Chapter 3

Static Longitudinal Stability and

Control

The most critical aspects of static longitudinal stability relate to control forces required
for changing trim or performing maneuvers. Our textbook [1] treats primarily the situ-
ation when the controls are fixed. This is, of course, and idealization, even for the case
of powered, irreversible controls, as the position of the control surfaces can he held fixed
only to the extent of the maximum available control forces. The opposite limit – that of
free control surfaces – also is an idealization, limited by the assumptions of zero friction
in the control positioning mechanisms. But, just as the control fixed limit is useful in
determining control position gradients, the control free limit is useful in determining con-
trol force gradients. And these latter are among the most important vehicle properties
in determining handling qualities.

3.1 Control Fixed Stability

Even for the controls-fixed case, our text is a bit careless with nomenclature and equations, so we
review the most important results for this case here. We have seen that for the analysis of longitudinal
stability, terms involving products of the drag coefficient and either vertical displacements of the
vehicle center-of-gravity or sines of the angle of attack can be neglected. Then, with the axial
locations as specified in Fig. 3.1 the pitching moment about the vehicle c.g. can be written
 
x
cg xac  St `t  xcg xac 
Cmcg = Cm0w + CLw − − η CLt − − + Cmf (3.1)
c̄ c̄ S c̄ c̄ c̄
where we assume that Cm0t = 0, since the tail is usually symmetrical.

Grouping the terms involving the c.g. location, this equation can be written
 
x
cg xac  St
Cmcg = Cm0w + − CLw + η CLt − ηVH CLt + Cmf (3.2)
c̄ c̄ S

15
16 CHAPTER 3. STATIC LONGITUDINAL STABILITY AND CONTROL

where VH = `c̄St St
is the tail volume parameter. Note that this definition is based on the distance
between the aerodynamic centers of the wing and tail, and is therefore independent of the vehicle
c.g. location. Note that the total vehicle lift coefficient is
Lw + Lt St
CL = = CLw + η CLt (3.3)
QS S
where η = Qt /Q is the tail efficiency factor, and this total vehicle lift coefficient is exactly the
quantity appearing in the square brackets in Eq. (3.2). Now, we can introduce the dependence of
the lift coefficients on angle of attack as

CLw = CLαw (αF RL + iw − α0w )

(3.4)
  
dε
CLt = CLαt αF RL + it − ε0 + αF RL
dα
Note that, consistent with the usual use of symmetric sections for the horizontal tail, we have
assumed α0t = 0. Introducing these expressions into Eq. (3.3), the latter can be expressed as
   
St St dε
CL = CLαw (iw − α0w ) + η CLαt (it − ε0 ) + CLαw + η 1− CLαt αF RL (3.5)
S S dα
This equation has the form
CL = CL0 + CLα αF RL (3.6)
where the vehicle lift curve slope is
 
St dε
CLα = CLαw + η 1− CLαt (3.7)
S dα
and
St
CL0 = CLαw (iw − α0w ) + η CLαt (it − ε0 ) (3.8)
S
is the vehicle lift coefficient at zero (fuselage reference line) angle of attack. Finally, if we define the
vehicle angle of attack relative to the angle of attack for zero vehicle lift, i.e.,

α ≡ αF RL − α0 (3.9)

where
CL0
α0 = − (3.10)
CLα

Figure 3.1: Geometry of wing and tail with respect to vehicle c.g., basic neutral point, and wing
aerodynamic center.
3.1. CONTROL FIXED STABILITY 17

then
CL = CLα α (3.11)
where CLα is the vehicle lift curve slope, given by Eq. (3.7).

Introducing the angle of attack into Eq. (3.2), the expression for the vehicle pitching moment coef-
ficient becomes
x  
cg xac  St
Cmcg =Cm0w + − CLαw (iw − α0w ) + η CLαt (it − ε0 ) − ηVH CLαt (it − ε0 ) +
c̄ c̄ S
       
xcg xac  St dε dε
− CLαw + η 1− CLαt − ηVH 1 − CLαt + Cmαf αF RL
c̄ c̄ S dα dα
(3.12)

This can be expressed in terms of the angle of attack from zero vehicle lift as
x  
cg xac  St
Cmcg = Cm0w + − CLαw (iw − α0w ) + η CLαt (it − ε0 ) − ηVH CLαt (it − ε0 )
c̄ c̄ S
   
xcg xac  dε
+ Cmα α0 + − CLα − ηVH CLαt 1 − + Cmαf α
c̄ c̄ dα
(3.13)

This equation has the form

Cm = Cm0 + Cmα α (3.14)
with the pitching moment coefficient at zero lift
x  
cg xac  St
Cm0 = Cm0w + − CLαw (iw − α0w ) + η CLαt (it − ε0 ) −ηVH CLαt (it − ε0 )+Cmα α0
c̄ c̄ S
(3.15)
and the vehicle pitch stiffness
x  
cg xac  dε
Cmα = − CLα − ηVH CLαt 1 − + Cmαf (3.16)
c̄ c̄ dα

Note that Eq. (3.15) can be simplified (using Eq.(3.16)) to

   
dε
Cm0 = Cm0w − ηVH CLαt it − ε0 + 1 − α0 + Cmαf α0 (3.17)
dα

Note that Eq.(3.17) correctly shows that the pitching moment at zero net vehicle lift is independent
of the c.g. location, as it must be (since at zero lift the resultant aerodynamic force must sum to a
pure couple).

The basic (or control-fixed) neutral point is defined as the c.g. location for which the vehicle is
neutrally stable in pitch – i.e., the c.g. location for which the pitch stiffness goes to zero. From
Eq. (3.16) the neutral point is seen to be located at

Cmαf
 
xN P xac CLαt dε
= + ηVH 1− − (3.18)
c̄ c̄ CLα dα CLα
18 CHAPTER 3. STATIC LONGITUDINAL STABILITY AND CONTROL

Note that Eq. (3.16) for the pitch stiffness can be expressed as
Cmαf
    
xcg xac CLαt dε
Cmα = − + ηVH 1− − CLα (3.19)
c̄ c̄ CLα dα CLα
where the quantity in square brackets is exactly the location of the basic neutral point, as shown in
Eq. (3.18). Thus, we can write nx
cg xN P o
Cmα = − CLα (3.20)
c̄ c̄
or, alternatively,
∂Cm x xcg 
NP
=− − (3.21)
∂CL c̄ c̄
Thus, the pitch stiffness, measured with respect to changes in vehicle lift coefficient, is proportional
to the distance between the c.g. and the basic neutral point. The quantity in parentheses on the
right-hand side of Eq. (3.21), i.e., the distance between the vehicle c.g. and the basic neutral point,
expressed as a percentage of the wing mean aerodynamic chord, is called the vehicle static margin.

3.2 Static Longitudinal Control

The elevator is the aerodynamic control for pitch angle of the vehicle, and its effect is described in
terms of the elevator effectiveness
∂CLt
ae = (3.22)
∂δe
where CLt is the lift coefficient of the horizontal tail and δe is the elevator deflection, considered
positive trailing edge down. The horizontal tail lift coefficient is then given by
∂CLt
CLt = (α + it − ε) + ae δe (3.23)
∂αt
and the change in vehicle lift coefficient due to elevator deflection is
St
CLδe = η ae (3.24)
S
while the change in vehicle pitching moment due to elevator deflection is
 
St `t xac − xcg
Cmδe = −η ae +
S c̄ c̄
  (3.25)
`t xac − xcg
= −CLδe +
c̄ c̄

The geometry of the moment arm of the tail lift relative to the vehicle c.g. (which justifies the
second term in Eq. (3.25)) is shown in Fig. 3.1.

The vehicle is in equilibrium (i.e., is trimmed) at a given lift coefficient CLtrim when

CLα α + CLδe δe = CLtrim

(3.26)
Cmα α + Cmδe δe = −Cm0
3.2. STATIC LONGITUDINAL CONTROL 19

These two equations can be solved for the unknown angle of attack and elevator deflection to give

−CLδe Cm0 − Cmδe CLtrim

αtrim =
∆ (3.27)
CLα Cm0 + Cmα CLtrim
δtrim =
∆
where
∆ = −CLα Cmδe + Cmα CLδe (3.28)
Note that the parameter

∆ = −CLα Cmδe + Cmα CLδe

    
`t xac − xcg xcg − xN P
= −CLα −CLδe + + CLα CLδe
c̄ c̄ c̄

`t xac − xN P
 (3.29)
= CLα CLδe +
c̄ c̄
`tN
= CLα CLδe ≈ −CLα Cmδe
c̄
where
`t xac − xN P
`tN = + (3.30)
c̄ c̄
is the distance between the tail aerodynamic center and the basic neutral point. Thus, the parameter
∆ is independent of the vehicle c.g. location, and is seen to be approximately equal to the product
−CLα Cmδe , so it will be positive for conventional (aft tail) configurations, and negative for canard
(forward tail) configurations.

An important derivative related to handling qualities is the control position gradient for trim, which
can be seen from the second of Eqs. (3.27) to be given by

dδe Cmα −Cmα
= ≈ (3.31)
dCL trim ∆ CLα Cmδe

It is seen from Eq. (3.31) that the control position gradient, which measures the sensitivity of trimmed
lift coefficient to control position, is negative for stable, aft tail configurations, and is approximately
proportional to the static margin. This equation can be used in flight tests to determine the location
of the basic neutral point. The value of the control position gradient is measured for several different
c.g. positions (achieved by varying the longitudinal distribution of the payload) and is then plotted
as a function of c.g. location. A best-fit straight line is then extrapolated to zero control position
gradient, which corresponds to the basic neutral point.

3.2.1 Longitudinal Maneuvers – the Pull-up

Another important criterion for vehicle handling qualities is the sensitivity of vehicle normal accel-
eration to control input. This can be analyzed by considering the vehicle in a steady pull-up. This
is a longitudinal maneuver in which the vehicle follows a curved flight path of constant radius R at
20 CHAPTER 3. STATIC LONGITUDINAL STABILITY AND CONTROL

Figure 3.2: Vehicle in a steady pull-up.

constant angle of attack, as sketched in Fig. 3.2. For this maneuver, the pitch rate q is constant,
and is given by
V
q= (3.32)
R
We define the dimensionless pitch rate
q c̄q
q̂ = 2V
= (3.33)
c̄
2V

and will need to estimate the additional stability derivatives

∂CL
CLq ≡ (3.34)
∂ q̂
and
∂Cm
Cmq ≡ (3.35)
∂ q̂

These derivatives characterize the sensitivity of vehicle lift and pitching moment to pitch rate. For
vehicles with tails (either aft or canard), the largest contribution to these derivatives comes from
the increment in tail lift due to the change in angle of attack of the tail arising from the rotation
rate. This change in angle of attack is
`t 2`t
∆αt = q= q̂ (3.36)
V c̄
and the resulting change in vehicle lift coefficient is
St ∂CLt ∂CLt
∆CL = η ∆αt = 2ηVH q̂ (3.37)
S ∂αt ∂αt
so
∂CLt
CLq = 2ηVH (3.38)
∂αt
3.2. STATIC LONGITUDINAL CONTROL 21

This increment in tail lift acts through the moment arm `t , so the corresponding estimate for the
tail contribution to pitch damping is

`t `t ∂CLt
Cmq = − CLq = −2η VH (3.39)
c̄ c̄ ∂αt

The fuselage and wing (especially if the wing is swept) also contribute to the vehicle pitch damping,
but it is difficult to develop simple formulas of general applicability, so these contributions will be
neglected here. Note that the derivative CLq will be positive for aft tail configurations (and negative
for canard configurations), but the pitch damping Cmq will be negative, regardless of whether the
tail is ahead or behind the vehicle center of gravity.

We analyze the motion at the point on the trajectory when the velocity vector is horizontal, so the
balance of forces acting at the vehicle c.g. is

V2 2mV 2
L−W =m = mV q = q̂ (3.40)
R c̄
This equation can be written as

 2mV 2
QS CLα (α + ∆α) + CLδe (δe + ∆δe ) + CLq q̂ − W = q̂ (3.41)
c̄
where α and δe are the angle of attack and elevator deflection for trim in the unaccelerated case,
and ∆α and ∆δe correspond to the increments in these angles due to the maneuver. If we introduce
the weight coefficient
W/S
CW ≡ (3.42)
Q
the dimensionless form of this equation can be written

CLα (α + ∆α) + CLδe (δe + ∆δe ) + CLq q̂ − CW = 2µq̂ (3.43)

where
2m
µ≡ (3.44)
ρSc̄
is the vehicle relative mass parameter , which depends on ρ, the local fluid (air) density. As a result
of this dependence on air density, the relative mass parameter is a function of flight altitude.

Subtracting the equilibrium values for the unaccelerated case

CLα α + CLδe δe − CW = 0 (3.45)

from Eq. (3.43) gives

CLα ∆α + CLδe ∆δe = 2µ − CLq q̂ (3.46)

Finally, if we introduce the normal acceleration parameter n such that L = nW , then the force
balance of Eq. (3.40) can be written in the dimensionless form

(n − 1)CW = 2µq̂ (3.47)

22 CHAPTER 3. STATIC LONGITUDINAL STABILITY AND CONTROL

which provides a direct relation between the normal acceleration and the pitch rate, so that the lift
equilibrium equation can be written
 
CLq
CLα ∆α + CLδe ∆δe = (n − 1)CW 1 − (3.48)
2µ

The pitching moment must also remain zero for equilibrium (since q̇ = 0), so
Cmα ∆α + Cmδe ∆δe + Cmq q̂ = 0 (3.49)
or
(n − 1)CW
Cmα ∆α + Cmδe ∆δe = −Cmq (3.50)
2µ

Equations (3.48) and (3.50) provide two equations that can be solved for the unknowns ∆α and ∆δe
to give
  
−(n − 1)CW CLq Cmq
∆α = 1− Cmδe + CLδe
∆ 2µ 2µ
   (3.51)
(n − 1)CW CLq Cmq
∆δe = 1− Cmα + CLα
∆ 2µ 2µ
where
∆ = −CLα Cmδe + Cmα CLδe (3.52)
is the same parameter as earlier (in Eq. (3.28)).

The control position derivative for normal acceleration is therefore given by

  
dδe CW CLq Cmq
= 1− Cmα + CLα (3.53)
dn ∆ 2µ 2µ
Using Eq. (3.20) to express the pitch stiffness in terms of the c.g. location, we have
  
dδe CW CLq  xcg xN P  Cmq
= 1− − + CLα (3.54)
dn ∆ 2µ c̄ c̄ 2µ
The c.g. location for which this derivative vanishes is called the basic maneuver point, and its
location, relative to the basic neutral point, is seen to be given by
Cm q
xN P xM P 2µ Cmq
− = C
≈ (3.55)
c̄ c̄ 1 − 2µL q 2µ

Since for all configurations the pitch damping Cmq < 0, the maneuver point is aft of the neutral
point. Also, since the vehicle relative mass parameter µ increases with altitude, the maneuver point
approaches the neutral point with increasing altitude. If Eq. (3.55) is used to eliminate the variable
xN P from Eq. (3.54), we have
 
dδe CW CLα CLq  xM P xcg 
=− 1− − (3.56)
dn ∆ 2µ c̄ c̄
where x
MP xcg 
− (3.57)
c̄ c̄
is called the maneuver margin.
3.3. CONTROL SURFACE HINGE MOMENTS 23

3.3 Control Surface Hinge Moments

Just as the control position gradient is related to the pitch stiffness of the vehicle when the controls
are fixed, the control force gradients are related to the pitch stiffness of the vehicle when the controls
are allowed to float free.

3.3.1 Control Surface Hinge Moments

Since elevator deflection corresponds to rotation about a hinge line, the forces required to cause
a specific control deflection are related to the aerodynamic moments about the hinge line. A free
control will float, in the static case, to the position at which the elevator hinge moment is zero:

He = 0.

The elevator hinge moment is usually expressed in terms of the hinge moment coefficient
He
Che = (3.58)
QSe c̄e
where the reference area Se and moment arm c̄e correspond to the planform area and mean chord
of the control surface aft of the hinge line. Assuming that the hinge moment is a linear function of
angle of attack, control deflection, etc., we write

Che = Che0 + Chα α + Chδe δe + Chδt δt (3.59)

In this equation, α is the angle of attack (from angle for zero vehicle lift), δe is the elevator deflection,
and δt is the deflection of the control tab (to be described in greater detail later).

The derivative Chα characterizes the hinge moment created by changes in angle of attack; it is
called the floating tendency, as the hinge moment generated by an increase in angle of attack
generally causes the control surface to float upward. The derivative Chδe characterizes the hinge
moment created by a deflection of the control (considered positive trailing edge down); it is called
the restoring tendency, as the nose-down hinge moment generated by a positive control deflection
tends to restore the control to its original position. The floating tendency in Eq. (3.59) is referred
to the vehicle angle of attack, and so it is related to the derivative based on tail angle of attack αt
by  
d
Chα = 1 − Chαt (3.60)
dα
which accounts for the effects of wing induced downwash at the tail. The aerodynamic forces
responsible for generating the hinge moments reflected in the floating and restoring tendencies are
sketched in Fig. 3.3. Only the shaded portion of the lift distribution in these figures acts on the
control surface and contributes to the hinge moment.

The angle at which the free elevator floats is determined by the fact that the hinge moment (and,
therefore, the hinge moment coefficient) must be zero

Che = 0 = Che0 + Chα α + Chδe δefree + Chδt δt

24 CHAPTER 3. STATIC LONGITUDINAL STABILITY AND CONTROL

(a) (b)

Figure 3.3: Schematic illustration of aerodynamic forces responsible for (a) floating and (b) restoring
tendencies of trailing edge control surfaces.

or
1
δefree = − (Che0 + Chα α + Chδt δt ) (3.61)
Chδe
The corresponding lift and moment coefficients are

CLfree = CLα α + CLδe δefree

(3.62)
Cmfree = Cm0 + Cmα α + Cmδe δefree

which, upon substituting from Eq. (3.61), can be written

 
CLδe Chα CLδe
CLfree = CLα 1 − α− (Che0 + Chδt δt )
CLα Chδe Chδe
  (3.63)
Cmδe Chα Cmδe
Cmfree = Cmα 1 − α + Cm0 − (Che0 + Chδt δt )
Cmα Chδe Chδe

Thus, if we denote the control free lift curve slope and pitch stiffness using primes, we see from the
above equations that
 
0 CLδe Chα
CL α = CLα 1 −
CLα Chδe
  (3.64)
Cmδe Chα
Cm 0α = Cmα 1 −
Cmα Chδe

Inspection of these equations shows that the lift curve slope is always reduced by freeing the controls,
and the pitch stiffness of a stable configuration is reduced in magnitude by freeing the controls for
an aft tail configuration, and increased in magnitude for a forward tail (canard) configuration (in
all cases assuming that the floating and restoring tendencies both are negative).

3.3.2 Control free Neutral Point

The c.g. location at which the control free pitch stiffness vanishes is called the control free neutral
point. The location of the control free neutral point x0N P can be determined by expressing the pitch
3.3. CONTROL SURFACE HINGE MOMENTS 25

stiffness in the second of Eqs. (3.64)

Cmδe Chα
Cm 0α = Cmα −
Chδe
as
x  
xN P 
cg Chα CLδe `t xac xcg
Cm 0α = − CLα + + −
c̄ c̄ Chδe c̄ c̄ c̄
x  
cg xN P  Chα St `t + xac − xN P xN P − xcg
= − CLα + η ae + (3.65)
c̄ c̄ Chδe S c̄ c̄
x  
cg xN P  CLδe Chα Chα ae
= − CLα − + ηVHN
c̄ c̄ Chδe Chδe

where ae = ∂CLt /∂δe is the elevator effectiveness and

 
`t xac xN P S t
VHN = + − (3.66)
c̄ c̄ c̄ S
is the tail volume ratio based on `tN , the distance between the tail aerodynamic center and the
basic neutral point, as defined in Eq. (3.30). The quantity in square brackets in the final version of
Eq. (3.65) is seen to be simply the control free vehicle lift curve slope CL 0α , so we have
x xN P  Chα ae
cg
Cm 0α = − CL 0α + ηVHN (3.67)
c̄ c̄ Chδe

Setting the control free pitch stiffness Cm 0α to zero gives the distance between the control free and
basic neutral points as
xN P x0 ae Chα
− N P = ηVHN (3.68)
c̄ c̄ CL 0α Chδe

Finally, if Eq. (3.68) is substituted back into Eq. (3.67) to eliminate the variable xN P , we have
 0 
0 xN P xcg
Cm α = − − CL 0α (3.69)
c̄ c̄
showing that the control free pitch stiffness is directly proportional to the control free static margin
 0 
xN P xcg
−
c̄ c̄

3.3.3 Trim Tabs

Trim tabs can be used by the pilot to trim the vehicle at zero control force for any desired speed. Trim
tabs are small control surfaces mounted at the trailing edges of primary control surfaces. A linkage
is provided that allows the pilot to set the angle of the trim tab, relative to the primary control
surface, in a way that is independent of the deflection of the primary control surface. Deflection of
the trim tab creates a hinge moment that causes the elevator to float at the angle desired for trim.
The geometry of a typical trim tab arrangement is shown in Fig. 3.4.
26 CHAPTER 3. STATIC LONGITUDINAL STABILITY AND CONTROL

(a) (b)

Figure 3.4: (a) Typical location of trim tab on horizontal control (elevator), and (b) schematic
illustration of aerodynamic forces responsible for hinge moment due to trim tab deflection.

Zero control force corresponds to zero hinge moment, or

Che = 0 = Che0 + Chα α + Chδe δe + Chδt δt
and the trim tab deflection that achieves this for arbitrary angle of attack and control deflection is
1
δt = − (Che0 + Chα α + Chδe δe ) (3.70)
Chδt
so the tab setting required for zero control force at trim is
1
δttrim = − (Che0 + Chα αtrim + Chδe δetrim ) (3.71)
Chδt
The values of αtrim and δetrim are given by Eqs. (3.27)
−CLδe Cm0 − Cmδe CLtrim
αtrim =
∆ (3.72)
CLα Cm0 + Cmα CLtrim
δetrim =
∆
Substituting these values into Eq. (3.71) gives the required trim tab setting as
 
1 Cm0 1
δttrim = − Che0 + (−Chα CLδe + Chδe CLα ) + (−Chα Cmδe + Chδe Cmα ) CLtrim
Chδt ∆ ∆
(3.73)
Note that the coefficient of CLtrim in this equation – which gives the sensitivity of the trim tab
setting to the trim lift coefficient – can be written as
   0 
dδt Chδe Chα Cmδe Chδe 0 Chδe xN P xcg
=− Cmα − =− Cm α = − − CL 0α (3.74)
dCL Chδt ∆ Chδe Chδt ∆ Chδt ∆ c̄ c̄
and Eq. (3.73) can be written
  0  
1 Cm0 Chδe 0 xN P xcg
δttrim = − Che0 + (−Chα CLδe + Chδe CLα ) + CL α − CLtrim
Chδt ∆ ∆ c̄ c̄
(3.75)
3.3. CONTROL SURFACE HINGE MOMENTS 27

Figure 3.5: Variation in trim tab setting as function of velocity for stable, aft tail vehicle.

Thus, the tab setting for trim is a linear function of trimmed lift coefficient whose slope is propor-
tional to the control free static margin. This variation is shown schematically for a conventional (aft
tail) configuration in Fig. 3.5.

3.3.4 Control Force for Trim

As mentioned earlier, the most important aspects of stability relating to handling qualities of the
vehicle are related to control forces. For longitudinal control, the control force F is related to the
elevator hinge moment He through a gearing constant G, so that

F = GHe (3.76)

This equation defines a positive control force as a pull , corresponding to the force required to balance
a positive (nose up) elevator hinge moment.1 The units of the gearing constant G are inverse length,
which can be interpreted as a mechanical advantage corresponding to radians of control deflection
per unit distance (foot) of control yoke displacement.

Expressing the hinge moment in terms of the corresponding dimensionless coefficient, we have

F = GSe c̄e QChe = GSe c̄e Q (Che0 + Chα α + Chδe δe + Chδt δt ) (3.77)

Since this equation is linear in tab deflection, the control force required for a tab setting other than
the trim value is
F = GSe c̄e QChδt (δt − δttrim ) (3.78)

1 It is important to be careful when reading other books; positive control force is sometimes defined as a push, in

which case there is a minus sign inserted on the right hand side of Eq.(3.76) and subsequently throughout the analysis.
28 CHAPTER 3. STATIC LONGITUDINAL STABILITY AND CONTROL

Figure 3.6: Typical variation in control force as function of vehicle velocity for stable configuration.

and, substituting the tab setting required for trim from Eq. (3.75), we have
   
Cm0 Chδe xcg − x0N P
F = GSe c̄e Q Chδt δt + Che0 + (−Chα CLδe + Chδe CLα ) + CL 0α CLtrim
∆ ∆ c̄
(3.79)
Finally, substituting
W/S
CLtrim = (3.80)
Q
for level flight with L = W , we have

Chδe CL 0α xcg − x0N P

 
F =GSe c̄e (W/S) +
∆ c̄
  (3.81)
Cm0 1
GSe c̄e Chδt δt + Che0 + (−Chα CLδe + Chδe CLα ) ρV 2
∆ 2

The dependence of control force on velocity described by this equation is sketched in Fig. 3.6. Note
from the equation that:

1. The control force F ∝ Se c̄e , i.e, is proportional to the cube of the size of the vehicle; control
forces grow rapidly with aircraft size, and large aircraft require powered (or power-assisted)
control systems.

2. The location of the c.g. (i.e., the control free static margin) affects only the constant term in
the equation.

3. The vehicle weight enters only in the ratio W/S.

4. The effect of trim tab deflection δt is to change the coefficient of the V 2 term, and hence
controls the intercept of the curve with the velocity axis.
3.3. CONTROL SURFACE HINGE MOMENTS 29

If we denote the velocity at which the control force is zero as Vtrim , then Eq. (3.81) gives
 
Cm0 1 2
GSe c̄e Chδt δt + Che0 + (−Chα CLδe + Chδe CLα ) ρV =
∆ 2 trim
(3.82)
Chδe CL 0α xcg − x0N P
 
− GSe c̄e (W/S)
∆ c̄
so
Chδe CL 0α
 
xcg − x0N P
1 − (V /Vtrim )2
 
F = GSe c̄e (W/S) (3.83)
∆ c̄
and
Chδe CL 0α
  
dF 2 xcg − x0N P
=− GSe c̄e (W/S) (3.84)
dV Vtrim Vtrim ∆ c̄
These last two equations, which also can be interpreted in terms of Fig. 3.6, show that:

1. For a given control free static margin (or c.g. position) the control force gradient decreases
with increasing flight velocity; and
2. At a given trim velocity, the control force gradient decreases as the c.g. is moved aft toward
the control free neutral point.

3.3.5 Control-force for Maneuver

Perhaps the single most important stability property of an aircraft, in terms of handling properties,
describes the control force required to perform a maneuver. This force must not be too small to
avoid over-stressing the airframe, nor too large to avoid making the pilot work too hard.

We will again consider the steady pull-up. The change in control force required to effect the maneuver
is
∆F = GSe c̄e Q∆Che (3.85)
where
∆Che = Chα ∆α + Chδe ∆δe + Chq q̂ (3.86)
where q̂ is the dimensionless pitch rate, as defined in Section 3.2.1. It was also seen in that section
that the dimensionless pitch rate for a pull-up could be related directly to the excess load factor
(n − 1), so, using Eq. (3.47), we have
(n − 1)CW
∆Che = Chα ∆α + Chδe ∆δe + Chq (3.87)
2µ
The derivative Chq arises from the change in hinge moment due to the change in tail angle of attack
arising from the pitch rate. Thus
2`t
∆Che = Chαt ∆αt = Chαt q̂ (3.88)
c̄
and
∂Che `t
Chq ≡ = 2 Chαt (3.89)
∂ q̂ c̄
30 CHAPTER 3. STATIC LONGITUDINAL STABILITY AND CONTROL

Now, we can use the solution for ∆δe from Eq. (3.51)
  
(n − 1)CW CLq Cmq
∆δe = 1− Cmα + CLα (3.90)
∆ 2µ 2µ
along with the lift coefficient equation, Eq. (3.48), which can be written
   
1 CLq
∆α = (n − 1)CW 1 − − CLδe ∆δe (3.91)
CLα 2µ
in the hinge moment equation to give
  
n−1 CLq ∆δe (n − 1)CW
∆Che = Chα 1− CW − CLδe + Chδe ∆δe + Chq (3.92)
CLα 2µ n−1 2µ
which can be rearranged into the form
CL 0α
  
∆Che CW CLq Chq ∆δe
= 1− Chα + CLα + Chδe (3.93)
n−1 CLα 2µ 2µ n−1 CLα
Finally, using Eq. (3.56) for ∆δe /(n − 1), the equation for the hinge moment increment can be
written
CW CL 0α Chδe
   
∆Che CLq xcg − xM P ∆ Chα Chq
= 1− + + (3.94)
n−1 ∆ 2µ c̄ CL 0α Chδe CLα 2µ − CLq

The control free maneuver point is defined as the c.g. location for which the control force gradient
(per g) (or, equivalently, the hinge moment coefficient gradient) vanishes. This is seen from Eq. (3.94)
to give  
xM P − x0M P ∆ Chα Chq
= + (3.95)
c̄ CL 0α Chδe CLα 2µ − CLq
Note that this quantity is positive for aft tail configurations, and negative for forward tail (canard)
configurations. Substitution of this expression back into Eq. (3.94) then gives
CW CL 0α Chδe
  
∆Che CLq xcg − x0M P
= 1− (3.96)
n−1 ∆ 2µ c̄

Finally, the control force gradient (per g) is

∂F ∆F ∆Che
= = GSe c̄e Q
∂n n−1 n−1
(3.97)
CW CL 0α Chδe
  
CLq xcg − x0M P
= GSe c̄e Q 1−
∆ 2µ c̄
or, since QCW = W/S,
CL 0α Chδe
  
∂F CLq xcg − x0M P
= GSe c̄e (W/S) 1− (3.98)
∂n ∆ 2µ c̄

Note that the control force (per g) gradient is

3.4. FORWARD AND AFT LIMITS OF C.G. POSITION 31

Figure 3.7: Allowable c.g. travel as imposed by limits on control force gradient (per g).

1. Directly proportional to the vehicle wing loading W/S;

2. Directly proportional to the cube of the linear size of the vehicle;
3. Directly proportional to the (control free) maneuver margin (x0M P − xcg )/c̄; and
4. Independent of airspeed.

The control force gradient should be neither too small nor too large. If the gradient is too small,
the vehicle will be overly sensitive to small control inputs and it will be too easy for the pilot to
over stress the airframe. At the same time, the control forces required for normal maneuvers must
not be larger than the pilot can supply (or so large that the pilot becomes unduly tired). The lower
and upper limits on control force gradient determine allowable rearward and forward limits on c.g.
travel, as sketched in Fig. 3.7. The values of these limits will depend on the vehicle mission; in
general the limits will be higher for transport aircraft, and lower for vehicles which require greater
maneuverability (such as military fighters or aerobatic aircraft).

3.4 Forward and Aft Limits of C.G. Position

The various control position and force gradients impose limits on the acceptable range of travel of
the vehicle center of gravity. These include (for most vehicles):

• Rearward limits:
1. The vehicle must be statically stable; i.e., the c.g. must be ahead of the basic and control
free neutral points.
2. The sensitivity of vehicle velocity to control position must not be too small; i.e., the c.g.
must be sufficiently far ahead of the basic neutral point.
3. The sensitivity of vehicle normal acceleration to control force must not be too small; i.e.,
the c.g. must be sufficiently far ahead of the control free neutral point.
32 BIBLIOGRAPHY

• Forward limits:

1. The vehicle must be trimmable at CLmax ; i.e., the c.g. must not be so far forward that
there is insufficient elevator power to trim the vehicle at maximum lift coefficient.
2. The sensitivity of vehicle normal acceleration to control force must not be too high; i.e.,
the c.g. must not be so far forward that excessive control force is required to perform
maneuvers for which the vehicle is intended.

Bibliography

[1] Robert C. Nelson, Aircraft Stability and Automatic Control, McGraw-Hill, Second edi-
tion, 1998.