Leading Edge Slats

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

Well, today I went into the museum and took my camera. Here is our almost-completed Hispano Ha.1112 Buchon from the side:
upload_2016-7-9_20-7-0.png


So ... I got into the cockpit and snapped a pic looking forward. As you can see from above, the cowling was off right in front of the windscreen, but you can get an idea:
upload_2016-7-9_20-8-18.png


Below is looking out left and forward:
upload_2016-7-9_20-8-56.png


You can see from above that piece of the instrument panel is out and you can see some connections behind it. Below is looking right and forward:
upload_2016-7-9_20-9-35.png


There's no use taking a shot off 90° to the side or straight up, but the view is just fine in those directions. You can decide for yourself about the view forward and forward-left or forward-right.

As you can see above, Voodoo is there for some personal attention from Steve Hinton Jr. So, I might as well throw in a pic of Voodoo:
upload_2016-7-9_20-11-55.png


All for now. - Greg
 
Last edited:
You're welcome.

Hope you can all come to your own conclusion about visibility. The canopy framing is rather massive, and the cockpit is narrow, with almost no room for leverage on the stick. But to the left, right, up and down, the visibility is great. Can't have EVERYTHING, but you can have most of it.

The overall visibility is NOT as bad as I would have thought from looking at pictures, but is definitely less than from a P-51, Spitfire, or Corsair. I have been in all the cockpits at one time or another and they were a bit better forward, and about equal to the left, right or down. I would NOT say it is bad as some, including me, have speculated.
 
Thanks Greg.

Got any Spitfires? If you could jump in a few others and give us a comparison that would be great. Thanks.
 
Well, Wayne, we don't happen to have a spitfire just now, but I can get a Douglas Dauntless next weekend, and perhaps a P-51 and the F4U-1a. Depends on what is happening next week. I am not supposed show the panels (not supposed to show things a visitor cannot see), but looking out without showing the panels may prove to be not objectionable to the museum.

I'll see what I can do.
 
Last edited:
British wartime data I have on aircraft 'fighting views' (the number of degrees from the sight line to the obstruction line):

Bf 109F - 3.0 degrees
Spitfire (merlin) - 3.5 degrees
Mustang (merlin) - 4.5 degrees
Hurricane - 8.5 degrees

The figures all seem to be rounded to the nearest basic fraction (1/2, 2/3, etc.). For example, they listed 4.5 degrees for the Typhoon, and measuring the view in this photo I get 4.40 degrees.

K9aFeio.jpg
 
Last edited:
Well, Wayne, we don't happen to have a spitfire just now, but I can get a Douglas Dauntless next weekend, and perhaps a P-51 and the F4U-1a. Depends on what is happening next week. I am not supposed show the panels (not supposed to show things a visitor cannot see), but looking out without showing the panels may prove to be not objectionable to the museum.

I'll see what I can do.

What is the issue with showing panels?
(Just curious)
 
Last edited:
British wartime data I have on aircraft 'fighting views' (the number of degrees from the sight line to the obstruction line):

Bf 109F - 3.0 degrees
Spitfire (merlin) - 3.5 degrees
Mustang (merlin) - 4.5 degrees
Hurricane - 8.5 degrees

The figures all seem to be rounded to the nearest basic fraction (1/2, 2/3, etc.). For example, they listed 4.5 degrees for the Typhoon, and measuring the view in this photo I get 4.40 degrees.

fv_typh.jpg

How do the F4F and F6F compare?
I seem to remember a thread here discussing how conducive the F4F was to deflection shooting.
 
We operate a museum and when people want special access, they usually come and ask for special permission to take photos. This usually means money for the museum, which is chronically short of money. Usually it is for a magazine article or a book and the museum gets a cut. After all, without the airplanes, the articles lose some impact.

As a volunteer, I can have access almost anytime I need it, not necessarily when I want it. That puts us in the position of being able to take money away from the museum when we post pics that normally require special permission. We have been asked not to do that. What I did above was to make sure no interior details were showing. The museum still may not like it. If not, there will be no more shots. Depends on who you ask and when.

My enthusiasm sort of got the better of me above and I'll make sure before posting another pic like that. I HAVE plenty of pics that would normally require special permission, but do not post them for these reasons.

However, whether or not I can post any more, you should be able to decide if the visibility from the basic Bf 109 is as bad as has been speculated. The Ha.1112 Buchon is basically Bf 109 G-2 ariframe, so you have that for comparison.
 
The Hellcat is the only conventional gear fighter I know of in which you can almost see the ground in front of the aircraft in the normal ground attitude. That is, only an occasional S-turn for forward visibility is required most of the time since the over-the-nose visibility is so good. If something like a small dog jumped in front of you, then you might not see it. But if an aircraft or vehicle is there, you definitely will see it in the normal ground attitude. In an airshow, you might still want a wing sitter, but in most normal circumstances, no.

Everyone I've met who has ever flow a Hellcat comes away impressed with it. The handling is viceless and forgiving, which is rare in a piston WW2 fighter. It has no trouble out-turning most opponents. Of course, they aren't exactly trying to kill each other, either. Contrary to what you might think, many of the owners of WW2 fighters get together and dogfight at least once every other year in private gatherings. Talking with them is like talking with a WW2 vet, his plane is the best, and they never met another they couldn't beat!

If I win a lottery, I'll join them! If not, well at least we get to work on some of them. I'm not as amazed by them as I was 10 years ago, and if i came back in WW2 reincarnated, it would NOT be as the crew chief of a radial-powered fighter! Way too damned many spark plugs to change! Also, if you're not 20 years old, it's hard to get into a Corsair! Getting out of one without coming away with large oil stains on your flight suit is also not easy. Simple in a P-51. I also strongly believe that no radial fighter that runs will ever rust anywhere near the engine since it throws massive quantities of oil all over the plane just about there. You could fill up a small block Chevy just from the drip pans ...

Let's see, the reason the A-1 Skyraider has such a large oil tank is because the job of the engine is to put 5 gallons down each side and 10 gallons on the belly of the aircraft each and every time you are impudent enough to actually start it and fly it.
 
Interesting photographs Greg, bit difficult to draw conclusions without the cowling and gunsight however, even without them the over the nose is very limited?
 
The Buchon might have a little different view from the cockpit than a Bf109, same cockpit, more or less, but the upright V12 verses a inverted V12. Much more of a distance from the top of the heads and intake manifold, than the distance to the furthest extent of the oil pan.
Then there's the reduction gearbox on the front of the engine, how's it's prop centerline lines up with the crankcase centerline. It's probably different DB V12 verses Merlin V12.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back