"Vee" Tail Bonanza?

Boris Badenov said:
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.)
Click to expand...

The floor on at least some of the 35's were made of wood. Nothing in the airframe though.
 
Lee D said:
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.
Click to expand...

Yeah the -34 had stall strips on the leading edges of the wing roots to give a little aerodynamic advance notice (and of course to ensure the roots stall before the ailerons lose effectiveness) and pedal shakers IIRC
 
WacoFan said:
Everyone that doesn't like Bellanca's are losers.

Seriously - take a look at them.
Click to expand...

I have never flown a Bellanca, but I must agree that I like the looks of them. We have two 14-19-2 in the shop where I work that haven't flown in years, and are a ways from being airworthy again, but I am hoping that I get some time in one of them when they are ready.
 
WacoFan said:
And, for the record - I like V-tails, but would never spend my own money on one - I would most certainly get its contemporary, a Cessna 195. If I was forced to get a flat-motored airplane I would get a Bellanca Cruisemaster for a traveling machine.
BellancaCruisemaster.jpg
Click to expand...

Cardboard Connie! Such a sweet looking airplane. I've always wanted to fly one. They, as well as the rest of the Bellanca's, look like fun to fly. Plus, there are fewer of them out there, so people come up to look at them on the ramp.
 
WacoFan said:
Everyone that doesn't like Bellanca's are losers.

Seriously - take a look at them.
Click to expand...

I'm with you on that Waco. From what I've read they are extremely tough airplanes. I heard the only reason Bellanca didn't have the Super Viking certified for acro was financial reasons at the time. I always waste time looking at them on controller.

cheerleaders.JPG
 
motoboy said:
I'm with you on that Waco. From what I've read they are extremely tough airplanes. I heard the only reason Bellanca didn't have the Super Viking certified for acro was financial reasons at the time. I always waste time looking at them on controller.

cheerleaders.JPG
Click to expand...

That is some great negative G load they have going there! Wow.
 
granlistillo said:
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.
Click to expand...


Beech making the tail "larger" without adding any structure is why the AD requires the leading edge cuff (or any of a number of other kits, the cuff on the leading edge was just the most popular one). Without the cuff you could break the tail while within the certification limits, that is why the AD was necessary, and why the V-tail has such a bad reputation.
 
Late to the thread, but I heard from "uncle walt" that if you cross-control stall one of those you are going inverted.


b.
 
shdw said:
That is some great negative G load they have going there! Wow.
Click to expand...

That was part of a great advertisement - basically said, "Try this with an aluminum airplane".

The Bellanca's are not as fast as a Bonanza nor will they carry as much. They will climb faster than 210's or Bo's, and they simply fly really nice (the ones I flew). Very well harmonized controls - everything was fluid. Very nice machines.
 
beasly said:
Late to the thread, but I heard from "uncle walt" that if you cross-control stall one of those you are going inverted.


b.
Click to expand...

If you cross control stall (skidding) most non trainers your going inverted. Under the right load conditions a cross controlled stall (skidding) will put a 172 inverted.

But when you say cross controlled stall there is a big difference between which type:

Skidding: Most aircraft will go inverted or at least partially so.

Slipping: Trainers will stall and just fall in a slip, buffeting like crazy. The cap 10 flipped right on its back (aero trainer) and so did the citabria high country.

I don't think I would try either type in anything but a trainer or aerobat.
 
trafficinsight said:
Beech making the tail "larger" without adding any structure is why the AD requires the leading edge cuff (or any of a number of other kits, the cuff on the leading edge was just the most popular one). Without the cuff you could break the tail while within the certification limits, that is why the AD was necessary, and why the V-tail has such a bad reputation.
Click to expand...
I was agreeing with you, but I think you have more information than me. My understanding is that some mods strengthened an elevon spar as well.

My dad had a Moony M21 and a couple of late 50s V tails. The bonanza tails seemed to have a little dutch roll or yaw instabity that would usually dynamically diminish. Only negative I could think of. The Mooney reminds me of a Diamond. You tend to wear it... Don't have a clue on a Mooney built newer than 35 yrs though.
 
As for Mooney's, I have always liked those. I also like almost all Al Mooney work from Bellanca, through Monocoupe, to Culver, to Mooney.

I have always thought that I would like to have a Mite. It would be an awesome and cheap commuter to get me between KC-Springfield-Jefferson City - St. Louis - Columbia - KC which is a route I currently do every couple months by car.

120-130 MPH on 4 gallons per hour and 900 FPM climb. Not bad for 65 horsepower.

mite1.jpg
 
granlistillo said:
I was agreeing with you, but I think you have more information than me. My understanding is that some mods strengthened an elevon spar as well.

My dad had a Moony M21 and a couple of late 50s V tails. The bonanza tails seemed to have a little dutch roll or yaw instabity that would usually dynamically diminish. Only negative I could think of. The Mooney reminds me of a Diamond. You tend to wear it... Don't have a clue on a Mooney built newer than 35 yrs though.
Click to expand...

Ahh, I see it now. I seem to remember one mod added another spar forward of the factory one... the most radical mod removed the tailcone aft of the baggage door and grafted on a straight tail ;)

The leading edge cuff won out because it was simple, and it fixed the problem ;)
 
shdw said:
If you cross control stall (skidding) most non trainers your going inverted. Under the right load conditions a cross controlled stall (skidding) will put a 172 inverted.

But when you say cross controlled stall there is a big difference between which type:

Skidding: Most aircraft will go inverted or at least partially so.

Slipping: Trainers will stall and just fall in a slip, buffeting like crazy. The cap 10 flipped right on its back (aero trainer) and so did the citabria high country.

I don't think I would try either type in anything but a trainer or aerobat.
Click to expand...


Ahhhh! So that's why "uncle walt" only brought it to the buffet---or so it seemed....but then, he was the examiner and I was on a check-ride so I did not question.

FWIW, the scenario is a pilot on base to final and was taught to never bank more than x degrees. He overshoots, kicks in rudder to kick the nose over, wing drops, opposite aileron., nose drops, back elevator......from what you are saying that describes a skidding entry to a cross control stall that leaves you inverted at 500 feet and dead as a doctor in a V-tail..


I am SO looking forward to rectifying these lapses in my (very expensive) training so I can approach these things with confidence and professionalism.

Anyway, thanks for the info. Very informative thread--sorry for the mini-hijack


Cordially,

b.
 
jynxyjoe said:
As you are on about any complex. Mooney has some real nasty stall characteristics too.
Click to expand...

Thx for the heads up. Only single complex I have flown is the piper brick---errrr---arrow. which is very stable in a stall--heck you have to work to make it stall.


Learning a lot here, thx.

b.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top