Gunner's security question

tyrodtom · Apr 13, 2017

You can see in those pictures that just changing magazines could be a hazard on a pusher.
If the gunner fumbled it, it might brain the pilot, 47 or 92 .303 rounds in the single or double drum magazine would be quite heavy.
Or if it went through the propeller and got hit by a blade.

Airframes · Apr 16, 2017

I was sure I had posted this, but I presume I made an error.
Here's a view inside a Bristol Fighter - I can see a 'sling' type of gunner's seat, but no sign of a harness or restraint.

mikewint · Apr 17, 2017

Well them Britishers used to wear RED so the enemy wouldn't see blood and crossed WHITE belts to help the enemy aim AND would stand shoulder to shoulder in an open field!!! So, heck, "We don't need no stinken restraints"

tyrodtom · Apr 17, 2017

I thought the red was so you wouldn't see your own blood.

soulezoo · Apr 17, 2017

My eyes aren't so good... is that a wicker seat for the pilot?

And Japanese planes are derided for a lack of pilot protection!

tyrodtom · Apr 17, 2017

I've seen a wicker seat in a lot of WW1 era aircraft.
When you're surrounded by about inch thick sticks of wood, joined by metal brackets, with tight wire holding it all in alignment, I don't think the type of seat could change the pilot's chances of surviving a crash much.
A good aluminum seat might make his body easier to find though.
Actually that form of construction was stronger than most would think, it just didn't perform very well during a crash.

Shortround6 · Apr 17, 2017

With the engines of the time, light weight construction was the byword of the day.

For the Bristol fighter (a real powerhouse in it's day) the dry weight of the engine was 1/3 of the empty weight of the aircraft. Now add oil, radiator/water, propeller and the powerplant is really sucking up a high proportion of the weight.

And Aluminium was just coming into it's own as a construction material.

tyrodtom · Apr 17, 2017

I'd like to thank everyone who has responded on this thread.
A lot of great pictures I've never seen before.

My biggest fascination has always been WW1 aviation, and stick and wire aircraft..

gumbyk · Apr 17, 2017

tyrodtom said:
Most pictures I've seen shows the gunner as he was during take off, and landing, sitting down.

But when you see films or pictures of them demonstrating use of the gun, a lot are standing up.

On most of the aircraft the upper rim of the cockpit is below hip level, it wouldn't take much of a upset to send you right over the side.
And even if they did have harnesses it probably would have only been leather. Plenty to keep you secure in a seat, but not overly strong for stopping falling bodies.

No, no harnesses of any sort in these machines for gunners that I know of. I've read a few accounts of people almost falling out during battle.

The F2B gunner cockpit comes to just under hip level, but to use the gun you have to crouch down a bit, so in reality it's harder to fall out than that, and you're already holding on to either the gun or scarfe ring to aim. We've got a waist harness out of an Avro 504 at the museum, but not sure if this was a civilian mod or original equipment, so it was at least thought of for pilots.

gumbyk · Apr 17, 2017

tyrodtom said:
I've seen a wicker seat in a lot of WW1 era aircraft.
When you're surrounded by about inch thick sticks of wood, joined by metal brackets, with tight wire holding it all in alignment, I don't think the type of seat could change the pilot's chances of surviving a crash much.
A good aluminum seat might make his body easier to find though.
Actually that form of construction was stronger than most would think, it just didn't perform very well during a crash.

Wicker actually has a lot of 'give' and can absorb a lot of energy, so was fairly common. Don't forget, most accidents was fairly low-speed, low energy events, especially compared to WW2 aircraft. e.g my Tiger Moth comes across the fence at 55 mph, a Yak 3, 120 mph, so there it has more than 4.5 times as much energy to lose during a crash.

tyrodtom · Apr 17, 2017

I never realized that was the pilots seat till I looked close. I thought it was the gunners seat for use during takeoffs and such, but it's turned around wrong.
The gunners buttocks are about at the pilot's shoulders, must have made for good communications between them as long as neither were incontinent. Whew !

soulezoo · Apr 18, 2017

gumbyk said:
Wicker actually has a lot of 'give' and can absorb a lot of energy, so was fairly common. Don't forget, most accidents was fairly low-speed, low energy events, especially compared to WW2 aircraft. e.g my Tiger Moth comes across the fence at 55 mph, a Yak 3, 120 mph, so there it has more than 4.5 times as much energy to lose during a crash.

The wicker actually makes a lot of sense given the rest of the primitive construction of the aircraft and need for light weight wherever they could find it. It was just the first time I had seen it.

mikewint · Apr 18, 2017

gumbyk said:
a Yak 3, 120 mph, so there it has more than 4.5 times as much energy to lose during a crash.

HOLY CREPE!!! One of these babies zooooming overhead at Mach 4.08 THAT has to be something to see!!! Not exactly an elephant but still...not want to be below
Too Late me hat and coat was already on...

mikewint · Apr 18, 2017

OK, ducking back in for a sec. Since KE = 0.5 m v^2 The energy would be increases by 16.5 times greater.
[door slams]

T Bolt · Apr 19, 2017

Wicker Seats went way beyond WWI. Here's the interior of a Ford Tri-Moter

soulezoo · Apr 19, 2017

That's first class compared to today! Look at the ample elbow room!

tyrodtom · Apr 20, 2017

And window seats for everyone.

buffnut453 · Apr 21, 2017

tyrodtom said:
And window seats for everyone.

And proper, big windows to boot. No craning your neck to see anything - the entire vista is open for inspection.

mikewint · Apr 21, 2017

Once again physics. Aircraft structures can withstand a pressure differential of about 8psi. Humans cannot survive if the partial pressure of oxygen falls below 2.9psi. So supplemental oxygen is required to fly above 12,500ft for more than 30min and a must at 15,000ft. Commercial air liners begin to pressurize the cabin as soon as the wheels come up maintaining the cabin pressure at about 7,000ft though the aircraft may be at 35,000ft. That works out to about 11psi.
Ok back to windows, that's 11 pounds of pressure on each and every square inch of surface, A window 1ft in diameter has 113sq in of surface so it must withstand 1244 pounds of force. Making the window 2ft in diameter must withstand 4976 pounds of force or 4 times as much pressure

pbehn · Apr 21, 2017

mikewint said:
Once again physics. Aircraft structures can withstand a pressure differential of about 8psi. Humans cannot survive if the partial pressure of oxygen falls below 2.9psi. So supplemental oxygen is required to fly above 12,500ft for more than 30min and a must at 15,000ft. Commercial air liners begin to pressurize the cabin as soon as the wheels come up maintaining the cabin pressure at about 7,000ft though the aircraft may be at 35,000ft. That works out to about 11psi.
Ok back to windows, that's 11 pounds of pressure on each and every square inch of surface, A window 1ft in diameter has 113sq in of surface so it must withstand 1244 pounds of force. Making the window 2ft in diameter must withstand 4976 pounds of force or 4 times as much pressure

The Handley Page HP42 was an aircraft of the era but it only did 90MPH while cruising and could run out of fuel flying into a head wind London to Paris. The whole thing had less maximum horsepower than the last Spitfires, airsickness was a common problem.

Gunner's security question

Senior Master Sergeant

Benevolens Magister

Captain

Senior Master Sergeant

Senior Airman

Senior Master Sergeant

Major General

Senior Master Sergeant

Master Sergeant

Master Sergeant

Senior Master Sergeant

Senior Airman

Captain

Captain

Colonel

Senior Airman

Senior Master Sergeant

Captain

Captain

Colonel

Users who are viewing this thread

Similar threads