I sat in the cockpit of an ME-109

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules


That could very well be...that would certainly explain the cramped setting I experienced...
 
I have a book about the less well known Luftwaffe aces, hunters of the Reich- day fighters, by David Williams.

In it is Heinz Marquardt, over 100 victories, every picture in it shows him to be the tallest in anyone else in the picture, in one award picture he appears to be as much as a foot taller than the awarding officer,( unless he's standing on a platform) He's described as being very tall, but nowhere I've seen says how tall. The book has one picture of him in a 109 cockpit, he doesn't seem to be impossibly tight.
 

I don't want to resurrect this - but I guess I am. If you look online and try to find a Luftwaffe WWII leather jacket you will discover the largest size they made was a 40 - with 38 being commonly the largest size readily available. The German pilots were slight of stature . . .
 
Way back in 81 or 82 at Harlingen Texas for the CAF airshow I began to sit in one of the Bushon (Hispano Ha 1112) cockpits. The first chore was to lift the armorglass canopy. Having been around airports since my early teens, I knew to be very careful with other peoples planes and although I am a life member it is important to cause no damage. The canopy when open is restrained by a cable about 1/4 inch thick. The canopy was quite heavy as I lifted it and as it went over center I held on to slow it's travel. Back then, I weighed about 165 pounds and it lifted me off my feet. I do not have broad shoulders, but what impressed me was as I stood in the seat and began to sit, both shoulders were against the cockpit opening sides. The seat had been left all the way down and as I kept sliding down, when my eyes were even with the cockpit edge, I realized I would not be able to pull myself up if I sat all the way down into the seat. At that point, I got out and when closing the canopy, had to use considerable strength to slow it as it closed. That experience has left me with fact that the 109 was very difficult to exit in combat when injured. I also think the German canopies did not use the heavy bullet resistant green glass that the Spanish put in their birds when built in 1959.
 
I'm 6'1" tall and I've sat in the cockpit of a Bf109E. It's a close fit, but the seat does adjust and you do have room enough to move about, but not by much. It may seem a bit claustrophobic to some, but it's not all that bad.
The Hs129 on the otherhand, had a tiny cockpit that I would not have liked at all.

And yes, the Bf109 had a canopy jettison feature, the release lever was on the left side of the cockpit, between the dash and the main windscreen support
 
The aircraft you sat in was an Ha.1112 Buchon. It is the only Bf 109 variant with a 4-blade propeller, and it is an Ha.1112-M1L Buchon. You have to ignore the Wiki article on this aircraft as the article is quite flawed. The DB engine turned clockwise when viewed from the cockpit, not counter-clockwise. Look at any picture of a Bf 109 with DB engine and propeller not turning. Anyway, the Buchon swings to the left, not the right on takeoff as claimed by Wiki, just as ANY conventional gear plane with a right-turning prop (when viewed from the cockpit). Put a finger on top and move WITH the prop rotation for 90 degrees, and then push. It will turn LEFT when the tail is raised with forward stick. It will NOT do so with as much vigor of you let the tail raise on its own, but it will still go left, not right. You need right rudder to take off.

There is a pull lanyard to release the rear of the canopy enclosure from the airframe. The rear perspex and the side-swinging canopy both blow away in the windstream to bail out. The cockpit is small, especially when you have it fully fitted out with parachute as a seat cushion. There is not enough room to get much leverage on the stick sideways, and that limits the roll at high speeds, as any Bf 109 flight test report that even addresses it will tell you.

Despite all the complaining about visibility out and forward, it isn't bad. Not great, mind you, but not as bad as one might suppose after reading about it. I posted a pic somewhere earlier in some thread.

Glad you got a chance to sit in one! I have when working on it, but not in it as it would be when operational .... SOON, though. Our engine is actually being worked on at this time.

Cheers!
 
Usually people are asked of what WW2 fighter they would like to fly (in WW2).
They should be asked of what WW2 fighter they cat sit on in their present size.
In my case probably all non-US planes are out of the question (and the P-39 as well).

I would say the P-47 and the F4U.
Close behind would be the P-40, P-51 and F6F.
 

I think most Germans were (not just pilots) at the time. I collect original uniforms, and they are all small in size...lol
 
If you think European uniforms were small look at U.S. civil war uniforms. Most men appeared to be between 5 ft 3 inches to 5 ft 6 inches tall. Add to this the weight of the rifle, bayonet and other equipment and I am amazed they could make the charge at the opposition.
 
Since I watch wartime documentaries, I point out to my wife, daughters or who else will listen, to look at the biceps and shoulders of the men without shirts back then. The biceps are not the bulging type we see in the gym today, but the longer firm type we see on men who do manual labor. My opinion is they were stronger and had more lasting ability than today. My father was like that and I didn't see him need help with anything heavy until he was in his late seventies. I'm now in my late seventies and my dad was a better man than I am today.
 
Actually it's not difficult to log some hangar time in a variety of warbirds. Many owners are glad to cooperate as long as the pleader is polite and WILLING TO FOLLOW DIRECTIONS.
(I've seen a couple who had an Entitlement mentality, and they made things impossible for themselves and difficult for others.)
Anyway:
I worked at the marvelous Champlin Fighter Museum in Arizona (extant 1981-2003) and had occasion to try on almost every bird in the barn, from the Rumpler Taube to MiGs. For reference, I was about 5-8 and 145 lbs, sorta typical for a 1940s male. The cockpits that fit me best were the Spit IX and F8F. Canopy rails almost touched my upper arms with flight jacket. The 109 was cramped fershure but the semi-reclining seat was semi-comfortable. Outside visibility left something to be desired, of course.

The 51D was well laid out, and gadgets came easily to hand. One of the better WW II cockpits. The Yak-3 was small in every direction including the canopy.
P-38 and P-47 cockpits were b-i-g. Reminded me of an ace friend who explained how a Jug pilot took evasive action: he unbuckled, got off the seat--and ran around the cockpit.

If you'd sat in a 190 you were surprisingly at home in a MiG-15/17...probably no coincidence.

At a Confederate AF event long ago I was invited to try on the A6M5. The cockpit was surprisingly roomy, contrary to expectations.
Just FWIW.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

An early 'Me 209' instead of the Me 309?
2
Replies
21
Views
1K
TM06
Spitfire vs Me-109
Replies
3
Views
1K
PAT303
P
S
Why did the Me 109 roll and turn so bad at speed?
5 6 7
Replies
134
Views
9K
GregP
S
Canopy aerodynamics
2 3
Replies
52
Views
5K
Snautzer01
617th squadron and the bunkers in Ijmuiden.
2
Replies
23
Views
792
DerAdlerIstGelandet
Menu
Log in
Register