I’m coming into this thread a little late, unfortunately, and I’d like to clarify some of the confusion in terminology that I’ve noticed.
But, progressively, as a duel wears on and E is exhausted as it is converted to angles there's a point it becomes a pure stallfight, then there is no E to manage, you no longer have the E needed to create angles alone.
Firstly, the terminology you are using in this quote is misleading. When you say “there's a point it becomes a pure stallfight, then there is no E to manage” there are two issues with that statement, the first is that there is never “no E to manage” and I’ll explain that later, the second is your interpretation of the term a “pure stallfight”. The reason is that any manoeuvring close to the edge of an accelerated stall can be referred to as stall fighting, it is a fairly explicit term, if you are riding the edge of the stall, regardless of your speed or energy state, you are stall fighting. So, stall fighting can begin soon after an aircraft’s speed falls below corner velocity when the pilot can hold it on the edge of the stall without blacking out, and continue until the aircraft is at ground level and at the lowest speed at which it can sustain a level turn.
Any true stallfight I've ever seen the noses are so heavy from E deprivation that neither plane can pull its nose up more than a few degrees off the horizon making it almost purely horizontal.
Again, it is possible to stall fight once an aircraft gets below corner velocity, and for most aircraft that still means relatively high speed and high energy. However, even when some aircraft are much slower than that, at the low energy end of a "true stallfight" where they should be maintaining their best sustained turn, they often still have enough energy to pull into the vertical and either loop (generally not tactically sound) or at least execute a high yo-yo, a maneuver that can clinch that type of fight. You seem to be applying the term "true stallfight" to an aircraft on the back of the power curve, at a speed below the best sustained turn rate, a place good pilots avoid like the plague. It isn’t angles fighting, because turn rate is seriously degraded and it isn’t energy fighting. Once you are on the back of the power curve, you are already beyond the fairly wide region in the envelope where stall fighting is possible.
It's almost like you are treating Angles fight and Stall fight as if they are synonymous. I just leafed through Shaw's, they don't sound or look synonymous to me...
I’m not sure how it is possible to conclude that a stall fight “don’t sound or look synonymous” with angles fighting in Shaw's book, particularly when he doesn't refer to stall fighting? Do you know why he doesn’t?
It can be said that anyone stall fighting is, at least during the time that they are riding the stall, in an angles fight, because in order to be on the edge of the stall and thus stall fighting, they will actually be maximising their turn rate at the cost of high negative Ps and energy depletion… Thus angles fighting. One alternative would be to ease back from the stall, turn at a slightly lower rate, and use less energy, and therefore, at least for as long as that situation persists, be energy fighting. However, it isn’t that simple, it is also possible for both aircraft in an engagement to be stall fighting, while one is flying an angles fight, the other an energy fight. Even though they are both staying on the edge of the stall the whole time, it is possible for one pilot to make decisive energy gains. This is an often misunderstood truth that causes some confusion with pilots who don’t understand how to manage their energy in a stall fight.
Hope that helps.
Badboy
