Stability and Control characteristics of the Early Mark Spitfires

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

Well so far, you all have been quoting a different report on a different subject.

It does not make any sense but I guess it keeps you happy and feeling like you are contributing.

I believe I was refering to the text boxed in NZtyphoons post which is the same NACA report you are refering to, it does feel good contributing to the facts.

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by robtek

You seem to forget that there is a very distinct difference between slow speed stall behavior, which is desirable, and high speed stall behaviour, which might result in a flick roll and is undesirable.

You just mix the resulting explanations as you like.

Look again and you will see they clearly talk about 'accelerated flight'...

[Glider]

Originally Posted by Al Schlageter

If the early Spits were so tail heavy then why did the MkVIII have 22.5lb added (weight and mount) to the tail? moment arm 175.5"

The very very early spits and I am talking about the first two bladed version, not the mk 1a as per BOB, were tail heavy and had weights in the nose. This ws soon countered as the additional equipment and natural growth common in almost any aircraft did away with the need.

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by Al Schlageter

bongo, 'Spitfire: The History' has some, but not for the MkI.

Thanks Al

[Crumpp]

Look again and you will see they clearly talk about 'accelerated flight'...

It is a completely different report.

However, if you read the paragraph right below the one you highlighted, it says exactly the same thing I pointed out from the NACA measurements on flying qualities AND what is repeated in several warning found in the early mark Spitfire Operating Notes.

You want me to highlight it for you or can you find it?

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by robtek

You seem to forget that there is a very distinct difference between slow speed stall behavior, which is desirable, and high speed stall behaviour, which might result in a flick roll and is undesirable.

You just mix the resulting explanations as you like.

So let me see if I understand you correctly..

When a spitfire experiences a high speed stall that results in a 'flick roll' it is undesirable..
When a Fw190 experiences a high speed stall that results in a 'flick roll' it is desirable..

Interesting..

Because we have all heard heard the stories of the German Fw190 pilots that used this technique to evade someone on their six, where they would intentionally cause a high speed stall (acc stall) that would cause the Fw190 to 'flick roll' onto its back to preform a fast split-s maneuver.. Which was a good (desirable) trait as far as the German Fw190 pilots were concerned..

So it appears that you have a double standard..

Spit does it it is a bad thing
Fw190 does it it is a good thing

Which IMHO sounds like you are the one who will just mix the resulting explanations as you like

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

It is a completely different report.

However, if you read the paragraph right below the one you highlighted, it says exactly the same thing I pointed out from the NACA measurements on flying qualities AND what is repeated in several warning found in the early mark Spitfire Operating Notes.

You want me to highlight it for you or can you find it?

No I can also see it, sounds like a real bind having to re center the stick by 3/4 inch or so, how did those RAF chaps ever manage to do it with all that vibration and shaking from the 'PRE-STALL' buffet giving ample warning?, they must have had to be real geniuses to remember to push the stick a 'bit'.

[bongodriver]

So it appears that you have a double standard..

yes but it is adopted and measured and defineable.....so it's ok.

[JtD]

I don't understand why folks are going nuts about the Spitfires longitudinal instability, it wasn't a problem for any pilot or how NACA put it "the well know long period oscillations have no correlation with the handling qualities of an airplane". Basically, it doesn't matter.

[Glider]

Originally Posted by JtD

I don't understand why folks are going nuts about the Spitfires longitudinal instability, it wasn't a problem for any pilot or how NACA put it "the well know long period oscillations have no correlation with the handling qualities of an airplane". Basically, it doesn't matter .

Slightly pithy but pretty much on the nose.