Dafuq did I get banned for!!?:shock:

Welcome back bongo. I was afraid you had gotten the big vacation, as another did.
I am still waiting for the reason I got some demerit points (now gone).

Balance? Probably.

I love forum bans, they're like temporary martyrdom.. Except you get reincarnated a week later.. Funny.

This video has a very intersting part at 3:20, listen very carefully to what the late Mark Hanna says, I know MH434 is a Mk9, but that is no less unrelated than a Mk5, but the point is this is how people who have flown any marque speak about the Spitfire.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lgn7o...feature=g-vrec

Yep, it's a Mk IX, and the difficulties of the early marks were reduced to non-problems by i.e. artificially increasing the stick forces with the bob-weights since the Mk V.
Later marks didn't have the extreme low stick forces (elevator) anymore.
They were still 'desirable light', though.

only the Mk5 was ever fitted with a bob weight, the Mk9 was not.

Wow, the instability only existed in the early marks.

Not all Spitfires were Mk I, II, or early Va's.

However ALL Spitfires were fixed with the addition of bob-weights or other design changes to eliminate the instability.

It doesn't actually say must be recovered by 5000feet it says recovery must be initiated by 5000feet. Its minimum altitude guidance to the pilot implying that up to 5000feet might be required for full spin recovery.

Right Ivan....

Did you read the recovery characteristics??

Again, answer the question.

What is the pilot to do if recovery does not begin by 5000 feet?