Tale of the tail

Stabilator advantages include lower production cost (there’s one surface instead of two); reduced trim drag because the entire surface can pivot to an optimum angle; and lighter weight because a stabilator is typically lighter and smaller with less total area than a horizontal stabilizer and elevator. (When the original RV–12 was being designed with removable wings, one of the goals was to make the tail surface narrow enough that the fuselage could be legally towed on public roads.)

OK, if stabilators are so great, why doesn’t every airplane have one?

Stabilators are mechanically complex; they put a great deal of stress on a single pivot point; and if a stabilator stalls before the wings, the aircraft’s heavy nose will drop uncontrollably. Cessna learned this the hard way in 1968 when stabilator-equipped 177 Cardinals suffered a series of landing mishaps attributed to tail stalls. (The company later corrected the problem by installing leading-edge slots on stabilators.)

Happily, from a pilot’s perspective, there are no differences in flying an airplane with a stabilator compared to a conventional elevator. If you didn’t look behind you, you couldn’t tell.

[email protected]