Official Fulqrum Publishing forum - "Comfort" in cockpits of BOB adversaries

Official Fulqrum Publishing forum (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/index.php)

- IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/forumdisplay.php?f=189)

- - "Comfort" in cockpits of BOB adversaries (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/showthread.php?t=19008)

Look, I know I won't be remembered for my manners, but this kinda stuff is what really damages the history of aviation..

Apart for my personal opinion on the pilot (who again I suppose I can express thanks to the freedom of speech and on the grounds of my personal direct experience with the person), the approach and comments that he does have no value for the sake of a correct evaluation of the quality and flaws of the two cockpit, not to mention his final personal opinion on something that he never even flew in.

And for the intelligent folks who thinks I'm a Luftwhiner, there are other important flaws in the 109 design: a real annoying factor of the 109 (and 110) cockpit that very rarely comes up but that you will notice once we can play CoD is the shadows of the window frames around the cockpit: they move continuously and will partially cover instruments.

Going back to pilot's accounts, I would rather value the impressions and comments of Charlie Brown, who flew both the Bf109 (he's probably the only modern display pilot to have flown the G and E series) and various marks of Spitfire.

Lol, these video clips are becoming a weekly feature of this forum. :D

Such emotion. Should we not save this passion for virtually murdering each other online when COD comes out in a few weeks?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Il2Pongo (Post 230255)

we need his height and weight

FWIW In the video he describes himself as lightly built.

Cheers!

Quote:

Originally Posted by BadAim (Post 230437)

Such emotion. Should we not save this passion for virtually murdering each other online when COD comes out in a few weeks?

+1 Payback time!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt (Post 230418)

IUntil that point our air force mostly operated F-4s, Mirage F-1s, F-104s, F-5s, etc, from the 60s-70s up until the early 90s. During those years, any person in the military flight school was disqualified from flying fighters if he was taller than 1.80-1.85m and we're talking a mere 15-20 years ago.

I seam to remember the reason for the rule in the RAAF being if your legs were too long it would cause a small gap between your legs and the seat. If this was the case it resulted in to broken legs if you needed to eject.

Cheers!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger (Post 230284)

..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.

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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robotic Pope (Post 230448)

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