Talk:Relaxed stability

Confusing phrase

What does "fly very "flat" to the air as well" mean? Amcfreely 03:23, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Low angle of attack?? !jim 11:20, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I assume so. This article reads like a junior high student wrote it... I'll revisit it in the next few weeks with what I've learned in my aerodynamics courses, using several different sources. Hopefully that will clean it up. ericg ✈ 02:00, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Relaxed Static Stability

The F-16 article mentions the term relaxed static stability. Is that the same as relaxed stability? 70.252.96.143 (talk) 01:17, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Relaxed (static) stability is a concept that was embedded in the F16 design. It is tied to the aircraft response in the longitudinal axis of the aircraft. When the eigenvalues/poles of the aircraft are at the positive side of the complex plane we have an unstable system, relaxed stability should be defined against the flying qualities of the vessel and the aircraft poles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Raphael Calvo (talk • contribs) 00:45, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

What's the line between 'marginally stable' and 'relaxed stability'

How marginally stable does an aircraft have to be to be considered having "relaxed stability"? Does the P-39 Airacobra count? If constant vigilance is required of the pilot to maintain controlled flight does that count? Benjamin S. Kelsey evaluated a Spitfire Mark V and found it uncomfortably close to the margin of stability—does that count? Binksternet (talk) 19:43, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

high/low wing

High and low relative to what? Is the determining factor the location of wing relative to the center of gravity, or is the determining factor whether there is more sail area below/above the wing? (e.g., Would a plane be stable with a lightweight fuselage below the wing and a very low cross section counterweight mounted very high above the wing?) Could someone explain in slightly more detail how the sideslip/crosswind produces the feedback force in either case? Cesiumfrog (talk) 00:47, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

translational troubles ?

If this article has been written due to the Saab JAS 39 Gripen article, then "relaxed" is wrong word. Swedish developers and media has in Swedish used the word "instabil tyngdpunkt", which should be translated as "instabile point of gravity". If a physical body has an instabile point of gravity, means that the point of gravity moves down if the object moves, while a stabile point of gravity means that the point of gravity moves up if the object is moved. (an object can though be stabile in one direction and instabile in an other direction). If a pen is standing up on a table (or on whatever surface), will its point of gravity fall, except for the very short initial part of the move, and when the move causes the point of gravity to fall, then also the pen will fall. If the pen lies down, will its point of gravity only rise though (and after a moving the pen a bit up, gravity will force it down again). Perhaps there is a phenomenon that indeed is called "relaxed point of gravity", but I believe "instabile point of gravity" is what this is about. Boeing720 (talk) 01:36, 26 October 2016 (UTC)