The PA-28 (and very earliest Cessna Cardinals) has a plain stabilator. These can be stalled (lifting down for nose up). My experience on several occasions on PA-28s from Cherokees to an Arrow, has been that a stalled stabilator will produce so much drag during a soft field takeoff, that the plane can be stuck in ground effect, unable to climb away for drag, with the only choice to land back.
Interesting. I have a distinct recollection that the POH for a PA28-181 I flew in the 80s stated that for a soft-field takeoff, said you should apply full up elevator from the beginning of the take-off roll and accelerate in ground effect to climb speed as soon as the aircraft was airborne. When I look at a PA28-181 POH today it instead says you should “apply back pressure to rotate to a climb attitude”. That POH page was revised in 1984. I wonder…
This photo is representative of what I like to see. I have made them for my planes. Consider tying them forward to the tiedown rope/strap, as they can creep off aileron/flaps over time. With a 1/4" bolt, they can be applied through the rudder balance on Cessnas. I accept that some types, and those aircraft with stabilators can be much more difficult to externally lock, but we do the best we can. A few later Cessnas (including Caravans) have a rudder lock which is applied by moving a lever at the base of the rudder. This lock is cunningly disengaged with the application of up elevator, should the pilot forget it pre flight. That’s the kind of thing I think is just great, I wish more manufacturers did that!
Could you post a pic of an external control lock, Pilot DAR?
What concerns me is that just about everybody is making planes with a single internal lock and just about everybody seems happy with it. I can see that control surfaces rattling against the lock (and all the way through the linkages) is not doing the control linkages any good even if the control surfaces were neutral, but what is the option?
Regarding the 1/4" bent aileron trailing edge, I would expect the effect to be massive – as you found. Similarly one needs only a flap to be 2mm lower then the other one, and the plane will be flying very visibly “sideways” (had that on the TB20).
Yes, I would agree that locking inside is better than none – however:
I do this when overnighting, with great consideration to the prevailing wind. Any aircraft I am going to park long term will have something external, as appropriate to the type. For each aircraft I own, and a few I don’t, I have made proper external control locks.
If you are about to fly an aircraft which you know has sat in a big tailwind, or for a long time, I would do a much more detailed inspection than just a quick DI. The challenge is that such an inspection can go deeper than “pilot level” pretty easily. If you can only do a pilot level DI, on a suspect plane:
Aileron symmetry (to the wingtips, or flaps, or each other), look at whatever control stops you can see for damage. Move the controls, listen for funny noises, feel for binding, watch the control wheel/stick move through a window, feel for loose or sloppy.
Though not so much a control lock issue, I once flew a Piper Aztec, which I knew well. This flight was different, as I accelerated past around 130 knots, it began a roll to the left. at 160 knots, it was all you could do to level the wings, certainly sustained cruise flight would not be possible. I took it back. It turned out that there was tiny hangar rash. On the right flap, 2 inches of training edge was bent up about 1/4". but that was enough to act like a trim tab on the flap, and allowed the small free play in the flap to fly the flap down a bit, so it acted like an aileron, and rolled the plane. A quick plier squeeze, and all better. But the effect from such small damage was considerable!
Locking the controls inside the cockpit by any means of poor form.
@Pilot_DAR, but you would agree that locking the controls inside is better than not locking them at all? I cannot imagine control surfaces yielding freely to winds and gusts to do much good to the flight control system…
What you gain one way, you loose the other. For low speed, high control deflections, I prefer elevator/stabilizer to stabiliator.
PDAR, next time you’re in the area we’ll go flying if you like, and I’ll show you an unslotted stabilator that could drag the tail on the ground at 15 kts (?) or less… In truth I’ve actually never checked that, preferring instead to keep the tail skid off the ground, but anyway it’ll never stall the elevator with any stick postion you’d use. Much more elevator power than needed. I do wheelies on landing, not letting the nose wheel touch down until I’m slowed to a crawl. 
I do every takeoff with a partial soft field technique, living the nose wheel just off the ground long before the plane is ready to fly.
What I’ve found I don’t like so much about a stabilator is the over-assisted ‘power steering’ feel… Less linear pitch control feedback than you generally get with a normal elevator.
Locking the flight controls at the cockpit assures that the controls in anything other than parked into a headwind, are “flying” all the time. In the case of a strong gust, there is potential for damage to the flight control system, which will likely be impossible for a pilot to detect during a preflight. You’d be horror struck to see a person handling an aircraft by the flight controls, how is it different when a strong wind is gusting from behind the parked plane, and forcing the flight control, through all the cables, pulleys, bellcranks and pushrods to the locked control wheel. Something has to give, and it will be something you cannot see. I’ve had such damage, which I found only in flight. A much more serious example here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Moorea_Flight_1121
The PA-28 (and very earliest Cessna Cardinals) has a plain stabilator. These can be stalled (lifting down for nose up). My experience on several occasions on PA-28s from Cherokees to an Arrow, has been that a stalled stabilator will produce so much drag during a soft field takeoff, that the plane can be stuck in ground effect, unable to climb away for drag, with the only choice to land back. An elevator stabilizer combination can be higher drag in cruise flight, but at very slow speeds, with large pitch control inputs will increase the camber, so there is increased capacity to generate lift (down) before it stalls. The stabiliator generates lift only through AoA, so a stall is more possible.
What you gain one way, you loose the other. For low speed, high control deflections, I prefer elevator/stabilizer to stabiliator.
On the TB, the control lock (in the LH yoke tube) locks the controls in the neutral position, which offers the least “catch” to any wind.
Where is the issue there?
There is no realistic possibility of modifying the locking options, short of a DER design package (DAR in Canada – I know ) or a massively expensive EASA 21 process.
What can not be liked about the slow flight characteristics of a (any except t-tail) PA-28?
Locking the controls inside the cockpit by any means of poor form. I know that Cessnas provided control wheel locks, what a poor idea, I use them only if there is no other choice. Control system damage, which is usually serious, and nearly always hidden, can result from the air forces forcing the control against the control wheel lock, with all of the cables, bell cranks, pushrods and pulleys taking the abuse along the control circuit, and nearly none are pilot preflight inspectable. I have found (in flight) such damage, and can think of at least one accident (Twin Otter) whose cause was a damaged flight control cable from locking the flight controls at the cockpit. I prefer to use external control locks, and I make them for all of my aircraft. I do agree that external control locks on a stabilator are a challenge. Usually this flight control is less susceptible to gust damaged, if allowed to rest trailing edge down. Just make sure the drain holes are clear.
Both Pipers and Cessnas have horizontal stabilizer/elevator, or stabilator, depending upon the aircraft model. Each have their benefits and detriments. I do not prefer stabilator configurations for slow flight reasons.
