Spit IIa

[Crumpp]

The spitfire had issues but then so does every aeroplane.

Sure, no aircraft is perfect but very few safe designs have unacceptable stability and control. It is a fact that the stability and control of the Spitfire was unacceptable, resulted in fatalities, and bob weights were installed. Those issues should be modeled as they very much effect the relative dog fighting capability of these aircraft.

The major point being made on the stall is the engineering tradeoff for that large amount of stall warning in the form of early and hard buffeting is a reduction in turn rate before Clmax is reached.

The pilots notes (MKI anyway) mention is made in the Accelerated (or high speed) stall that if not quickly corrected could lead to structural damage.

A spin by definition requires an accelerated stall.

Err yes, 36 years professional flying,

How many different kinds of aircraft? Try to think of one that repeats the warnings found in the Spitfire Mk I Operating Notes. Those warnings are all characteristics of unacceptable stick fixed longitudinal stability.

Just because something doesn't comply to a standard doesn't mean it lacks merit, it just means it doesn't comply to a standard.

In this case the standard is a little higher. It is not about comfort but rather what will cause the death of a pilot and what will not.

The longitudinal stick fixed stability of the Spitfire was unacceptable because it could kill the pilot. In fact, it did kill and bob weights were installed on the aircraft in response.

[RAF74_Winger]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

A spin by definition requires an accelerated stall.

No, just a stall.

W.

[TomcatViP]

Ok guys let's not make this an other "experts" issue.

Both of you are talented with no doubts.

Facts is that raising any suspicion abt the flying qualities of the SPit enclosed you immediately in a defensive posture thx to the grands Spitfire's popes tht cruise there and elsewhere on every WWII's sims forums

Reading Crumps I see that he tried only to lift the case on the difficulty to perform well in the spit in slow tight turns. There shld be a far more un-forgiving ctrls pattern for doing such in the sim just like what we have with the hurri (the hurri need cte monitoring of the slip needle).

Remind that there was some extensive washout on that wings to give artificial aileron authority near the stall (what the 109 and the hurri did achieved without any washout). This is a direct layoff of the EW (ellip. wing), the thin airfoil with a max camber point put far frwd).

I think it would be more interesting to discuss the doc IvanK has posted earlier and comments all the data and small info we can gather here.

For example the stick force for the 109 is nearly the same of that of the spit mkV at 400mph !!! That's by itself is a revolution in ll2 world !!!

[Bussard_1]

Whether the Spit is unacceptably balanced was not the issue, was it?

The discussion WAS; are aircraft in sim over/under powered, which developed into a turning discussion.

And then,..?

[IvanK]

"A spin by definition requires an accelerated stall. "

So are you saying you cant spin from a 1G stall entry ?

[TomcatViP]

Originally Posted by Bussard_1

Whether the Spit is unacceptably balanced was not the issue, was it?

The discussion WAS; are aircraft in sim over/under powered, which developed into a turning discussion.

And then,..?

Bussard the way the SPit pop out in the skies each time it zoom up makes any comments regarding the boost and whatever useless.

Let them fix the drag of the Thing and then we will see what the Merlin has wrong (although as a Hurri pilot I don't see the issue)

[TomcatViP]

Originally Posted by IvanK

type with neutral stability (and 50+ degrees Alpha and controllable capability) and the ability to fly in both FBW and basic manual modes.

Pffff that's such a commonplace... [/EnvyMode=OFF]

[IvanK]

So we are all reading from the same page, here are the relevant bits from both the Spit MK I and Spit MKV pilots notes. (The Spit MKII section is pretty much word for word whats in the MKV manual)

SPIT MKI



SPIT MKI ON FLICK MANOEUVRES


Warnings on the dangers of high speed flick manoeuvers but no real dramas on Lower speed flick manoeuvres, makes sense as no chance of real overstress or excedence of rolling G etc. As you can see pilots are being encouraged to experiment with these

The section in the Spit MKV manual on Stalling and Spinning.

[TomcatViP]

intersting to note for the neg G cut-out debate : in the Rolling paragraph of teh Aerobatic section : "The roll being barrelled just enough to keep the engine running throughout"

Def even with an MkV, G as to be kept positive to say the least

OOhh and pls do take attention to the cruise speed

[Crumpp]

A spin may be defined as an aggravated stall that
results in what is termed “autorotation” wherein the
airplane follows a downward corkscrew path.

http://www.alphatrainer.com/handouts.../pg_4-12-2.pdf

A spin is defined as an aggravated stall that results in autorotation with a corkscrew path downward.

http://www.mountainflying.com/Pages/...revisited.html

A spin may be defined as an aggravated stall that results in what is termed “autorotation” wherein the airplane follows a downward corkscrew path

http://www.pilotoutlook.com/airplane_flying/spin

Can you force an aircraft to spin by control input from a 1G level stalled condition?

Sure!!

What are you doing with your accelerations to the aircraft when you input those controls?

Think about it.