Stability and Control characteristics of the Early Mark Spitfires

[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.