It is not my confusion, Taildragger.

Like I said, it is not the first time that terminology has been explained in this thread.

He is right, many modern fighters do use automatic slats. What is the issue??

Look Buzzsaw, the act of spin proofing an airplane by the application of anti-spin devices builds a spin resistant design. Are you confused by the terminology??

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpos...2&postcount=67

That was page 6 and you never answered my question on why you leaped in spouting the same exact thing I said!!

I asked you in your first post Buzzsaw to clarify what you think I exaggerated which is your claim and to point out exactly your point of contention.

I have asked you several times. Do that and we will clear it up.

There won't be any conflict just be honest and let's get the facts out.

It is pretty obvious most posters in this thread do not know the terms and confused them.

Do you actually read the posts people respond to you with? It is apparent you have great difficulty grasping the context of many of them, so I will need to explain my perfectly clear and highlighted in bold quote was saying the elevators remain effective in the stall, did you get that? The elevators remain effective in the stall......now if you have effective elevators you have the ability to pitch beyond critical angle of attack, now are going to stick with the theory that the 109 had some form of pitch inhibition?

Ok taildragger,

Do you understand that the basic effect of the slats is to add energy to the boundary layer and delay seperation?

On the lift polar, the slats have the effect of extending the lift polar increasing both maximum co-efficient of lift tied to that, available angle of attack. This is a completely different effect from increasing camber, btw.

The wing stalls at a higher angle of attack with the slats deployed.

The plain airfoil cannot reach that same angle of attack and is stalled while the tips continue to fly. When the plain airfoil, which makes up the majority of the Bf-109's wing is stalled, the pilot does not have enough control to raise the nose and stall the tips which do gain the benefit of the slats.

Study the diagram below and explain to me how the plain airfoil can continue to fly and reach the slated portion CLmax??

Under normal operating conditions

Now is pulling hard turns in combat 'normal operating conditions'?

OK....:confused:

Come on and let's do some stalls.

You try to keep the nose up with elevator!!!

:-P

You understand the aerodynamic center in a normal stable airplane is behind the Center of Gravity. When our wing produces less lift, the reduction in aerodynamic force on the aerodynamic center causes the nose to drop. It is not hard to size the elevator appropriately. In fact, the forward CG limit is defined by our inability to raise the nose at landing velocity (not Vref, flare).

No, you explain to me what the phenomenon is that prevents the still effective elevator from allowing you to pitch beyond the slatted portion of the wings maximum angle of attack.

:confused:

For a fighter, yes!!

Read the RAE report, guy!

I have explained three times already. It just does not sink in!