An il-2 without Rear spoiler can still fly!?

[Kimmer]

I don’t understand why an il-2 without Rear spoilercan still fly

[GiftGruen]

Ah, they do so also in IL2 GB.    Quite a tough thing, such an IL2 😉

And - why should they fall out of sky just because of this ? Ailerons to counter missing lift in the right direction and this thing can fly and even land.

[Kubert]

I saw photos of a planes with more damage make it back. For example:

https://www.amusingplanet.com/2020/08/the-b-17-that-flew-with-its-tail-sliced.html

[Avimimus]

Yes, it is a real phenomenon. The tail isn't a generator of lift but a generator of stability... and the aircraft can fly with reduced stability (albeit less safely and with less control).

Look up the 1983 Negev mid-air collision if you want an extreme example of an aircraft with reduced lifting surfaces making it back to a landing (albeit an aircraft with a lifting fuselage and powered controls)!

[FuriousMeow]

Its a horizontal stabilizer, and half of its still there with some of the elevator as well. 

Which is more than can be said for this B52's vertical stabilizer:

And this would have had far less stability.

[Avimimus]

I would not want to try landing that.

I did create a Boeing 306 in X-Plane and managed to land it in a cross-wind though. That said, I also wouldn't want to try that in real life.

[MaxPower]

The horizontal stabilizer in an aircraft is to provide drag and down-force at the rear of the aircraft.  Aircrafts must be slightly nose heavy to be stable.  The opposite of this is 'relaxed stability' which requires computerized controls.  Aircraft that are nose heavy tend to pitch downwards with the tail in the air.  Therefore, they have to decrease lift in the tail to keep the nose level.  Therefore, they provide the opposite of lift and decrease the over all lift of the aircraft. 

They also increase drag at the rear of the aircraft, especially when they are under angle of attack, like when the aircraft is pitching.  increasing the drag at the tail of the aircraft keeps it wanting to point forward, like a dart.

The Il2 has quite large tail surfaces and the aircraft was likely designed with some redundancy in mind.  Even if not, losing a horizontal stabilizer would decrease the downforce available, but I guess the ragged stump it left behind would still contribute to the drag at the rear of the plane.  A decrease in downforce would require an increase in elevator deflection on the remaining horizontal stabilizer.  Whether the elevator would still be effective in the state shown, I don't know.

Anyways, all things being equal, this is how I understand an aircraft uses the horizontal stabilizer, and how I could rationalize how it could fly with half the horizontal tail missing.

On 8/9/2026 at 2:29 PM, FuriousMeow said:

And this would have had far less stability

Indeed.  I think you can see the spoilers near the wing tips deployed.  If the spoilers are near the tips of the swept wings would be behind the mean aerodynamic centre and behind the c of g, then they would provide some stability as well.  Also, I noticed the rear landing gear is also deployed.  This could also be a means to add drag to the rear of the aircraft to try to stabilize it.

Edited August 11 by MaxPower