Here is an interesting 1974 NASA report on testing a T-Tailed 733-290 like configuration, which I find even nicer than the 733-290. I believe it’s the same model as this one :
[ATTACH]617871[/ATTACH]
here is the model scale plan extracted from the report:
[ATTACH]617872[/ATTACH]
As noted by Skybolt before in post #224, T-tail was tested for the 733 before, being rejected because of deep-stall problem, But this was re-investigated later after the end of SST program to see if CCV would solve the problem , here an interesting extract:
The present study is part of an overall effort by the NASA to provide the technology base for the development of advanced supersonic vehicles. The configuration concept which is the subject of this paper is a derivative of one studied in the National SST (supersonic transport) program (references 1 and 2) and traces its ancestry to the SCAT 16 configuration of the SCAT
(supersonic commercial air transport) studies (reference 3). As studied in the SST program, the concept exhibited one of the highest ratios of payload to gross weight of all those submitted for evaluation.
The dominant feature of the configuration is its non-integrated, variable-sweep wing. The variable-sweep feature was utilized to provide high
levels of low-speed lift, good subsonic flight efficiency, and good supersonic
cruise efficiency with a relatively small, highly loaded wing which would
involve less structural design uncertainty than would the lightly loaded, large wings of competing concepts.
The primary reason for abandoning the non-integrated, variable-sweep concept during its development was a conflict between longitudinal stability
criteria of that time, and effects of the engine exhaust on the horizontal tail. Placement of the horizontal tail in a high, or T-tail, position would have eliminated adverse thermal and acoustic effects of the jet on the tail and would have prevented a venturi-like suck-down of the horizontal tail as the exhaust jet streamed between it and the ground during takeoff rotation, both of which were problems for a low-tail configuration.
However, a T-tail was generally known to produce a deep-stall problem as the tail dropped into the wake of the stalled wing and became ineffective. Because "stick pusher"
or attitude-limiting systems, which are dependent upon attitude and pitch- rate sensing, were not then considered permissible in commercial aircraft, the contractor conducting the SST study ultimately took the alternate route of integrating the wing and horizontal tail, and suspending the engine nacelles from the latter, before abandoning the variable-sweep approach altogether. Since that time, developments in stability criteria and in aero- electronic technology and an increased emphasis on CCV (control-configured vehicles) have opened the path to serious study of a T-tail solution of the problems of the variable-sweep SST.
