"Vee" Tail Bonanza?

esa17 said:
In short the V-tail is a great airframe but still falls short of a Mooney. :D
Click to expand...

Good God, did Chelios crack you in the skull with a Sher-Wood while he was there?

Bonanza = BMW...

Mooney = Chevy.

Flown both. I like leg room, shoulder room, AND headroom! I'll take an S35 any day. Mooneys are waaaay too small.

The S35 is faaaast.....
 
^^ +1, not a Mooney hater per se, but it is just a totally different aircraft and I really love the harmony of controls that the bonanza has. Very similar to a T-34, but with a little bit more stability and of course luxury
 
The early straight 35 bonanzas had an electric controllable pitch prop with wooden blades, other than that I don't remember there being any wood.

Also, the early 35's had a problem with the tail cone skins being too thin (most have been retrofitted by now), and the wing spar doesn't carry through, instead there is a welded steel truss that carries the load through the cabin and it is notorious for failing due to fatigue, corrosion, poor maintenance practices or a combination of the three. This is the same problem the T-34 fleet has. These are problems only on the earliest 35's and it isn't likely you'll be buying one of those.

The early 35 V tail was narrower chord and in 1951 with the C35 they increased the chord ahead of the spar and changed the dihedral. This led to the inflight breakup problems with the V-tail. Beech swore up and down that you had to operate it out of the normal flight regime to break the tail but in the end they were proved wrong, there was a way to break it while within limits... this led to the various kits that are available to strengthen it. As far as I know there hasn't been any problem since.

If you are going to be looking at a V-tail and you only look at the logbooks for 30 seconds, look to see if it has been painted. If it has, look to see that the control surfaces have been balanced and that the balance values are recorded. If they aren't then demand that the balance be checked during the pre-buy. The Ruddervators are extremely sensitive to balance. Even the slightest bit out of balance and they will flutter way below Vne, and the result is not pretty... if you live to tell the tale.

In conclusion, buy a straight tail Bonanza if you must have one... also it's a Beech so you might as well set your wallet on fire now. ;)
 
If I remember correctly, there were no in-flight breakups of any V-tails where the pilot put the landing gear down to act as a speed brake. You lose the gear doors, but that's better than hitting the ground.

The V-tail is slick (so is the straight tail). Beech claims an equivalent drag of a 2 sq. ft. plate on the straight tail. That's extremely low. You have to plan your flight more carefully. You can't just drive up to the airport and drop it in like a Cessna or Piper, but it's fun to fly and safe if you are willing to think ahead of it a little.

If you fly it IFR and don't stay proficient, unusual attitudes get bad fast. Reference the low drag above. The advice I have been told is if you're losing it in IFR, get the gear down. It'll act as a speed brake and give you more time to sort stuff out without exceeding Vne.

I have about 50 hours in Bonanzas (mostly V-tail but some straight), and my opinion is that it's a good airplane, but it's a pilot's airplane. Not much for the passengers. That has all been explained above.
 
The V tail was designed, smartly, to reduce drag and weight by having two big sails in the back of the airplane instead of three. Unfortunately, that also meant that there were two big sails in the back absorbing all the forces of flight rather than three. The tail isn't big enough or strong enough to absorb that kind of punishment. The AD esa referenced which fixed the problem actually made the stabs larger and heavier, which essentially negated the gains that they got originally. This is evident in the fact that the V tail models aren't any faster than the straight tail models.
 
Wait a minute, how is this turning into a mooney v bonanza thread?

-----

Our local "doctor killed v tail accident" happened while he was going way to fast, icing up badly, over shot the localizer and pulled the tail off trying to catch it on his one-way ticket descent.

They have really beefed the tails up since then.
 
roundout said:
The V tail was designed, smartly, to reduce drag and weight by having two big sails in the back of the airplane instead of three. Unfortunately, that also meant that there were two big sails in the back absorbing all the forces of flight rather than three. The tail isn't big enough or strong enough to absorb that kind of punishment. The AD esa referenced which fixed the problem actually made the stabs larger and heavier, which essentially negated the gains that they got originally. This is evident in the fact that the V tail models aren't any faster than the straight tail models.
Click to expand...

You've got it backwards, making the stabs larger is what led to the AD.
 
I'm telling you guys, seriously, look into Bellanca's. I posted the "Cardboard Connie" with the tailwheel and that is a what I would choose. There were versions of the Cruisemaster with nosewheels though, and the Viking and Super Viking are supposed to be fantastic machines. Higher operating costs - bigger engine - but they are fast and many people are fearful because of the wood. I have only flown a couple of Bellanca's (14-13's and 14-19's) but they seemed like really, really nice flying airplanes.
 
trafficinsight said:
You've got it backwards, making the stabs larger is what led to the AD.
Click to expand...
Common misconception. A few months back I saw two guys washing two airplanes. One didn't have the the leading edge doubler bracket, and I asked nonchalantly why not? Get more information than I wanted.
As far as the other silly discussion, growing up my dad with a DR. at the front of his name didnt get killed by other. But not surprisingly, the bigger he got, he switch to a V tail bonanza.


Mooney's are porsches

Bonanzas are cadillacs

imho...
 
I have about 90 hours in a 55 V tail BE 35. I even had a few hours in it with the electric prop, then it was changed to a more modern constant speed. (The electric thing was kind of weird, but worked.)

I think all of them had several fixes to shore up the tail. I don't think there has been a tail failure in a Bonanza for years and years. Personally I don't think that is a big issue these days. The one I flew was older but flew like a champ and I enjoyed flying it. The only thing I did not really like was demonstrating stalls in it. She was not as gentle as a 172 stall. It had a tendency to really dip the nose and drop a wing if you let it go into a deeper stall. No problem recovering, unless you decided to panic and pull back on the yoke more. (I had a student do that once, and we really nosed down.)
 
The bonanza was probably my favorite airplane to fly. Nice performance and sweet control harmony. A real fingertip airplane.
 
SteveC said:
The bonanza was probably my favorite airplane to fly. Nice performance and sweet control harmony. A real fingertip airplane.
Click to expand...

I was for a while in partnership with some guys on 2 A-36s. Sweet, fast comfortable airplanes in the front seats. I think we filed about 160 true and planned on about 15gal/hr.

The A-36 would pick up speed VERY quickly in descent. It was a good instrument platform but it was not an airplane for a novice who seldom flew it.
 
Lee D said:
The only thing I did not really like was demonstrating stalls in it. She was not as gentle as a 172 stall. It had a tendency to really dip the nose and drop a wing if you let it go into a deeper stall. No problem recovering, unless you decided to panic and pull back on the yoke more. (I had a student do that once, and we really nosed down.)
Click to expand...

I've not really done any stalls in the Bonanza, but have done lots of stalls, spins, and a little otherwise OCF (zero airspeed departure) in my T-34C days and it has very similar characteristics......same wing and similar fuselage so go figure. Definitely had a tendency to drop a wing pretty much every time, and would enter a solid developed spin if coaxed with a boot of rudder or crossed controls. IIRC the spin rate was around a turn and a half a second, so considerably more violent than spinning a Cessna. That said, it too recovered nicely with anti-spin rudder and essentially neutral stick (sometimes took a little forward depending on the rigging of the particular airplane). Overall pretty docile, and I actually prefer an aircraft that has more pronounced behavior at the stall, rather than just mushiness of controls.
 
You realize that if there were an error with the design of the V tail Cirrus would not be using it for their jet they are building.

I've always felt it was where it got its nickname from was the stupid crap that the pilots would do... Doctors are some of the worst pilots out there. They are hard to train and think they know every damn thing.
 
///AMG said:
I've not really done any stalls in the Bonanza, but have done lots of stalls, spins, and a little otherwise OCF (zero airspeed departure) in my T-34C days and it has very similar characteristics......same wing and similar fuselage so go figure. Definitely had a tendency to drop a wing pretty much every time, and would enter a solid developed spin if coaxed with a boot of rudder or crossed controls. IIRC the spin rate was around a turn and a half a second, so considerably more violent than spinning a Cessna. That said, it too recovered nicely with anti-spin rudder and essentially neutral stick (sometimes took a little forward depending on the rigging of the particular airplane). Overall pretty docile, and I actually prefer an aircraft that has more pronounced behavior at the stall, rather than just mushiness of controls.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I never had a problem getting it to recover either. It always came right out of any stall you put it through. The concern I had was the "suprise" factor of an unanticipated stall. The older model I flew had a stall light and not a horn. I found very little aerodynamic buffet before the stall and when you did finally get the buffet the stall was about 1/2 second away. So if you did not pay attention to the light and you did stall, it would probably suprise the heck out of you and close to the ground a less experienced pilot might quickly find himself in trouble. I'm sure most younger Bonanzas had a horn, which would help. Even though it was old the thing was quite sporty and fun to fly.
 
FWIW, I was getting the 35 and the early M20s mixed up. As far as I know, no wood on a 35, although I still maintain they're not the safest chariot in the sky (referring here only to the "straight" 35 which you'll probably never even see one.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top