Spitfire control throws

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

Squidly

Squidly

Recruit
8
5
Mar 17, 2023
Hi everyone, first post.
I'm starting to build a Spitty cockpit for flight sim purposes and while I've got much of the information I need, I'm running into problems finding out what the control throws are for the column and the rudder pedals. They can be expressed in any way, as a distance between two points, an angular measurement - just something that will allow me to design the correct travel into them.
While I think about it, I also need to know how many turns the rudder and elevator trim wheel turn, from one extreme to the other. I've managed to find a modern drawing of the scroll on the elevator trim wheel which drives the indicator on the instrument panel and that suggests 5 turns, but I don't have any confirmation.
I think I already own all the modern books on the Spit which have technical information in them ( I think ! ) - including Spitfire Engineered - but none of them have drawings or extracts from the appropriate manuals, so if anyone can help I'll be very grateful.
 
Crimea_River said:
Don't mind him. He's our self-appointed wit.

Tony Hill Tony Hill would be your best bet for an answer but he hasn't checked in for some time now. Check out his thread here: 1:1 Spitfire K9817 Cockpit Build
Click to expand...
That's some amazing work, very impressive. I just had a quick scan through and I'll read the whole thing later.
The ironic thing about the control movements is that I actually flew a MKIX trainer last year. The experience of being at the controls of a Spitfire fried my brain so much that I forgot to ask if I could take some measurements once we were back on the ground :D
 
I wonder what the bloke in the front seat would have said if I'd suddenly moved the control column through it's entire range while faffing about with a ruler and a protractor ? :D
I'd have said something myself - like " Aaaaaargh " just before I passed out :D
 
The aileron throw is easy to work out in degrees at the stick. Elevator throw more difficult. But it is surprisingly low. Not as low as a Hurricane. On a spit controls are not well harmonised as say, a Mustang. On the spit roll forces are quite high, pitch not so.
 
Rocketeer said:
The aileron throw is easy to work out in degrees at the stick. Elevator throw more difficult. But it is surprisingly low. Not as low as a Hurricane. On a spit controls are not well harmonised as say, a Mustang. On the spit roll forces are quite high, pitch not so.
Click to expand...
Give me a clue as to how I go about working it out then ? ;)
 
Squidly said:
Hi everyone, first post.
I'm starting to build a Spitty cockpit for flight sim purposes and while I've got much of the information I need, I'm running into problems finding out what the control throws are for the column and the rudder pedals. They can be expressed in any way, as a distance between two points, an angular measurement - just something that will allow me to design the correct travel into them.
While I think about it, I also need to know how many turns the rudder and elevator trim wheel turn, from one extreme to the other. I've managed to find a modern drawing of the scroll on the elevator trim wheel which drives the indicator on the instrument panel and that suggests 5 turns, but I don't have any confirmation.
I think I already own all the modern books on the Spit which have technical information in them ( I think ! ) - including Spitfire Engineered - but none of them have drawings or extracts from the appropriate manuals, so if anyone can help I'll be very grateful
Click to expand...

I think you;ll find what you're looking for (And more) from NACA Wartime Report NACA-WR-L-344, "Measurements of the Flying Qualities of a Supermarine Spitfire VA Airplane", published 1 Sept, 1942, available as a PDF from the NASA Technical Reports Server. (Be careful, it's easy to go down multiple rabbit holes there.)

Measurements of the Flying Qualities of a Supermarine Spitfire VA Airplane - NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

ntrs.nasa.gov ntrs.nasa.gov
 
PStickney said:
I think you;ll find what you're looking for (And more) from NACA Wartime Report NACA-WR-L-344, "Measurements of the Flying Qualities of a Supermarine Spitfire VA Airplane", published 1 Sept, 1942, available as a PDF from the NASA Technical Reports Server. (Be careful, it's easy to go down multiple rabbit holes there.)

Measurements of the Flying Qualities of a Supermarine Spitfire VA Airplane - NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

ntrs.nasa.gov ntrs.nasa.gov
Click to expand...
Thanks a lot for that link, I'd never thought about the NACA server. That document is going to be a huge help
 
Squidly said:
Thanks a lot for that link, I'd never thought about the NACA server. That document is going to be a huge help
Click to expand...
The ailerons elevators and rudder were changed at various times on the Spitfire, but as far as I understand it the movement of the "stick" and its effect on the plane varies with speed and altitude. In the many flights taken by celebrities in the dual control Spitfire they showed that at a normal speed just applying pressure not any movement on the stick will make it dive and climb when trimmed for level flight. A the other end of the scale, in a high speed dive no one has the strength to move the stick at all.
 
pbehn said:
The ailerons elevators and rudder were changed at various times on the Spitfire, but as far as I understand it the movement of the "stick" and its effect on the plane varies with speed and altitude. In the many flights taken by celebrities in the dual control Spitfire they showed that at a normal speed just applying pressure not any movement on the stick will make it dive and climb when trimmed for level flight. A the other end of the scale, in a high speed dive no one has the strength to move the stick at all.
Click to expand...
Well, you've made an interesting point there. I flew a dual control MKIX last year ( does that make me a celebrity ? :D ) and it did feel a bit like the F-16 replica flight stick I own for computer simulation use. That only moves a fraction of an inch in total travel and operates via strain gauges that sense the amount of force applied.
The Spitfire column was moving of course, but you didn't need to move it very far and the impression of applying pressure rather than deflection was quite strong. That cliche you always hear about you not having to do anything other than think about what you want the Spit to do and she does it seems very real to me. Just for 'normal' flying you can steer her with thumb and index finger.
I didn't get to do any aerobatics - no one does except their own pilots - but I also flew the companies motion sim that they train pilots on for conversion to the Spit, and when you were in the more interesting areas of the flight envelope then the stick deflection comes into play.
 
pbehn said:
The ailerons elevators and rudder were changed at various times on the Spitfire, but as far as I understand it the movement of the "stick" and its effect on the plane varies with speed and altitude. In the many flights taken by celebrities in the dual control Spitfire they showed that at a normal speed just applying pressure not any movement on the stick will make it dive and climb when trimmed for level flight. A the other end of the scale, in a high speed dive no one has the strength to move the stick at all.
Click to expand...
The stick movement limits don't vary, but the force feedback from the control surfaces do, This can be modified by the use of servo tabs on the control surface to act to reduce control forces, or anti-servo tabs to increase control forces - it's all a balancing act. As the speed range of airplanes got larger, the use of mechanically linked tabs became more and more complicated, with the addition of springs and cams and such to make it manageable in the cockpit.
It's worth noting that despite the impression that Miles had pioneered the use of a slab stabilator for high-speed control in the M.52, that's not the case. The slab stab had been tested in both the U.S., by the N.A.C.A, on the XP-42, and in Britain by the RAE on a Spitfire It was discussed during the Joint Fighter Conference at Patuxent River in mid-1944, and while recognized as a useful concept, was not considered practical with the mechanically assisted techniques available at the time. Either the forces were too high in a particular section of the speed range, limiting control authority, or too low (over-assisted), leading to lack of precision in control, possible structural failure, and Pilot Induced Oscillation. It took the development of fully-powered irreversible hydraulic control systems to make them practical - F-86E and later. (The X-1 had a separate stabilizer and elevator, with the stabilizer providing trim using an electrically controlled jackscrew system)
Control forces are an art form. Too heavy, and you can't maneuver. Too light, and the airplane is so twitchy that, for example, accurate target tracking for air-air of air-ground weapons is difficult. The Spitfire is a good example of this - In general, it was lighter on the controls than the Hurricane, which combined with its superior performance made it more likely to gain a good shot on another fighter (Say a Bf-109), but that same light control force made it a less accurate gun platform.
 
PStickney said:
The stick movement limits don't vary, but the force feedback from the control surfaces do
Click to expand...
I'm intending for the control column to mimic the forces that the pilot feels by using a force feedback system based around electric motors. I was going to contact a Swiss company called Brunner who make force feedback control hardware for commercial flight simulators, even though their prices require you to be sitting down with a trained nurse on standby when you read them. It's sort of like " if you have to ask then you can't afford "
But then I found a guy in Eastern Europe who has developed hardware that's a lot cheaper than Brunner. I bought two of his motors and a control board. I'll build the control column around those.
The only downside is that I'm then at the mercy of the developers of the sim software to give me feedback which seems at least sensible. I don't get to have my say in what happens - not unless I learn programming and write a plugin that sits between the output of the sim software and the stick controller hardware. But I'm an old school machinist and software either mystifies me or annoys me, or both.
But before I can make any real progress I've got to start out by fixing the vertical axis of my new-to-me but 70 year old milling machine. Which isn't simple because there aren't any spares for something so old, so I've got to make the parts I need....oh well, no-one said it would be easy :D
 
One thing a member of our model club did to get model airplane engines at a good price was to write the various companies manufacturing them and ask for any which had been returned for repairs and are unclaimed. Often he purchased them for the repair cost or were free. Another tact was to ask for rejects or cosmetically damaged engines which could not be sold as new. Another was a ruse that he was working with under privileged kids (his own).
 
wells said:
the column was tilted 11 deg towards the pilot in the "neutral" position. For aileron control, it tilted 41 deg to either side of neutral. that's all I got, from the MkV manual
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure that should be 20.5 degrees either side of vertical, for 41 degrees total ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

C
Control column
Replies
4
Views
618
Wurger
Wurger
J
Question about control system of Bf-109E
Replies
4
Views
546
jun
J
T
Automatic Flight Control Systems
Replies
8
Views
784
tkaniuka
T
P
Looking for photos of the arrester gear control box from a Swordfish?
Replies
11
Views
717
Simon Thomas
Simon Thomas
T
Control Surface data - Ju88 G series
Replies
0
Views
509
tkaniuka
T
Back