Can something like an Airbus A320 or a Boeing 737 be flown at all, in the absence of the horizontal and vertical tail surfaces? Not just failure of the control surfaces, but removal of the tail.
Let’s assume the least-worst scenario:
Pilots of the highest possible skill level with experience of a wide range of emergency scenarios
Everything else in the plane being fully functional including automatic systems for maintaining stability
Optimal flying conditions with perfect visibility and no turbulence
Removal of the tail surfaces happens in the least violent and least-disruptive way and results in no structural weakness (let’s just say a powerful wizard just causes the tail surfaces to atrophy away to nothing over the course of a minute or something)
Is the plane immediately doomed? Could it still land with some meaningful chance of survival if this happened when it was already lined up to start final descent (so no major turns needed)? Could it survive if it needed to make any kind of turns?
I’m neither a pilot nor an aeronautical engineer, but I think it’s safe to assume that the surfaces of an airplane’s tail are there for a reason. I believe they provide stability and maneuverability, allowing the plane to fly smoothly. If the tail suddenly disappeared, I think even an experienced pilot would have a hard time keeping the plane flying straight and smoothly. Could it be done? Perhaps. Could it then be landed safely? I’m guessing it would be very difficult, if not impossible.
The instant the horizontal tail disappears the airplane noses over uncontrollably into an outside loop. That’s even if we skip the effect of losing the weight; that’s just the effect of losing the aerodynamic forces it provides.
The instant the vertical tail disappears, a swept wing airliner will try to swap ends and fly ass-first. It won’t get very far into that swap /, maybe 20 degrees before it also starts rolling over on its back. By the time it gets 90 degrees to the airflow it’ll be coming apart everywhere. Like the horizontal tail case, that’s even if we skip the effect of losing the weight; that’s just the effect of losing the aerodynamic forces it provides.
Utterly totally unstable and uncontrollable. “The back fell off” is just as fatal to airplanes as “the front fell off” is to ships.
American Airlines 587 basically had the vertical stabilizer come off shortly after takeoff due to aerodynamic loads stemming from “unnecessary and excessive rudder inputs” by the first officer — not too far off from what you’re describing. The crew did not recover control, and the plane crashed within about 15 seconds (starting from low altitude, admittedly).
The one caveat is that the plane was already in a sideslip when the vertical stabilizer separated, due to wave turbulence and the aggressive maneuvering in response. In other words (I think), it had a head start on “swapping its ends” as described by @LSLGuy.
I remember seeing a movie made aboard a Wright Flyer in Europe around 1908 or so when the Wright brothers were doing a demonstration tour. The lecturer says “notice how the horizon goes up and down…” The Wright configuration with the horizontal stabilizer in front was dynamically unstable requiring constant adjustment, while the rear stabilizer configuration was self-stabilizing, just as arrows have the feathers on the back.
From what I learned 40 years ago… Plus I assume, a low-wing aircraft has the center of gravity of the hypothetically tailless aircraft above the wing centerline. Any tendency of the wing to turn (pitch) the body would be aggravated, if center of lift is not directly below the center of gravity, the CoG would keep going forward or back making the craft want to flip as LSL points out. The tail (Stabilizer) is what makes the aircraft not pitch up or down in this situation, and the flaps on it help fine-tune this control.
Similarly any imbalance left-to-right will have the same effect, turning the aircraft. The rudder, like the feathers on an arrow, is what keeps it on the straight and narrow.
When the flagship Minneapolis was struck by two torpedoes, New Orleans, next astern, was forced to sheer away to avoid collision, and ran into the track of a torpedo, which detonated the ship’s forward magazines and gasoline tanks. This explosion severed 150 ft (46 m) of her bow just forward of turret number two.
The crew was able to temporarily repair the damage and the ship sailed backwards to the nearest harbor for better repairs and then it sailed backwards across the Pacific for permanent repairs.
I saw this happen to an RC plane years ago. It was flying straight and level then suddenly went nose down and buried itself about a foot in the ground. It was so fast I didn’t really know what happened until the tail section came fluttering down a few seconds later.