limit of trim = limit of travel?

wrote in message
...
On May 5, 5:55 pm, WingFlaps wrote:

Does the elevator lift force and stall angle reflect trim setting at
all?
Cheers

Probably to some rather minor degree. The government just demands
that the airplane behave in certain ways in various configurations and
maneuvers, so the designers have to build their airplanes to fit
within those specs. An elevator should never stall before the wing,
for example, or the whole machine could flip over onto its back. The
rising tail, rising because the stab/elevator stalled, would
experience an even higher AOA as it rose and things would get very
nasty. The certification guys want the nose to drop gently as the wing
stalls, which couldn't happen if the stab let go too soon. Some
airplanes (I.E. Ercoupe) had limited up-elevator to prevent wing stall
and therefore the stall/spin scenario that killed so many in the '40s
and '50s. The nose didn't drop because the wing stalled but because
the stab/elevator ran out of nose-up authority. It could easily have
been modified to get the stall. There was plenty of area there. Only
problem was that guys would get slow on final and pancake into the
ground and break their backs with compression fractures. Don't
necessarily need to stall to get killed.


Actually, the more powerfull tail was eventually added, as the Cadet, after
Mooney bought the type design rights and type certificate. IIRC, it was
then touted as a solution to the perceived shortcommings in pilot training,
in much the same way as the Tomahawk--which arrived a few years later. My
recollection is that sales were poor, and the Cadet is now all but
forgotten...

Peter