Stability and Control characteristics of the Early Mark Spitfires

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by NZtyphoon

Thanks for contradicting yourself again Crumpp...

Good point!

[camber]

Originally Posted by IvanK

Oh How I thought I'd slipped the surly bonds of earth
I've danced and rolled and slipped and pulled and done a thousand things
I pulled once more .....Buffet flick ... oh no the lift has gone from my wings.

Many threads deserve an epic poem,
Very few get one.
Thank you IvanK.

[Robo.]

IvanK that was epic!

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

Ahh....

You can look at the slope of the Cm/CL curve.....

Ahhh, elevator oscillation graphs....


Ahhh, Abrupt pull up characteristics.....

Elevator angle / Acceleration / stick force graphs....

It is very cut and dry. No emotional involvement required.

Here is the stick travel requirement the Spitfire did not meet.....

You guys need a copy of the report?

I can look at your graphs all day, it doesn't change the fact that the same report from NACA gives avery different picture to yours, next time quote me in context, I was talking about the apparent need to push the stick forward in the turn, I had no problem accepting the stick 'travel'......I said I assumed nobody was 'making it up'.
Like I said to Doggles, if there was a case where the Spit needed to have the stick 'pushed' in the turn it would have been subject to when the CoG was in the unstable region, and this would have been a temporary condition subject to fuel burn.

Does anybody have a good Spitfire weight and balance schedule? I just can't find one.

[NZtyphoon]

Originally Posted by Robo.

IvanK that was epic!

+1 - Brilliant!

[ATAG_Snapper]

Originally Posted by Robo.

IvanK that was epic!

+1

Great way to start the day.

[Al Schlageter]

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

[robtek]

Originally Posted by NZtyphoon

So I guess that your comments




and those that you posted on the PN's are worthless to this discussion and not worth bothering with? I take it the NACA report on the Spitfire's desirable stall behaviour was wrong because according to you the PNs say otherwise? Thanks for contradicting yourself again Crumpp...

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.

[Crumpp]

You just mix the resulting explanations as you like.

That is the case.

Does not matter what the facts or that all of this is definable unlike anecodotes.

The bugtracker post is almost finished. I will submit it in the next day or so.

[Crumpp]

I can look at your graphs all day, it doesn't change the fact that the same report from NACA gives avery different picture to yours

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.