Stability and Control characteristics of the Early Mark Spitfires

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by robtek

It is always boring when the old red vs blue flag is waved again.

You should remember that it is not about this trait that we are talking, but how to get there!

Willingly or inadvertently?

Of course it was done, as a last resort, even as flick maneuvres were explicitly forbidden in the pilots notes.

Also there are enough Spitfire fans which will point out every positive aspect possible.

Even in a very specific thread where by now at least 50% of the posts are slightly or completely off topic.

Even some of mine, sorry for that.

Flicks were not forbidden in the MkII notes

[robtek]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

Flicks were not forbidden in the MkII notes

Ok, in the Mk II notes "AIR PUBLICATION 1565 B" is written:

34. Flick manoeuvres.- The high-speed variety of flick-roll
or flick half-roll must ON NO ACCOUNT be done. It is liable to
cause severe strain, is clumsy and uncomfortable, and, being extremely
easy, has no training or other value of any kind. But a flick-roll
at low speed, and low r.p.m. done very gently, is a useful exercise
in timing and control at low speeds, and prevention of spin. It is
done by throttling well back, slowing down to about 140 m.p.h. A.S.I.,
and then very gently easing the stick back and, at the same time,
applying rudder. The nose will rise and yaw, and, as the control
angles are steadily increased, the aeroplane will suddenly start to
"auto-rotate", or flick. If the stick is kept back the aircraft
would then spin, but, as soon as the aeroplane approaches an even
keel (at about the moment when the wings are vertical) the stick is
put forward, and, as the flick ceases, the controls used to steady
the aeroplane until the roll is completed. If this is done too
late the aeroplane will continue to flick, until it does part of
a turn of a spin; if done too soon the flick will stop, and the
rest of the roll must be done by aileron control, in the normal way.

ON NO ACCOUNT CARRY OUT FLICK MANOEUVRES EXCEPT AT LOW SPEEDS,
but remember that low speed makes spinning more likely if the controls
are mishandled. Ample height should be allowed (see Stalling
and Spinning, paras. 17 and 19). other variations of loops, rolls
and so on may be carried out.

The word forbidden is missing and at slow speed they are allowed.

[Crumpp]

Exactly. And it was the only unstable oscillation with the Spitfire.

Did you read the NACA report? Do you need me to highlight the part about long period oscillation is not considered????

Do you understand that none of the Operating Note warnings or NACA measurements include anything about long period oscillation.

The RAE measured stick free oscillation. The NACA measured stick fixed.

In otherwords, the early mark Spitfire was not a hands off aircraft. Left to its own devices, it would eventually destroy itself without pilot input in conditions it was divergent.

[JtD]

You're repeating what I said yet you try to make it sound as if you disagree with me. Why?

[bongodriver]

In otherwords, the early mark Spitfire was not a hands off aircraft. Left to its own devices, it would eventually destroy itself without pilot input in conditions it was divergent.

'NO' mark of spitfire was 'hands off', nor for that matter was 'any' aircraft of the time, have you really raised a thread with all the guff you posted at the beginning just to prove the aircraft would 'eventually' 'if' left 'unchecked' destroy itself? what do you think pilots do? they control the aircraft.

Please tell me this has all been just a bad joke, I ended up banned for doing nothing different to anyone else on this thread.

[FS~Phat]

Gents time to all step away from the keyboard a bit and try and keep it from being personal. I dont want to have to lock the thread but I will if you cant all play nice!

And im not singling anyone out, your all as bad as one another in different ways. Which often happens with us passionate lot but please have a bit of humility and humour in your discussions as if you were a couple mates having a good old disagreement over a beer at the pub! If you can discuss with that kind of banter and respect it will be more fun for everyone. REMEMBER NO ONE IS WRONG OR RIGHT im 99% of these discussions, it is discussion of opinion. Facts can be interpreted differently or differing accounts can be made for just about every claim or published article ever made on the spit, the 109 and most of the era's aircraft. Please remember you are not automatically right just because you found something on the "interweb". None of us are experts in testing and we are presenting and interpreting data without the proper training to do so.

So have I made it clear we are all here to learn and discuss and not make things personal, and also try not to take everything personally???
Sometimes its hard I know but please give it go gents.

[macro]

My2 pennies.
I diidnt think any fighter was hans off at the time?
If i went to make a cuppa during flight i would most likely come back to a burning wreck no matter the plane i was flying.

We need structural damage modelling for all planes to stop unrealistic manouvers unger high g's. Is there bug tracker for this? Maybe a more sensitve elevator as this is well documented

Not going to comment on the rest as, to be frank, i dont understand it!

[Glider]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

In otherwords, the early mark Spitfire was not a hands off aircraft. Left to its own devices, it would eventually destroy itself without pilot input in conditions it was divergent.

Crumpp
Can you name any aircraft, of any type, in any airforce, that was hands free during WW2, ie wouldn't eventually destroy itself without pilot input in conditions it was divergent?

[Osprey]

V1 doodlebug

[41Sqn_Banks]

I don't know about 'hand off' but there were aircraft that couldn't even be flown 'feet off'. Must have been total crap planes ...