[taildraggernut]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

Yes the propwash gives just enough elevator force to balance the AC keeping the nose up, however as an airplane control, it is NOT effective.

No the propwash allows you to make excessive pitch input due to increased effectiveness of the elevator and preventing the natural tendency of the aircraft to drop it's nose and recovering, this is why power on stalls give a greater chance of wing drop because you are able to hold the aircraft attitude beyond critical angle of attack.....it also answers this question of yours...

Why would a designer allow a pilot to take an aircraft someplace it cannot fly anyway?

because in this case if a designer didn't wan't to give you the ability to go beyond the flight regime he wouldn't have put an engine in and for that matter he might not have given you facility for 'any' control of the aircraft as it also gives you the chance to screw up, so why did the designer even bother with wings?

Originally Posted by Crumpp

It is one of the cautions pilots should be aware of in a power on stall and accidents have occurred as pilots did not realize they were stalled, experiencing a loss of control until impact with the ground.

it's amazing you can say this yet clearly understand none of why it is so.

http://www.langleyflyingschool.com/Pages/Stall.html

From your own source......whoever Langley flying schools are.

Describing a POWER OFF stall.

The most important lesson from this sequence of stall exercises is that the aircraft will stall at any speed and in any attitude—in all cases, a stall occurs when the critical angle of attack—usually 18°--is exceeded. The job of the pilot during the recovery is therefore quite simple: smoothly and steadily decrease the angle of attack with controlled, smooth, and steady, forward motion of the control column. Never snap or jerk the control column forward as this simply confuses the aircraft and excites your Instructor. Don't be a jerk! Always be slow, purposeful and smooth during your inputs to pitch the nose forward to decrease the angle of attack. Equally important, never give up excess pitch to a stall--the pitching forward or pushing forward of the control column should only progress to the point that the stall symptoms recede and disappear. This is important because we want to be effective in recovering from a stall in close proximity to the ground.

Now if as you suggest that during a power off stall the elevator has become completely ineffective how exactly is the pilot expected to use such purposeful and smooth recovery inputs? shouldn't it be the case the elevator input is now redundant according to your theory? you can only purposefully operate an effective control, if it is not effective then you may as well be moving a toilet plunger attached to the floor.

Originally Posted by Crumpp

LOL, you very conveniently emphasize only the facts that fit your world without considering the final conclusion of the RAE.

No I simply emphasised a FACT (thanks for recognising that) any convenience is coincidental.

Originally Posted by Crumpp

Yes it does describe the conditions a spin should result in!!

Thank you for recognizing that!!
However your conclusion is not correct.

How can it be?

When the slots were fully open the aircraft could be turned quite steadily until very near the stall. If the stick was then pulled back a little more the aircraft suddenly shuddered, and either tended to come out of the turn or dropped its wing further, oscillating meanwhile in pitch and roll and rapidly losing height ; the aircraft immediately unstalled if the stick was eased forward. Even in a very tight turn the stall was quite gentle, with no tendency for the aircraft to suddenly flick over on to its back and spin.

it describes clearly:

1. there is still elevator authority enough to take the aircraft beyond stall of the slatted portion of the wing.
2. the aircraft stalled despite having slats.......amazing.
3. a wing dropped......clearly the beginnings of the incipient stages of a spin.
4. slats failed completely to prevent entering into that.
5. the quote makes no suggestion of a continued pitch input to delay recovery, this leaves it open to speculation as to what would happen should the pilot not ease off on the stick.
6. given that the evidence has now proved there is enough elevator authority to take even the slated portion of the wing beyond critical angle of attack and maintain that condition...(or have you forgotten theres an engine giving you thrust which affects the elevator?) what is the phenomenon that prevent the 109's magic wings from behaving like any other plain wing once all of its slats usefullness has run out? are you really saying that a slatted wing can pitch infinitely without penalty? so a 109 can actually do a Pugachev's cobra?