Stability and Control characteristics of the Early Mark Spitfires

[BTB]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PBes98c8RSA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4Xbk...eature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kn3Rf...feature=relmfu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_J9N8...eature=related

[41Sqn_Banks]

Originally Posted by robtek

BTB, to be so condescending on such thin ice, ts ts ts.

150 mph, in a vertikal dive, with a GRADUALLY recovery, surely you'll reach a pretty high velocity before leveling out, accelerating all the time.

That is not a > 500 kg glider but a 3 ton machine with a not that much larger front surface.

Mass doesn't matter in vertical acceleration*. The speed doesn't instantly increase from below 150mph (second stall) to above x mph (aircraft breakup).

[41Sqn_Banks]

Again I don't get the discussion. All source state that spin recovery is pretty standard for Spitfire. The only "problem" is the light elevator/relative instability, which makes precise control more difficult than in other aircraft, but this is only a issue if the pilot is not used to the aircraft.
It's like driving a car with a sensitive clutch. You must be careful on the first day, but after a week it won't make a difference and you make use of the benefits.

[CaptainDoggles]

Originally Posted by 41Sqn_Banks

Mass doesn't matter in vertical acceleration*

That's only true in a vacuum. You have to account for density (among other things) when in the atmosphere.

[41Sqn_Banks]

Originally Posted by robtek

Probably because a controled dive with a defined level out altitude is different from a spin with a uncontroled loss of altitude and therefore the possible increased urgency to level out before hitting the ground.

Indeed, spinning is one of the most dangerous man oeuvres. Combined with the fact that there is little to no benefit from a deliberate spin it's the simplest solution to prohibit it.

Btw I don't get why topic has so many pages. Just read the Pilot's Notes, it's all there:

- exceptional/remarkable light elevator response even at high speed, which is a good thing and a bad thing (risk of high speed stall and blackout/break up the aircraft if pilot is not carefully)
- instability in turns (elevator becomes lighter in turn)
- stall warning/buffeting/buzz (best turn rate is achieved slightly before buffeting)

Now let's look at the current FM and find out if this is represented.

[robtek]

Originally Posted by 41Sqn_Banks

Indeed, spinning is one of the most dangerous man oeuvres. Combined with the fact that there is little to no benefit from a deliberate spin it's the simplest solution to prohibit it.

Btw I don't get why topic has so many pages. Just read the Pilot's Notes, it's all there:

- exceptional/remarkable light elevator response even at high speed, which is a good thing and a bad thing (risk of high speed stall and blackout/break up the aircraft if pilot is not carefully)
- instability in turns (elevator becomes lighter in turn)
- stall warning/buffeting/buzz (best turn rate is achieved slightly before buffeting)

Now let's look at the current FM and find out if this is represented.

Nice summarisation, that of course will be ignored by all who are looking for a dispute instead a solution.

[winny]

I see you're still using the MK V as your data source for a Mk I/II.

Lmao.

Anyway, this thread is supposed to be about early mark spitfires.
Can I please see some data for a MK I or II?

I'm bored by all this Mk V stuff. It's irrelevant to CLoD.

It doesn't matter what was prohibited and what wasn't. For every single time Crumpp has said that the pilot's notes forbid something I have been able to find a combat report or pilot account where the same manouvers were done deliberately by a pilot. Brian lane deliberately entered spins, deliberately stalled etc etc.

Here we go again with the pilots notes red herring..

Pilots notes are just someone's opinion. They are not proof that prohibited manouvers were never performed. They are just a set of reccomendations. Good pilot's overcame their machines limitations on both sides.