exactly and you get very tired very quickly wrestling a stable aircraft around the sky.

the 29 is practically obsolete, the 29's inherent stability is why it no longer competes against modern fighters, and the 27 is fly-by-wire.

mainly because it gives the edge in a dogfight because of the increased maneverability, I'm fairly sure flying in cloud is not a high priority in fighter design.

Skimming this thread, it seem that the Spitfire was longitudinally unstable in a narrow technical sense, which primarily manifested itself as a perceived sensitivity to elevator input.

However, the aircraft had generally good handling properties and pilots on both sides actually regarded it as rather easy to fly. In fact, it was successfully used by low-hours pilots without problem, so clearly the technical instability had either very little or no impact on its real-world use.

Can this be represented in a game? No, not unless the game forces the use of full-size force feedback joysticks and prevents players using response curves.

We should note that words like "instability" can have a narrow technical meaning that is rather different from their normal everyday meaning. Crumpp would have avoided a lot of confusion, much of it his own, if he had made this distinction clear from the beginning.

Again You are mixing instability and relaxed stability.

instability would make the plane depart itself from its velocity vector

relaxed stability is implemented in the design but ctrl the plane trough a computer. And there is a raison to that.

Exemple :

Stable or FBW stable F16 Rookie pilot: 400Kts, pull 6G -> Black out -> the plane unload by itself. Pilot woke up 10 sec after safely

Taildraggernut design instable "NutShark Uber Killer 2121" aircraft with Tomcat pilot : 400kts, pull 6G, Black out -> the plane continue to tighten the turn untill what remain of Tomcat'brain is crushed. Pilot CTG 10 sec latter.

Note:
- The 27 does not have FBW implemented. Only latter vers have pitch ctrll.
- Good luck trying to teach NATO or US fighters pilots that the 29 is obsolete. You might have the same kill rate ratio as them in BFM ;)

Quoted for the absolute and glaring truth of the whole matter, but I would argue that confusion is perhaps what the aim of Crumpp's thread is all about, confuse everyone with science so they feel insecure about opposing your position and I think that is almost as glaringly obvious.

I'm not mixing anything.....but with a statement like yours I think you are mixing some volatile chemicals right now.

p.s. the Su-27 had a 'pitch only' fly by wire

http://www.milavia.net/aircraft/su-27/su-27.htm

:shock::shock:
Rgr that TDN, hve fun

Really guy??

Obviously you have not read much of the documentation in this thread or seen the Cm over Cl plots.

:rolleyes:

Feel free to point out where the manual states a fighter should be unstable.

Thank you.

OK, now you're back please answer my question, this is the third time.

What is the purpose of this thread, and what are you trying to prove?

Edit: Sheesh, the bloke mustn't read very much. He's gone again.

Ok, take time to very very carefully understand the point, it clearly shows how slight instability is beneficial for maneuverability....a desireable quality in a dogfighter yes? at no point have I said a fighter 'needs' to be unstable, if it is a ground pounder then stability is probably a desireable quality, if it is an interceptor then it is also probably good to be stable, but a pure air defence dogfighter would benefit greatly from being able to outmanouver an opponent.

Youre welcome.