11:18 PM
@jamesqf I am, but the plane isn't. My question is about the aerodynamics of controls, and I think I must have asked it very poorly because the responses are about pilotage.
@Jpe61 I don't understand this comment. The question is about the structural mechanisms which permit a plane to skid through a vertical body-frame acceleration. There is no requirement for two controls here, similar to how a plane doesn't have to have two controls to turn. There are many R/C planes which have only a rudder but no ailerons.
@CharlesBretana Centripetal acceleration is not a fictitious force, and is a misnomer to call centrifugal force fictitious, as it is a very real force in the body-frame. Centrifugal force is what leads to G-lock, which can and has killed people. It is indeed real, even if it is not perceived in the inertial frame.
@CharlesBretana This is incorrect. Angular rates can only be generated by torques, which are forces applied at some distance from the fulcrum. The vertical force can change without a pitching torque, as is evidenced by rotorcraft.
Unlike rotorcraft, the airplane airframe has certain properties which make it point in the direction of flight. The question I have was about the characteristics which make it align itself with its vertical motion.
@RobertDiGiovanni Yes! Exactly this. The elevator generates a force acting on a lever arm. This force is actually in the opposite direction of the pitching arc. Without a stabilizing reaction torque, the plane would increasingly accelerate around its lateral axis. I think the wings are providing that reaction torque, but I thought maybe someone here can confirm.
I'm also interested in the design which goes into the tail, and to understand if the A/C designer cares in the slightest bit about this effect, since it might be automatically solved by any sane set of wings.