I've been flying my -7A for 4 years. My tail surface balance horns were built and finished "squared off" pretty much how they came. The distance between the control surface "horns" and the fixed surfaces on the stab and fin are minimal, about 3/8"-1/2".
I've notice that higher performance planes, King Airs and Citation jets come to mind, have a more "rounded" aerodynamic shape to the front of their tail control surface "horns". The other planes also have a much greater clearance between the fixed and movable tail surfaces, sometimes as much as an inch or so.
In level, cruise flight, my rudder horn pretty much stays "in trail", but I find I need to rest my left foot on the left rudder pedal to keep the ball centered. My elevator horns are raised above the stab surface by 3/8"-1/2"
Questions: Are there worthwhile reduced drag advantages to be gained by rounding the leading edge of the control "horns" ? When does the clearance between the horn and fixed surfaces get to be too much? How have other builders finished them off?
Thanks.
I've notice that higher performance planes, King Airs and Citation jets come to mind, have a more "rounded" aerodynamic shape to the front of their tail control surface "horns". The other planes also have a much greater clearance between the fixed and movable tail surfaces, sometimes as much as an inch or so.
In level, cruise flight, my rudder horn pretty much stays "in trail", but I find I need to rest my left foot on the left rudder pedal to keep the ball centered. My elevator horns are raised above the stab surface by 3/8"-1/2"
Questions: Are there worthwhile reduced drag advantages to be gained by rounding the leading edge of the control "horns" ? When does the clearance between the horn and fixed surfaces get to be too much? How have other builders finished them off?
Thanks.
