Stability and Control characteristics of the Early Mark Spitfires

[taildraggernut]

Originally Posted by CaptainDoggles

I think you will find there are just as many 'thugs' on the Allied side of things, who get hot under the collar when there's the potential that the Spitfire might not be the aircraft equivalent of Zeus himself.

i think you will find it's the total closed mindedness of people like Crumpp who inflame things, every time he gets nailed with an awkward question he vanishes and then you and some others jump in and start some kind of riot with all the 'please stay on topic bla blah', why is it when I've asked Crumpp all these questions I end up in a debate with you?

[taildraggernut]

Well for example the Hurricane, by all accounts, was a very stable gun platform. I don't think you'll find anyone disputing this. That could maybe be classed as "normal".

The Hurricane is described as longitudinally unstable in the pilot's notes.

[CaptainDoggles]

Originally Posted by taildraggernut

i think you will find it's the total closed mindedness of people like Crumpp who inflame things, every time he gets nailed with an awkward question he vanishes and then you and some others jump in and start some kind of riot with all the 'please stay on topic bla blah', why is it when I've asked Crumpp all these questions I end up in a debate with you?

If you don't want other people jumping in, then take it to PM. This is a public forum, not a dueling arena.

I furthermore don't think that wanting to stay on topic is "starting a riot". This thread is cluttered enough as is, and I hope the moderators come and remove some of the clutter.

[taildraggernut]

Originally Posted by CaptainDoggles

If you don't want other people jumping in, then take it to PM. This is a public forum, not a dueling arena.

I furthermore don't think that wanting to stay on topic is "starting a riot". This thread is cluttered enough as is, and I hope the moderators come and remove some of the clutter.

Ah pseodo-righteousness, yes it's a public forum, I asked Crumpp some questions on his claims, I see no need to go to PM for that.

I have asked nothing of Crumpp that is off topic, I merely want some answers to questions on his topic, so please kindly reffrain from speaking to me and I won't bother you, yes I have a feeling the Mods will be getting plenty of requests for clean ups and complaints about users, it seems to be the MO with Crumpps thugs.

[NZtyphoon]

Originally Posted by CaptainDoggles

If you don't want other people jumping in, then take it to PM. This is a public forum, not a dueling arena.

I furthermore don't think that wanting to stay on topic is "starting a riot". This thread is cluttered enough as is, and I hope the moderators come and remove some of the clutter.

You do realise that Crumpp has made lots of assertions in his first posting which do, in fact, make them part of this thread and a matter for legitimate debate? His claims about the so-called lack of stability and control standards for all countries apart from the good ol US of A and Germany are ridiculous and call into question his neutrality in this thread.

As for the Spitfire - of course it wasn't perfect, and I have never tried to make out that it was; however, the NACA report makes it quite clear that there was some doubt about the correct cg position as measured by NACA, and that should be sufficient reason to question its conclusions.

Also, as a fighter, it was in good in good company:





most pilots reported that the F8F was an excellent aircraft to fly and fight in, yet there was a certain amount of longitudinal instability. It would seem that a well designed fighter could exhibit some longitudinal instability as long as it could be controlled.