.jpg.
.planelogix-85x100-2015-04-15.jpg.
.concorde.jpg.
.AAI.jpg.
.aps-85x150.jpg.
.ForeFlight.jpeg.
.centex-85x50.jpg.
.jetfuelx-85x50.jpg.
.SCA.jpg.
.fliteelectronics.jpg.
.Trace.jpg.
.temple-85x100-2015-02-23.jpg.
.avidyne-ifd-85x50.jpg.
.pdi-85x50.jpg.
.whelen-85x50-2.png.
.westsky.jpg.
.cmi-85x200-2017-06-23.jpg.
.tat-85x100.png.
.Electroair.jpg.
.JacksonAssociates.jpg.
.kingairacademy-85x100.png.
.wealthserve-85x50-2015-02-16.jpg.
.carpenter-85x50.png.
.tulsair-85x50.jpg.
.midwest2.jpg.
.jlosborne-85x50.jpg.
.airpowerred.jpg.
.wholesalepowertools.jpg.
.texasgyro.jpg.
.Outright_85_50.png.
.cubcrafters.jpg.
.americanaviation-85x50.jpg.
.selectairparts-85x100.jpg.
.kingairnation-85x50-2015-03-17.png.
.ffc-85x100.jpg.
.mccauley-2017-06-01-carbon.jpg.
.Nexus.jpg.