Quote:
|
The report alludes to "careful" flying. Does that mean "not careful" flying in the other charts.
|
Good questions.
No, these where done with "careful flying". If you read the report, they were done with force measurement equipment hooked to the controls.
The pilot could move the stick but when he let go, the equipment held it fast so the forces could be measured.
He could move the stick if needed to keep the accelerations within safe limits.
So, the controls in the test are done with about as careful flying as you can get. Most Spitfire pilot did not have a force gauge holding their controls fixed.
Quote:
|
Yet it does not say that is was dangerous flying quality
|
It is dangerous under conditions the pilot can overload the airframe. That is why you see the incidence of in-flight structural failure's and the warnings in the Operating Notes.
It is dangerous when you need to shoot accurately and it is dangerous when you need to make an abrupt maneuver to avoid and enemy attack.
Yes, it can be controlled by the pilot and mitigated by his skill level. It requires such input.
You have hit upon the entire reason the Air Ministry did not have stability and control standards outside of pilot opinion.
The British were major pioneers in stability and control in the beginning but kind of floundered after World War I.