Wing position related to stall likelihood?

[button]

It seems to me that the more forward the wing is, the more likely the plane is to enter stall if an abrupt pitch occurs, assuming the center of gravity allows for hands off upright and inverted flight in all cases. Is this true?

John

[Ollie]

"It seems to me that the more forward the wing is,--"

Wing stall is defined by angle of attack and maximum Cl.
http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/incline.html

What do you have mind of "forward the wing is?"

[button]

I am talking about the wing's position along the fuselage.

[Ollie]

The fuselage could be zero like a flying wing!
http://www.nurflugel.com/Nurflugel/nurflugel.html

How does your theory apply?
http://www.scaled.com/projects/freewing.html

[Sparky Paul]

It seems to me that the more forward the wing is, the more likely the plane is to enter stall if an abrupt pitch occurs, assuming the center of gravity allows for hands off upright and inverted flight in all cases. Is this true?

John
.
"...hands off upright and inverted flight..." is difficult to achieve. The trim for upright flight is wrong for inverted flight, some assistance in the form of slight elevator input is needed, inverted.
Long tail moments make for a reluctance to be abrupt in pitch, unless the c.g. is quite far aft.
There's duelling thoughts here.

[button]

Put another way: how does moving the wing either up or down along the fuselage affect a plane's stall likelihood, assuming the center of gravity is moved to achieve hands off upright and inverted flight (or best possible compromise) for each new position?

[Sparky Paul]

Put another way: how does moving the wing either up or down along the fuselage affect a plane's stall likelihood, assuming the center of gravity is moved to achieve hands off upright and inverted flight (or best possible compromise) for each new position?
.
"up or down along the fuselage" are more apples and oranges.
A wing stalls when alpha passes a certain value.
This is airspeed dependent, more than airplane configuration dependent.
When equal response upright and inverted is desired, the wing migrates to along the thrust-line/centerline of the fuselage, and the horizontal moves into line with the wing.
High wings move down, low wings move up.
Tail moments are modified more for control of lateral oscillations than pitching problems.
(The plane described is a pattern plane, which must have equal responses in both directions in pitch, and no tail wiggling laterally.)

[button]

Ah...I think I'm not describing what I mean clearly. By "up or down," I am referring to how the plane is designed in terms of the wing's aft or forward location along the fuselage. By building planes with various wing locations, assuming the wings are centered in the thrust line, can stall likelihood be affected?

[slipstick]

You're not taking the hint ;). Wings stall. The location of the wing doesn't affect whether the wing stalls or not. When the AoA is too high the wing will stall.

You could make the wing "more forward" by either reducing the length of the nose or increasing the tail moment (distance from wing to tail). The first of these will have no real effect on anything and the second has an effect on control authority as Paul says but no real effect on the wing's tendency to stall.

Steve

[Ollie]

slipstick and Paul,

Right on!

button,

Forget your theory about fuselage and wing position effects the stall. The wing stall is controlled by the wing AoA and only that.

The function of the wing is to do lift and depends AoA and airspeed. The fuselage functions are other than lift. In the case of tailless wings, all the functions of the whole aircraft are in the wing. In the case of the wingless body all the function of the aircraft are in the body. Thus, your theory doesn't apply.

[BMatthews]

Button. Assuming you've trimmed the CG to the same neutral balance point as indicated by the very little elevator trim needed for upright to inverted the model there will be no change to the way the model stalls. I'm not sure where you came up with this misconception but I suspect it's related to other factors if you experienced such an action. A very heavy fuslelage coupled with a long moment arm and a small tail would tend to have inertia and lower damping forces on it's side and could result in such a case.