"Comfort" in cockpits of BOB adversaries

Originally Posted by Trumper

The pilot in the video is the ex BBMF leader Paul Day.

,probably has more flight time in a WW11 fighter than anyone else ,[maybe John Romain excepted] and you call him a twat and biased.
If you actually listen to what he says ,they are facts.
Cockpit is small/cramped
Canopy is heavy and difficult to get open [Black 6 crashed and the pilot asked the fire crews NOT to cut the airframe to release him] as he could'nt get out any other way had to be lifted.
http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org...es/lrg1545.jpg
He praises the controls,throttles,panel and the layout so not really totally biased against at all.
I think you need to listen more carefully and make a less biased statement yourself.

..since when having more flight time in a WW2 fighter than anyone else means you're not a xxxx?!

Ok, let's put it in this way: I met the man in person in a couple of occasions and both times he talked, behaved and addressed people like a xxxx, is that better?

As for what he says on the video, the patronising tone in which he's giving his comment on the bf109 is as useless as his judgement: these aeroplanes were developed for combat duty, and as such the bf109 design was far superior.
Yes, the cockpit is way more crammed, but for EVERYTHING ELSE the bf109 is by far better than the Spitfire. Just to give you a couple of examples: the Luftwaffe tended to select small size men for their fighter crews, a choice that meant a better tolerance of G-loads and ease of movement in a machine that was deliberately small; second thing (and this is something that your friend here forgot to mention) the spitfire was designed with engineering farts like a fuel tank behind the cockpit panel with no adequate firewall, which meant that many Commonwealth pilots suffered severe burns because of this "uh, whoopsie!"..

[Richard]

I sat in a F6F Hellcat and a P51 Cockpit once, (I'm 1.77m tall) both were pretty comfortable to me, The Hellcat cockpit feeling slightly bigger (to me) , I guess that the F4U Corsair had a similar cockpit size to the Hellcat as well.. So if I had to fly for 7 hrs straight, I think I'd pick the Hellcat, but there's no doubt that 109 'pit was a tight squeeze.

[Robotic Pope]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger

..Yes, the cockpit is way more crammed, but for EVERYTHING ELSE the bf109 is by far better than the Spitfire. Just to give you a couple of examples: the Luftwaffe tended to select small size men for their fighter crews, a choice that meant a better tolerance of G-loads and ease of movement in a machine that was deliberately small; second thing (and this is something that your friend here forgot to mention) the spitfire was designed with engineering farts like a fuel tank behind the cockpit panel with no adequate firewall, which meant that many Commonwealth pilots suffered severe burns because of this "uh, whoopsie!"..

G Force. Thats another thing he didn't mention about the 109 cockpit which gives the pilot an advantage over a spitfires. In a 109 you sit with your legs almost horizontal which gives you a far better G tolerance.

[robtek]

One thing in favor for the tighter cockpit is that even with the straps not tightened your position in the cockpit can be stayed by pressing your shoulders to the framework while the loosened straps gives the ability to turn your body and head if needed.
In a roomier cockpit one has to tighten the straps.

Originally Posted by Robotic Pope

G Force. Thats another thing he didn't mention about the 109 cockpit which gives the pilot an advantage over a spitfires. In a 109 you sit with your legs almost horizontal which gives you a far better G tolerance.

Another very important aspect indeed,but watch it when u say it,you might be called a Luftwhiner..

[Baron]

As i understood it the seat wasnt even adjusted to its lowest settings when he sat in the cockpit and to make it look even worse/cramped he closed the canopy, wich he didnt when he tested the spit.

Commenting on the cannon breach is another thing thats not really necessary, the pilot keeps his feets on the rudder pedals at all times. I mean, if the cannon breach wasnt there what is he suppose to do with that space anyways?. The flightstick is there either way so its not like he can cross his legs and take a nap in the spit because there is no cannon there.

[Chill31]

Interesting thoughts by you guys...

If your shoulders touch both sides of the cockpit as his do, its a tight spot so to speak. If your cranium touches the top of the canopy, its tighter still. Now trying to check 6 when youre pulling 5-6 Gs...its going to seem tiny.

Having been in a multitude of cockpits, I'd take his commentary at face value that the 109 is tiny inside and every inch I could get to move around would be valuable in combat.

In regard to pulling Gs, having your legs straight out vs dangling below you helps, but its not siginificant. For example, the F-16 seat is reclined at about 30 degrees. Even that doesnt contribute significantly to increasing your G tolerance...it takes something on the order of 60 degrees to get a noticeable increase in G tolerance. Something to be said for comfort though...