In point of fact, corner velocity is the lowest speed at which the maximum allowable Gs can be pulled. It has nothing at all to do with "sustaining" the Gs. WWII prop fighters did not have enough thrust to sustain a max-G turn without descending, nor did the Korean or AFAIK Vietnam era jet fighters.
How can we find the minimum airspeed needed to pull max-Gs? The speed at which an airplane will stall under a specific G-load is the accelerated stall speed. The accelerated stall speed of an airplane in a given configuration can be derived by multiplying the 1g stall speed by the square root of the number of Gs.
For instance, take an airplane with known to stall in clean configuration at 100mph IAS, and which is structurally limited to 8gs. The square root of 8 being 2.83, that means the accelerated stall speed for that aircraft *will* be 283 mph IAS, in *clean* configuration. However, the corner speed for the P-51 is usually quoted not in clean configuration, but with one notch of flaps deployed, which will increase lift and lower corner velocity somewhat to...around the same 270mph IAS that has been known for 60 some odd years. Rather anticlimactic outcome, aye?
Pilot resistance to G-forces plays a heavy role in air combat, especially without G-suits, so just for sh*ts and giggles we'll work out the 6g accelerated stall speed, which turns out to be 245 mph IAS.
For further sh*ts and giggles, let us say that the airplane is at a higher gross weight than the, I don't know, 9,611 lbs. usually quoted in performance reports for this aircraft. Let us say that it is loaded heavily enough to raise the 1g stall speed to 105 mph. Through the "magic" of physics and mathematics, we find that the 8g accelerated stall speed of the aircraft has now become 297mph IAS. In fact, lets do calculate for 6 and 4 gs using this heavier weight:
8g accelerated stall-297mph IAS
6g accelerated stall-257mph IAS
4g accelerated stall-210mph IAS
For additional sh*ts and giggles, we will look at an airplane known to stall in clean configuration at 127mph IAS:
8g accelerated stall-359mph IAS
6g accelerated stall-311mph IAS
4g accelerated stall-254mph IAS
Now note, these figures are
not even close. In fact, the former aircraft has 8gs of lift available at a speed lower than than the 6g stall speed of the latter aircraft! These figures make it very likely that any "out-turning" of the former on the part of the latter has alot to do with the geometry of ACM and skilled piloting and little to do with any putative turn advantage for the vastly heavier-loaded aircraft. Sustained turn radius is so closely tied to an airplane's loading/minimum flying speed that the latter aircraft simply could not sustain a tighter radius speed for speed, and for the much heaver loaded aircraft to have an advantage in sustained turn rate would require a vast advantage in thrust which simply does not exist when comparing the two aircraft in question.
However, a Fw-190 at 300mph IAS will easily avoid/turn-inside a P-51 piloted by someone who has been taught to "keep it fast" and is chugling along at 400mph IAS, a fact which I suppose is lost on those unfamiliar with even the basic practicalities of ACM.
More is the pity, could save a lot typing if this were not the case.
Oh and Gaston, there is no mechanism in the real world for the aerodynamic forces of a deflected elevator to be "delayed", and if you have discovered one, you're the first since Kittyhawk to do so. Here is something for you to do with your time than posting to this forum: Get a library card. Check out a book on basic aerodynamics. Even the very basic stuff they teach you in ground school for a private pilot ticket would illuminate you in regards to how airfoils work, critical AoA, accelerated stall, and the formula for deriving accelerated stall speed.
