Stability and Control characteristics of the Early Mark Spitfires

[lane]

Originally Posted by taildraggernut

It's rather amusing how now that the OP's initial criticisms of the Spit have been crushed, this whole thread is now descending into criticising the Spit's spinning qualities, now even this theory is being brought into question I wonder what road we will go down next?

... ironic that this thread has been an attack on the Spitfires most redeeming features.

I agree, the case made is a real hack job.

[taildraggernut]

Originally Posted by TomcatViP

"to soon or to quickly" - see IVANK post just bellow

Look at page 17 IvanK. That would hve been a point of concern for anyone. In a combat situation, try to imagine yourself trying to understand the meaning of to soon or to quickly when your plane just departed knowing that somewhere around there is a Hun ready to put the pipper on you.

.

Presumably the main concern was the Hun that already had their pipper on you that caused tyou to spin.
Concern? it's actually reasonably typical behaviour for most aircraft, thats why you always get the opposite rudder in first in a 'standard' spin recovery.
This is just getting silly now, analysing the finite points of the Spitfire spin qualities, but I guess some of you have gone too far in the debate to back down.

p.s. nicely edited post once you someone posted some great evidence against your original comment.

[winny]

An account of a deliberate spin, in a Spitfire, during the BoB..

The pilot was later KIA.



Good job he was KIA because he did something that was forbidden! Tut tut...

[taildraggernut]

Originally Posted by winny

An account of a deliberate spin, in a Spitfire, during the BoB..

The pilot was later KIA.

Good job he was KIA because he did something that was forbidden! Tut tut...

Not only that but he did something 'forbiden' for 20,000ft and had the presence of mind to recover correctly despite thinking he had 6 huns with their 'pippers' on him....

[TomcatViP]

Originally Posted by taildraggernut

p.s. nicely edited post once you someone posted some great evidence against your original comment.

You know TDN, there is also plenty of people with good intentions in that world...

As I said alrdy this thread turned down to paranoia and maniacal
behavior.

Let's get out of that spin

[taildraggernut]

Originally Posted by TomcatViP

You know TDN, there is also plenty of people with good intentions in that world...

As I said alrdy this thread had turned down to paranoia and maniacal
behavior.

Let's get out of that spin

I would argue the original sentiment of this thread has nothing to do with 'good intention'

I haven't got any sense of paranoia here but maniacal behaviour is becoming very evident among the Spit critics who are taking this thread down some very desparate avenues.

Yes, lets get out of the Spin (with correct technique) and push for the much awaited 109 thread, this one has run it's course.

[Al Schlageter]

Originally Posted by TomcatViP

As I said alrdy this thread turned down to paranoia and maniacal
behavior.

Yes it started on Page 1 with Post #1.

[6S.Manu]

Sure! Spins there used as defensive manouvres: it was a tactic used by many pilots in many different planes...

Anyway it's clearly a defensive manouvre that sometimes saved the life of that pilot leaving your squad with one less unit in combat, resting with the enemy's decision to follow you.

It keep the pilot alive, but don't make you win the battles.

[taildraggernut]

Originally Posted by 6S.Manu

Sure! Spins there used as defensive manouvres: it was a tactic used by many pilots in many different planes...

Anyway it's clearly a defensive manouvre that sometimes saved the life of that pilot leaving your squad with one less unit in combat, resting with the enemy's decision to follow you.

It keep the pilot alive, but don't make you win the battles.

Aren't you missing the point?.......the idea was apparently the Spitfire was dangerous to spin, now if this post isn't clear evidence of the maniacal and bizarre avenues Spit critics are going.....

Serously, whats the difference between an aircraft that is out of combat because it evaded an opponent and an aircraft that is out of combat because it was shot down?.....that's right, the one that got away will fight again, just like the account winny posted.

[6S.Manu]

Originally Posted by NZtyphoon

Flying and fighting at 30,000 feet in a tropical environment in a heavily loaded Spitfire VC (trop) was very different to flying and fighting at 10-20,000 feet over SE England in a more lightly loaded Spitfire I or II.

IIRC the tropical version had a great disadvantage only at medium-low altitude (under 20k ft).

Sure that Vc was heavier (6900 lbs against 6200 lbs), but the Merlin 46 was more powerful than the Merlin XII. The V climbed better at those altitudes.

Of course the stall speed was higher.