Quote:
|
Spit was pretty benign too despite the stability,
|
Baloney.
I suppose the NACA, the RAE, the Operating Notes, and Gates are all wrong.
You however must be correct. You can submitt your Dad's logbook as proof.
Quote:
|
Spitfire had neutral stability in pitch with light elevators, this means the pilot could hold it in a high rate of turn with little more than 2 fingers
|
Sure, an experienced pilot could do it who had lots of practice. In fact, in the Spitfire Mk V when the stability and control was addressed with bob-weights, there were pilots who did not like it.
However, the very light stick forces combined with very small amount of stick travel required to use up the available angle of attack would make for an aircraft that is difficult to precisely manoeuver. This is why the POH advises the pilot to brace himself against the cockpit. Small stick movements make for large aceleration changes in the Spitfire.
The stick force imbalance between the longitudinal and lateral axis contributes to the slow rate of roll the pilot is able to apply at high speed. He is fighting a very sensitive elevator with high lateral control pressure. It makes for an aircraft that is difficult to change the direction of the lift axis.
The RAE had no measureable standards for stability and control. It was all based on opinion. However, when the early marque Spitfire was subjected to measureable and definative standards, it was unacceptable.
Who cares if a pilot cruising along with 2 fingers on the stick in the pattern felt it was "easy to fly".
The stability and control of the design effected its ability as a dogfighter and gun platform as noted by the NACA, Operating Notes, and every measurable standard.