Johng,

Had I already found the text before my post I would have included it. However I found it after the fact. In fact I did not look it up until after my second post. This is not a witch hunt. Just looking for some second thoughts. You are right everything in arerodynamics is a fact, but not all of us know all the facts so we have opinions untill we know the facts.

I disagree with you as well. The question has all it needs for qualification. Regardless of the situation of flight when you apply "Load Factor" to the aircraft be it in vertical, inverted or other situations the C.G. position will still affect the airspeed at which the the wing reaches the critical AOA.

A vertical ballistic zero g path would not count because technically the wing in no longer flying or producing lift. It is at zero AOA provided it is symmetrical. The thrust source would be providing the lift. However when you pull the stick back now you are increasing the angle of attach. Centrifugal force is pulling at the point of C.G. and lift is pulling at the center of lift. If you have a forward C.G. the airplane is going to stall sooner than with an aft C.G. If the stall come sooner than it would make sense that the airspeed was higher.

I am not saying that speed is always the same. You pull hard enough you can stall at any speed.

I have some experience in full scale aerobatics. When I am by myself in an extra 300 and try to pull 6 g's at 130 kts it is no problem. When I throw a 250 lb pound guy up front and do the same thing I get an accelerated stall, regardless of the attitude of flight. This is why I need to add some speed to some manuvers to prevent accelertated stall problems.

Your thoughts....