Tight Cockpits

[MIflyer]

I got to look into the cockpit of a P-51D on Saturday. It looked snug but not uncomfortable.

In the book Flying to the Limit it is revealed that the RAF found the Mustang Mk1 canopy to be a bit tight, the top too low. The Malcolm Hood helped this, as well as enabling a better view to the rear as well.

Now look at these photos of a Spitfire Mk V and a P-51A with the original canopy. Which one looks rather tight?
.

 

[Capt. Vick]

I also thought the B-25 cockpit looked tight for two.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

The pilot in the Spitfire is probably sitting on something to give a tight perspective in the pic. Is that Blakeslee? Anyway here's another shot for a different perspective. I don't know how these two chaps compare in height.

 

[pbehn]

Claustrophobia is as much in the mind as in reality, the early P 51s had a lot of metal in the pilots eye line and close to him, the Malcolm hood probably seemed to give much more space than it actually did.

 

[Crimea_River]

 

[MIflyer]

I understand the door was put in the Spitfire because without that opening a pilot could not get into the cockpit with a parachute on. You can also imagine that getting out in a hurry would be a challenge.

Probably another reason for the Malcolm Hood was that during testing the RAF pilots found that during high speed dives the original canopy tended to open up along the seam where the two sections joined by about an inch . Disconcerting to say the least. I assume that NAA fixed that problem on later airplanes.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I've been in a -109 and P-51. The 109 was definitely tighter but for me not too unreasonable, mind you no parachute as with the P-51 where I had plenty of room. I'm a tad under 5' 9" 180

 

[Barrett]

I was privileged to work at the Champlin Fighter Museum here in AZ during the glory days of the 80s, and logged quite a bit of cockpit time in a huge variety of aircraft (Taube to MiGs.) For some perspective: I was in my prime (yeahright) at 5-ft 8 and 150 lbs, pretty typical design specs for a WW II aviator. The cockpits that fit me best were the Spitfire and Bearcat: everything came easily to hand. The 38, 47, Wildcat, Hellcat and Corsair were big-gish for me. (Surprisingly, so was the Zero I tried on elsewhere.) The 109 was a comfortably tight fit with the semi-reclining seat but the visibility was lousy. 190 was much better for viz, a tad big. (Note: when I moved from the Dora to the MiG-15/17, it was almost like old home week. Even some of the minor fittings were similar or identical including the stick, armament options, and the backup "iron" gunsight.)

Question: How does a P-47 pilot take evasive action?
Answer: He unstraps and runs around the cockpit.

The tightest fit was the Yak 9, especially the close canopy.

Of the WW I birds, the Fokker D.VIII most impressed me. If I stretched my neck I could see over the top of the wing, and of course viz was unlimited in other directions.

 

[MIflyer]

My high school physics teacher was a USN aviator before WWII, USNA Class of 1932, I think. He was about 5 ft 8n in in height and slim. He said that the cockpits of his time seemed to have been made with him in mind; everything fit nicely and was within easy reach. I know he flew Stearman biplanes, PBY's and other flying boats, and floatplanes, which I presume included the Curtiss Seagull biplane. He was the USN pilot that performed the last test flight of the XSBD-1 before the USN accepted it after the Curtiss test pilot refused to fly with a live 500 lb bomb.

 

[nuuumannn]

In my life I have been fortunate to have sat in (and flown in) a few WW2 era aircraft. I'm 6'2", which makes sitting in most WW2 fighters difficult and that's without flying gear. The Spitfire and Messerschmitt (it was a Buchon) are cramped for me, to say the least, especially leg room. I couldn't shut the Malcolm hood of the Spit without my head hitting the top. An illusion was that sitting in a bubble top XVI gave me a better sense of space. The Hurricane is a bit more roomy inside, but there feels like there's less visibility because of the framing. The Mitsubishi Zero is quite comfortable and visibility is good, but the framing tends to block things out also, but its better than the Hurricane. The P-40 is actually quite good size wise and the Yak-3 is sparse, but comfortable and visibility is great. I found the P-51 roomy, but with the canopy closed I got a sense of being very exposed, I guess because of all that perspex. The Me 163 cockpit is small, but visibility is good, except behind - there's no visibility, but you're going so fast with your a*se on fire, I'd imagine you wouldn't worry too much about what's behind you! The worst thing about these fighters are the seats. They are all awful. American cockpits tend to be a bit better in terms of comfort compared to the sparse approach taken by the British fighters, but out of all, none were designed for tall people.

 

[soulezoo]

No wonder Jimmy Stewart flew -17's....

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I prefer the box office, but to each their own...

 

[MIflyer]

My 1946 Ercoupe has the original seat pan, with a large cushion that sits in the pan. There is not much to the seat, just the pan, cushion, and the back, which is fabric over lawn chair type webbing.

Some people complain about the seat, and modify the airplane to put in Cessna 150 seats or something else, but think it is the most comfortable aircraft seat I've ever used. I can sit there for hours, and while flying can be fatiguing, it's not the seat that contributes to it. I guess it really is a case of the airplane matching the pilot.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

My 1946 Ercoupe has the original seat pan, with a large cushion that sits in the pan. There is not much to the seat, just the pan, cushion, and the back, which is fabric over lawn chair type webbing.

Some people complain about the seat, and modify the airplane to put in Cessna 150 seats or something else, but think it is the most comfortable aircraft seat I've ever used. I can sit there for hours, and while flying can be fatiguing, it's not the seat that contributes to it. I guess it really is a case of the airplane matching the pilot.

"SCARECOUPE!"

I flew one once just after I got my pilot's license. I was looking at the plane to do an annual inspection and the "owner" asked me to try to land it after we got up into the pattern for a pre-inspection test flight (he wanted to show me a couple of things). The owner neglected to tell me he was a STUDENT PILOT and only flew with his instructor a few times. As we were on the downwind he got spooked and fessed up his true capability. Needless to say I learned very quickly how to land from the right seat. Thank god that thing had rudder pedals!!!!

I did his annual - charged him double my going rate. True story!

 

[herman1rg]

Apparently Charles Lindbergh's Spirit of St Louis plane was actually designed so that the cockpit was cramped so it kept him awake during the Transatlantic Solo flight.

 

[buffnut453]

No wonder Jimmy Stewart flew -17's....

I thought he flew B-24s.

 

[soulezoo]

I thought he flew B-24s.

Indeed he did... to get into the combat war. He was initially trained on B-17's though after AT-11's. He also flew Convair B-36 Peacemaker, Boeing B-47 Stratojet and Boeing B-52 Stratofortress.

James Stewart was a remarkable man.

 

[buffnut453]

Indeed he did... to get into the combat war. He was initially trained on B-17's though after AT-11's. He also flew Convair B-36 Peacemaker, Boeing B-47 Stratojet and Boeing B-52 Stratofortress.

James Stewart was a remarkable man.

Agree entirely. He didn't just play at being a hero in the movies. He was a war hero and a leader for real.

 

[KiwiBiggles]

Agree entirely. He didn't just play at being a hero in the movies. He was a war hero and a leader for real.

And I believe he had it written into all his post-war contracts that any publicity was not to mention his wartime service.

 

[buffnut453]

A class act..in every respect!