As Rick said, the backside of the power curve is normal for all aircraft. It''s basically a plot of drag and available power. It's usually noticeable on landing because you're in a high drag low power configuration. If you remember that old video of the F-100 where the pilot comes in too slow and he tries to correct by pulling the nose up and only gets slower then finally stalls and rolls into the ground. Basically it's where the drag generated is higher than the power available. Modern aircraft usually have enough excess power that they can add smash and fly out of it. The F-100 didn't have that much power available at low speeds. The pilot got slow and tried to compensate with more alpha, which lead to even more drag, and he really didn't have any way out since they didn't have zero-zero ejection seats in those days.
Here's a graph of it. Power available is what your powerplant produces and power required is the total drag curve. When you get to the left side where the power required (drag) is higher than the power available, that's the backside of the power curve. Most aircraft will stall before they get into this region of the envelope.
What I'm talking about with regard to the delta is basically how the flight controls which control pitch also effect the camber of the wing. With a tailed aircraft, you push the stick forward, the tail lowers the nose (alpha), the wing is at lower alpha and if density and speed (dynamic pressure) remain constant, you generate less lift. With a delta, you push forward on the stick, which will push the nose down, and lower alpha, which lowers lift, but it will also increase lift because you've just increased the camber of the airfoil. The exact opposite happens for pitching up.
At small increments of alpha, the higher dynamic pressure means you don't have to deflect the flight controls much, so the camber change is most likely negligible, but based on what I've read of most deltas, it's really noticeable at low speeds and high alpha, such as on approach to landing.
Bookmarks