Bonanza Tufted Wing Tail Two Surprises

[@michaelnapier3221]

I’m a CFII and this is probably the best I’ve have ever seen explaining (in the real world) the airflow separation from the wing in a stall and reversal the of airflow, that I’ve seen in 40 years. Thanks !!!

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Glad I could help! Makes it worth all the time putting tufts on and taking them off!

[@lenflier3826]

I did catch the stall near the wingtip. What a beautiful paint job by the way. Saw that video, too. But this was the first closeup of the wings. Beautiful gloss and nice tight color boundaries.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Thanks, Len!

[@paul_k_7351]

This video is amazing, informative and to the point. I really appreciate you doing this, Scott and I'm sure hundreds of pilots will in the future too.

[@ryzlot]

Great video - lots of work with all the indicators and loads of angles. Interesting seeing the VG effect. Good flying skills - but you know that already! JR

[@craigt4467]

Scott Thank you so so much for having the idea to demonstrate these effects in this video You bring so much to the table. I appreciate that you learn as we all do seeing what the tufts do during these spins. I sincerely thank you again for this video and all the great videos on your channel Bravo 👏🏻 and best wishes always From Las Vegas Craig Another 10 stars 🌟 Out of 5 stars for this video ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ ✌️😇

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Glad it was helpful! Thanks Craig!

[@emergencylowmaneuvering7350]

Nice.. Much better than the Piper Tomahawks i used to teach spins in the 1980's..

[@johnfitzpatrick2469]

G,day Scott from Sydney Australia. Thankyou for your demonstrated evidence using yaw strings, that there is smooth laminar airflow over the wing of your plane. Moreover, the synthetic vision of the Garmin G1000 is effective in displaying the position of the plane to the horizon. * This film was also a good reminder, of angle of attack and rolling the plane. 🍏👔

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Thanks John. The G3X is a great display and it records 50+ parameters every second... data collection! Cool!

[@johnfitzpatrick2469]

@@FlyWirescottperdue GX3 I apologize.

[@tomsmith3045]

This was fascinating! I've never read a clear description of how the tail works (or doesn't) in a spin, and you have it for that aircraft on video. I think the surprise to me, though, was that the wing seemed to start flying again *before* the tail? Did I see that correctly? Of course in slow flight and stall the rudder still has authority where the ailerons are less effective to non-effective...so I always assumed the tail would come back first. My limited aeronautical knowledge is now popping up, and I'm wondering if the reason some aircraft weren't spin-recoverable is all about airflow over the tail during a spin, and those surfaces being stalled.

[@philipcollins5440]

This was fasinateing. I love learning about different things about planes. Thanks 👍 😊

[@paulhendershott667]

You're best instruction video yet! You had me at Hello 😂

[@spyderyates4587]

Your new paint job is awesome

[@Ryanboy2020]

Scott, fascinate stuff! I wish I had this explanation in my air dynamics class.

[@tennesseered586]

I was surprised to see how quickly the airflow reattached to the outside (left) wing after the stall, even as the airplane spun to the right. It was also interesting to see the rudder and fin stall and watch it quickly unstall with relaxation of rudder input. Very reassuring. Did you mean that the VG device protected the airflow over the OUTboard portion of the aileron? Because that's what it looked like. The whole wing seemed to suddenly stall from the root out to the airflow disturbed by the VG, while the outboard wing and aileron kept its airflow attached. Great job, brilliant idea to tuft the tail. Best watched at 1/4 speed. Thank you.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

I did an update to this video at Oshkosh- about that VG on the leading edge. Perhaps I need to do another more detailed one.

[@richardseton7014]

Excellent demo, footage and leasons learned! Thanks very much.

[@dobedad75]

Great video Scott.. learned a lot.

[@lautburns4829]

Wow great info, never could have guessed that.

[@cedricbassin8024]

Very interesting video- > well done, as usual. Thks Scott!

[@davidevigano118]

Fantastic I wish someone did this same experiment in a Mooney long body.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Trouble is they aren't aerobatic airplanes... this one is.

[@stay_at_home_astronaut]

This is a great video. I wish I could have done it with my V-tailed Bonanza.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

It would be interesting... But I for one would like a spin chute on that airplane.

[@stay_at_home_astronaut]

@@FlyWirescottperdue Yeah, no kidding. A spin-chute for the plane and another one for my butt!

[@imaPangolin]

I like the fact that you ask for the like at the END of the video. You got one from me.

[@zidoocfi]

As you well know, yarn makes the most accurate flight instrument known -- the yaw string. Too bad many airplanes can't use one. Thanks for both the inflight footage and the explanation.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Thanks Dean, I appreciate that! We used to use Yaw Strings on the F-4!

[@WarblesOnALot]

@@FlyWirescottperdue G'day , Yeah, Yaw Strings are great, as long as there's no Airscrew in front of them. And, the most accurate Flight Instrument on the Aeroplane should actually be the first Flight Instrument ever invented. Alberto Santos Dumont went to Cartier and commissioned the soldering of two Lugs onto his Pocket Watch, because in 1898 his Dirigible used Weight-Shift for Pitch-Control, his Fueltank had no Contents-Guage but he knew his Engine's hourly consumption-rate ; and when surrying back and forth along the Girder attached under his Envelope of Hydrogen, over the Rooftops of Paris at 200 ft or so - he didn't have a spare hand with which to pull out his Pocket-Watch to see how long he had before running out of Fuel. Thus, the FIRST Flight Instrument ever built for a Human-carrying Aircraft was the "Wristlet Watch", fashioned by Pierre Cartier, who was otherwise famous for his ornamental Eggs. And, from there, Wrist(let)watches took over the World, the only Flight Instrument ever to become Standard Items in most households. I suppose the Balloon Pilots might contest the "First Flight Instrument" claim in favour of co-opting an Aneroid Barometer to calculate Altitude..., my contention is that a Wristwatch yields the required information without having to interpolate Pressure displayed to deduce Altitude - so the Barometer is a SENSOR, rather than a "Flight-Instrument". I may be clutching at straws with that rationalisation, too ; but Santos-Dumont & Cartier are the reason why Pilots are identifiable at 10 paces by the size & complexity of their Wrist(let)watches. I once even tried one with a built-in Altimeter (!), but it was Temperature deranged ; going outside for an armload of Firewood in Winter caused it to indicate a Climb & Descent of 650 ft accross the job (Casio, 1992). A gem for one's Trivia File, perhaps... Such is life, Have a good one... Stay safe. ;-p Ciao !

[@Mrsournotes]

@@FlyWirescottperdue I’m guessing that yarn to be the least expensive component on the Phantom. My mechanic used to say he was fixing nickel and dime stuff on our Cessna.

[@Sugarsail1]

we use them in sailing on our sails for the same reasons

[@Mrsournotes]

@@Sugarsail1 You bet, me too!

[@briansims4365]

That turbulent air seems to like the color red. Who says u need a wind tunnel!

[@tomblack9401]

I thought about it earlier this week and surmised that the wedge was not a vortex generator but rather it created a flow fence to control the aerodynamics of the stall as it progresses. Also, the flow on the vertical tail in the spin did not totally surprise me - it seems to follow work that NASA Langley did in the latter 1970s looking at tail geometry end its effect on spins and spin recovery. Definitely great to add these videos to the data NASA generated.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Tom, that wedge is NOT a vortex generator at all. I am not aware of work that NASA did on tails of this configuration. The design of this tail dates back to the early 60's I believe.

[@MasteryFlightTng]

Outstanding video, Scott. It confirms what I’ve taught for 30 years, cause I learned it when I began instructing at Beech Field: the “hatchet blade” leading edge vortex generator is designed to assure that at high angles of attack and even when the wing stalls there is still airflow attachment over the ailerons. This is to assure more effective controls for stall recovery and also to reduce the adverse yaw effect on stall recoveries. Well done. Thomas P. Turner

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Thanks Tom. I've been wondering for years what is actually happening with that Wedge. It was fascinating to find out! The tail airflow was equally interesting. Those Beechcraft engineers were nothing shot of excellent designers. They really knew their stuff! And they didn't use computers!

[@bicycle697]

Really interesting!!!

[@javev1772]

Correct me if I’m wrong: appears as if that VG makes that part of the wing stall first which I think is counterproductive. I would want the inboard of the wing stall first so I can have aileron control. Some airplanes have that VG on the inboard leading edge to produce the stall on the inboard wing first. Im confused as of why. Thanks for the excellent video.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

That is indeed what is happening.

[@javev1772]

@@FlyWirescottperdue thanks for your response, but why would Beechcraft want that? To make it more aerobatic? (That bonanza is aerobatic no?)

[@z400racer37]

I loved this. It would be really cool to see what happens when you do what you're not supposed to do, so we can see exactly why you're not supposed to do those things (i.e. trying to correct a stall with aileron instead of rudder, etc.). Thanks Scott!

[@tomdchi12]

This points out how little I understand airflow other than over the wings! The effect behind that VG vane was definitely dramatic. I don't have a good sense of what percentage of the wing area was effected behind it, but it might be 10% or somewhat less. If it is significantly improving the effectiveness of the ailerons, then it's probably a good tradeoff overall, but my immediate thought was that the local non-laminar flow area behind the vane would reduce the lift and bring the plane into a stalled state significantly earlier than if it wasn't there.

[@jtveg]

Thanks for sharing. 😉👌🏼

[@billylain7456]

Fascinating

[@gretchenlittle6817]

Just a curious observer here -- you wouldn't want me in your aircraft while performing these maneuvers. What fascinates me is that 1) a person with your level of training and experience freely admits being surprised by the results (good on ya!); and 2) different aircraft perform quite uniquely in these situations.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

I don’t claim to know everything. I’m always learning! Airplanes are the same... but different! One reason I like them so much!

[@turnbank3492]

To cool thanks for your work

[@bobcfi1306]

I wonder what the effect of the single person in the aircraft had. Repeat with 2 equal weight people in the front seats?

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Very little.

[@markdahlhoff1674]

Scott can you do a similar video recording at a more aft center of gravity that is still in the envelope? The reason I ask is that I used to flight instruct in a C150 and C152. And the 150 stayed in the spin and the 152 would not--its Airspeed would increase while controls were applied. The 152 when flown had a forward cg on paper when compared to the 150.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Maybe, the aerobatic CG is not as wide as the passenger CG for this airplane.

[@ko9446]

Had a friend put tuffs all over his Pitts to confirm what was the general thought of airflow over the fuselage, wings and tail. Let’s say the results were a lot different then what had been thought by many. This was done for a inverted flat spin.

[@wolfherold7760]

Interesting experiment! Does Beech actually call that contraption "vortex generator"? As you stated vg's are there to energize the (turbulent) boundary layer to prevent/delay separation ( and thus reverse/chaotic flow). The don't want to disrupt the average flow. They don't want to create a lot of additional drag either. That's why vg's are typically those small triangular pieces (remember the ones on your 180). Can't be a "stall strip" either, at least not if named for its function: it's in a location on the wing which one wants to stall last! Strange... @JavEV vg's (not stall strips) at the wing root have the same energizing function: to prevent separation - and thus additional (interference) drag - in the aerodynamically "complicated" area between flow over the wing and flow along the fuselage (junction section).

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

It is perplexing There is obviously more to know here.

[@KB4QAA]

@@FlyWirescottperdue I think this VG is similar in function to a 'Dog's Tooth" leading edge introduced to fighters beginning in the 1950's.

[@WarblesOnALot]

G'day, Wheee ! It's always goanna be A goodie, When Scotty's Got 'is 'Brolly on...! That's the weirdest Vortex Generator I've ever seen. It appears to work like a Knife-Edge, cutting the Airflow so sharply that it "billows" up above the regular Leading-Edge & then the "Billow-Stream" is sucked back down & into the strong Low Pressure Zone created by it's earlier upward divergence, hence the retrograde Airflow at the upper Skin of the Wing, downstream of the VG...(?). I agree with your idea that the result of that is to very heavily turbulate the flow over the outboard Aileron, while leaving that over the inboard Aileron relatively smooth & undisturbed, and thus the Control Surface is still effective. As they say, it's, "as cunning as a Shithouse Rat...!". (because, nobody puts Rat-Traps in their Outhouse..., and thus the Rat which lives out there - quite safely, gets the run of the House at night, while everybody's asleep...). Such is life, Have a good one. Stay safe. ;-p Ciao !

[@jackoneil3933]

fascinating indeed Scott and thanks. You think that was the design intent Beech had from the start or more happenstance? This brought to mind what might have happened to me during an incident in a B55 Baron Biannual checkride with high time instructor who was unfamiliar with the Baron. He asked I demonstrate critical engine VMC, and with full power at about 2500MSL/AGL. Having done some stalls in the Baron I mentioned that it we ended up in a spin 2500' might not be enough, but he insisted and as I pitched up I neglected to lift my right foot above the rounded sheet metal cover below the bottom of the rudder pedals, and on which my cowboy boot heel caught before I could apply full right rudder. The instructor, an AF Combat instructor barked "FULL RIGHT RUDDER!" I said "I CANT, I'm hung up" and as I started to lower the nose he grabbed the yoke shaft and pulled back while abruptly stomping full right rudder. At this point I recall we were a few kts below VMC, so when he applied full right rudder the Baron yawed right about 5 degrees right then suddenly and violently yawed left about 30 degrees. The aircraft did a half snap roll to the left, and about half way to a 90 degrees stalled and went inverted before I could retard the right throttle. Before cutting power I managed to continue the roll to near level and recovered from an almost vertical dive with a recovery about 500 feet above the ground. The Instructor thought I had applied right aileron as he applied right rudder but the slight right roll was due to the initial right yaw caused by the heel of his #13 on the right rudder. We went up to about 3,500 feet and tried it again and found a sudden application of full right rudder slightly below VMC would result in a sudden and violent left yaw. That was before the advent of GoPros but I wanted to tuft the vertical Stab and wings to see what was happening to the vertical stab, and if the boundary layer was detaching with over application of right rudder. What you have shown here Scott has me wondering if something more like reverse flow on the wing occurred in the Baron rather then a Vertical Stab detachment?

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Wow, what a story! You did very well to have lived through that! Lots of folks haven't.

[@jackoneil3933]

@@FlyWirescottperdue Indeed. And 3:40 in your video the buffeting was what I remember as we went inverted.

[@tennesseered586]

That CFI should have had at least 5 hrs. PIC in-type before giving you instruction, high time or not. Also, it sounds like the fin stalled when full right rudder was suddenly applied. You were brave to do that at relatively low altitude, especially the second time.

[@jackoneil3933]

@@tennesseered586 Yes, indeed. Having owned a number of Baron's, Bonanzas and Cessna 300/400 twins, including an old Cessna 411 that was notorious for V-stab stalls and incidents, and seeing how much larger the B55 Baron's rudder is than a 310 or even the old 411, I suspect there's something about the B55 that leaves it a bit vulnerable to abrupt rudder over-control, which was basically what was applied. Having done some aerobatics an spins in an F33C and SNJ and my Instructor being an aerobatic instructor, whit a lot of SNJ time we were both curious if it was my fault or a design feature, and we both felt the second time, being prepared for what would likely happen we approached it progressively and found even then an abrupt rudder input near VMC could cause a severe Yaw and roll break, that was reasonably recoverable if corrected very quickly. Something to keep in mind and respect avoid but not inherently deadly or really a major factor for a proficient operator I think.

[@cjs6070]

Extremely fascinating in terms of the aerodynamic characteristics of your airplane. I have a challenge for you that really is more of a dream than a potential reality - but it would be a great educational aerodynamic study. The wish goes this way - locate a Saab MFI-15/17 somewhere and get checked out on it. Perform aerobatics similar to what you have done in yours and on other airplanes. Also put those tufts on the Saab and do a full aerodynamic comparison between conventional airplanes with conventional wings and the Saab of which there are almost no other light airplanes of this type. ...... I can only wish

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

It does have an interesting wing/tail configuration.

[@TheUltimateThrillRideMarcoola]

I think you need to let the spin fully stabilize (4+ rotations) to get a better picture of the airflow. The airflow over all surfaces in the incipient stage will vary depending on how it's 'kicked' into the spin i.e. from straight and level, slight climb or sinking, hard fast kick, soft slow kick etc.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Go for it.

[@mikeblackford994]

Amazing!

[@sumrica]

Scott, the Bourland Airport is home base for you? I finished up my Commercial training requirements and did my checkride there back in November of 1991.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

It is. It’s an Airpark now.

[@waukeshapilot6462]

That fabric is beautiful, What is that Velvet?

[@Airplane_Willy]

I actually was not surprised by the airflow separating in that location at all. Anything put on the leading edge like that is there for one purpose (that I know of). To detach airflow sooner than the rest of the wing. The bigger the stall strip or device, the sooner (higher speed) the airflow will start to become turbulent. Now the question is why. I don't know this part for sure, but it could be so that the pilot gets a very positive indication of a stall long before it happens in the form of buffeting (airflow is turbulent over the aileron, thereby felt by the pilot). It would make sense if that ties into the aerobatic portion of the airworthiness. Just my take. EDIT: BTW, thank you so much for doing this. Man, this should be pilot 101 stuff that you just never get to see. You're taking someone else's word for it, good or bad.

[@Parr4theCourse]

That was WAY too cool…..

[@HoundDogMech]

Notice how the White Yarn is more beat up than the black in most cases. Is it that the White yarn is not as tough as the black and the turbulence isn't really that much different? Just asking.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Don't think so. They feel the same consistency.

[@tomblack9401]

@@FlyWirescottperdue NACA used to dip the tip of their tufts in rubber cement to prevent unraveling. Of course, they were leaving them on for several flights, not just one.

[@adamkinsey3139]

It really confuses me that the large hatchet blade is being called a "vortex generator", and not a Stall Strip. To me, what it looks like is a very large Stall Strip, and his description of it's action is that of a Stall Strip. It appears to cause that region of the wing to stall BEFORE the rest of the wing! That is NOT what a vortex generator does, to my knowledge. If it is creating a "fence" of reverse flow/low pressure/stalled air over that section of the wing, how can it be called a vortex generator? (Aerospace Engineers, please chime in, because I am NOT one)

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Good question. A stall strip induces a stall at a particular part of the wing to control the progress of the stall. This indeed breaks the boundary layer early, but creates a fence to inhibit span wise flow. There is a purpose behind this, see my update video I filmed at Oshkosh. In general you want the wing to stall at the root first. That is not the purpose of this VG.

[@MsDenver2]

The reason your getting less hate mail is because they know your right lol😊👍

[@jimgraham6722]

Inverted next?

[@cluelessbeekeeping1322]

My brother has a ScareCoupe and I kept trying to put wind tuff on the wing...uh, for kicks. I asked him to go up and do some stalls and video it for me, again, for kicks. He's removed them all of three times. & not nearly as many tuffs as you're using...the kill joy!

[@dabneyoffermein595]

Wing-Walkers could use this data

[@saintsi6997]

Tidy

[@cecilboatwright3555]

VERY interesting! ....you need to look out the windows over your shoulders more...

[@viperdriver82]

You should have flown the plane from the right seat incase you had to egress

[@justinparker7795]

Once again we know what you look like!!!!!!!!!! please point the camera forward so we can see whats going on! please !!

[@budmcfly3311]

That’s not a VG sir it’s a stall strip. It’s doing what it’s meant to do. Stall the wing in that area first!

[@tomdchi12]

It certainly seems to be effective at that purpose! I see there is even a wikipedia entry for "stall strips." I'm scratching my head about why that is good, and why the strip well down the wing would encourage turbulence to develop at the wing root, which means I have a ton more to learn about aerodynamics!

[@thomasaltruda]

Ok, but if it is a stall strip, why is it at the aileron, and not at the wing root? I think it’s there to induce a rumbling in the yoke.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Nope, it does not do that. Turbulent air over the horizontal provides the tickle in the yoke.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Arjan- It is indeed a stall strip. But why put it in front of the aileron? Aerodynamics says you want the root to stall first and progress outwards. What is the benefit?

[@budmcfly3311]

Beats me why it’s placed outboard near the aileron. The only reason I could think is to make the aircraft less stable laterally along the longitudinal axis to make it snappier for aerobatics but it is a bonanza. Who did the modifications? They may have a better reason. Nice vid!

[@thompsonjerry3412]

bull, you stall in the pattern you die , do not stall, push

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

I don’t understand your comment Jerry.

[@davidpatton5757]

Just use the same string on all surfaces. Why would you use different string in different areas? Please tell me it isn't because it looks better on KZbin or that contrast is the purpose. The black string would be fine. To me, this choice to use different string isn't wise when trying to prove a theory, scientifically.

[@KB4QAA]

It's for better visibility. Control your emotions. ;)

[@thompsonjerry3412]

This is why stalls and spins should be avoided, they are unpredictable and dangerous,every now and then pilots do not recover.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Jerry, I really don't see your point. Folks tend to find the stall and the departure with regularity even trying to adhere to your advice.

[@thompsonjerry3412]

@@FlyWirescottperdue nothing to be learned by stalls and spins, other than not to do it. Every stall and spin is a unique event, and some end poorly. To me it is like rock climbing, ya I can do it but why, it is not flying but falling.

[@tomsmith3045]

If you're not comfortable with stalls and stall recovery at a safe altitude, you shouldn't be flying. Nothing dangerous about it at all, again with enough altitude, in a properly functional aircraft. That's not just my opinion, it's part of the certification process for pilots. Part of the reason for that is that every aircraft is flying with a pretty low margin over stall on final approach, on every landing. For a typical trainer, that might be 15 knots, or less, on final and lower crossing the threshold. With an unexpected gust or tailwind, lower. I would go so far as to say every pilot should spend some time in a airplane that doesn't have a stall horn, so they're not relying on that aid/crutch during their stall training, to better learn it by feel. I say that because the reaction to stalls that are unexpected needs to be automatic. For that to happen, the stalls that are planned and practiced need to be comfortable and second nature.

[@thompsonjerry3412]

@@tomsmith3045 there is nothing to learn, except not to stall, push and keep flying. this stall crap gets people killed just like pulling the critical engine on a twin

[@tomsmith3045]

@@thompsonjerry3412 It's only similar in that if you're going to fly a twin, you need training in how to fly on one engine, and if you're flying an airplane at all, you need training in stalls and stall recovery; and that neither stalls nor single engine should be practiced at 300' off the ground. But it's not reasonable to say that there is "nothing to be learned". At altitude both are completely safe. I'll say it again, if you're afraid of stalls, you need to either do more and get comfortable with them, or stop flying. Same if you're driving a twin and aren't comfortable with single engine flight.

[@rcflighttestengineer5636]

Almost, stopped watching during the taxi out when I saw the elevator lazily left full down, reduces prop clearance, unnecessarily compresses the nose suspension, leaves the underside of the elevator prone to damage from FOD picked up in the prop blast and accelerated into it, and puts stress on the forward elevator stops as it bounces up and down whilst taxiing. Why are pilots no longer taught proper taxiing technique, or are they and they are just too lazy to apply it?