1/2 place flex seating configuration

[Jay]

Trading off tandem vs side by side seating I came upon an idea I
wanted to run by the group. The mission my aircraft needs to perform
is mostly a single place weekend out and back kind of mission, with an
occasional 2 person XC trip. I'd been homing on the tandem seat
config because I like the fighter plane style symetric seating. But
my spouse doesn't like the idea of having to look at the back of my
head for 4 hours on trips and prefers the side by side configuration.
But I don't want to sit scrunched on one side of the aircraft year
round with the canopy next the side of my head because twice a year
she wants to have a seat beside me. And of course you have the
left/right unbalance. But then after a ride in a Zenith I had an
idea:

Zenith planes use single stick between the 2 passengers, either person
can use to fly. If the seat was bench style, I could sit in the
middle when flying solo, and push the 2 outside rudder pedals of the 2
pairs (or move cables to the 2 middle ones). You don't really need a
bucket seat in an airplane as you do in a car because most forces are
normal to the plane defined by the wings and thrust vector. It would
just be a nice roomy single seater at that point. Anyone seen
anything like this before?

[Gig Giacona]

You don't mention which Zenith you rode in so what I say is based on the
601XL as that is what I'm building. To do what you are talking about you
would have to raise the seat a significant amount to clear the control
cables which would lead to hear room clearance problems. Or you could
reroute them which I think would be WAY more trouble that it's worth.

Gig Giacona
www.peoamerica.net/N601WR


"Jay" > wrote in message
om...
> Trading off tandem vs side by side seating I came upon an idea I
> wanted to run by the group. The mission my aircraft needs to perform
> is mostly a single place weekend out and back kind of mission, with an
> occasional 2 person XC trip. I'd been homing on the tandem seat
> config because I like the fighter plane style symetric seating. But
> my spouse doesn't like the idea of having to look at the back of my
> head for 4 hours on trips and prefers the side by side configuration.
> But I don't want to sit scrunched on one side of the aircraft year
> round with the canopy next the side of my head because twice a year
> she wants to have a seat beside me. And of course you have the
> left/right unbalance. But then after a ride in a Zenith I had an
> idea:
>
> Zenith planes use single stick between the 2 passengers, either person
> can use to fly. If the seat was bench style, I could sit in the
> middle when flying solo, and push the 2 outside rudder pedals of the 2
> pairs (or move cables to the 2 middle ones). You don't really need a
> bucket seat in an airplane as you do in a car because most forces are
> normal to the plane defined by the wings and thrust vector. It would
> just be a nice roomy single seater at that point. Anyone seen
> anything like this before?

[Mitch Hines]

Have you looked at the Sonex? ( www.sonex-ltd.com ) With the center stick
it can be flown from the center with one foot on the far left rudder pedal
and the other on the far right. The designer even mentions this in the
informational video. It can also be built with two sticks, but the center
stick is common just for the reason you mentioned, flying in the center when
solo.


--Mitch


Mitch Hines
Alon A-2 Aircoupe
N6369V


Flight by machines heavier than air is unpractical
and insignificant, if not utterly impossible.

- Simon Newcomb, 1902



"Jay" > wrote in message
om...
> Trading off tandem vs side by side seating I came upon an idea I
> wanted to run by the group. The mission my aircraft needs to perform
> is mostly a single place weekend out and back kind of mission, with an
> occasional 2 person XC trip. I'd been homing on the tandem seat
> config because I like the fighter plane style symetric seating. But
> my spouse doesn't like the idea of having to look at the back of my
> head for 4 hours on trips and prefers the side by side configuration.
> But I don't want to sit scrunched on one side of the aircraft year
> round with the canopy next the side of my head because twice a year
> she wants to have a seat beside me. And of course you have the
> left/right unbalance. But then after a ride in a Zenith I had an
> idea:
>
> Zenith planes use single stick between the 2 passengers, either person
> can use to fly. If the seat was bench style, I could sit in the
> middle when flying solo, and push the 2 outside rudder pedals of the 2
> pairs (or move cables to the 2 middle ones). You don't really need a
> bucket seat in an airplane as you do in a car because most forces are
> normal to the plane defined by the wings and thrust vector. It would
> just be a nice roomy single seater at that point. Anyone seen
> anything like this before?

[James R. Freeman]

The Evans VP-2 is designed to fly that way. Center stick feet on the
outer petals,

"Jay" > wrote in message
om...
> Trading off tandem vs side by side seating I came upon an idea I
> wanted to run by the group. The mission my aircraft needs to perform
> is mostly a single place weekend out and back kind of mission, with an
> occasional 2 person XC trip. I'd been homing on the tandem seat
> config because I like the fighter plane style symetric seating. But
> my spouse doesn't like the idea of having to look at the back of my
> head for 4 hours on trips and prefers the side by side configuration.
> But I don't want to sit scrunched on one side of the aircraft year
> round with the canopy next the side of my head because twice a year
> she wants to have a seat beside me. And of course you have the
> left/right unbalance. But then after a ride in a Zenith I had an
> idea:
>
> Zenith planes use single stick between the 2 passengers, either person
> can use to fly. If the seat was bench style, I could sit in the
> middle when flying solo, and push the 2 outside rudder pedals of the 2
> pairs (or move cables to the 2 middle ones). You don't really need a
> bucket seat in an airplane as you do in a car because most forces are
> normal to the plane defined by the wings and thrust vector. It would
> just be a nice roomy single seater at that point. Anyone seen
> anything like this before?

[Martin Morgan]

Yep. That is how the Rans S-10 is set up. I have flown an S-10, but only
2 up so I can't say how good it is. I imagine that the compromise is the
loss of view out the sides and always having frontal area that you don't
always need.

I am told that it works quite well though. And since I have a serious
bent to centerline flying, I'd probably set up that way if there was no
way of saying NO to the missus... :)

Martin
Pitts S-1S


Jay wrote:

> Trading off tandem vs side by side seating I came upon an idea I
> wanted to run by the group. The mission my aircraft needs to perform
> is mostly a single place weekend out and back kind of mission, with an
> occasional 2 person XC trip. I'd been homing on the tandem seat
> config because I like the fighter plane style symetric seating. But
> my spouse doesn't like the idea of having to look at the back of my
> head for 4 hours on trips and prefers the side by side configuration.
> But I don't want to sit scrunched on one side of the aircraft year
> round with the canopy next the side of my head because twice a year
> she wants to have a seat beside me. And of course you have the
> left/right unbalance. But then after a ride in a Zenith I had an
> idea:
>
> Zenith planes use single stick between the 2 passengers, either person
> can use to fly. If the seat was bench style, I could sit in the
> middle when flying solo, and push the 2 outside rudder pedals of the 2
> pairs (or move cables to the 2 middle ones). You don't really need a
> bucket seat in an airplane as you do in a car because most forces are
> normal to the plane defined by the wings and thrust vector. It would
> just be a nice roomy single seater at that point. Anyone seen
> anything like this before?

[BllFs6]

Hi all


This thread reminds me of something I've been wondering about the past year or
2....

Okay, you have side by side seating...in which you either have a nice wide
cockpit and pay a substantial weight/aero penalty....or you have your shoulders
rubbing the canopy on one side and the passengers on the other....

Or, you can take inline seating....but now the passenger gets to stare at the
back of the pilots head and really cant help with watching guages (well they
can if you install 2 of everything....another penalty there) or flying or
digging up maps etc etc....


So, what about a mixture of the two?

Imagine side by side seats.....but you slide the passenger seat back roughly 2
feet.....if you do that and allow the passengers legs to be lower than the
level of the pilots hips....you can have a pretty narrow cabin that would still
allow a decent amount of elbow/hip/shoulder room .....and perhaps even allow
for the left (say) passengers leg to be under the pilots seat....

Anyone ever seen an arrangement like that?


Seems to me that it might be a more efficient and comfortable way to pack
people and stuff into a small cabin....


take care

Blll

[Russell Kent]

BllFs6 wrote:

> Hi all
>
> This thread reminds me of something I've been wondering about the past year or
> 2....
>
> Okay, you have side by side seating...in which you either have a nice wide
> cockpit and pay a substantial weight/aero penalty....or you have your shoulders
> rubbing the canopy on one side and the passengers on the other....
>
> Or, you can take inline seating....but now the passenger gets to stare at the
> back of the pilots head and really cant help with watching guages (well they
> can if you install 2 of everything....another penalty there) or flying or
> digging up maps etc etc....
>
> So, what about a mixture of the two?
>
> Imagine side by side seats.....but you slide the passenger seat back roughly 2
> feet.....if you do that and allow the passengers legs to be lower than the
> level of the pilots hips....you can have a pretty narrow cabin that would still
> allow a decent amount of elbow/hip/shoulder room .....and perhaps even allow
> for the left (say) passengers leg to be under the pilots seat....
>
> Anyone ever seen an arrangement like that?
>
> Seems to me that it might be a more efficient and comfortable way to pack
> people and stuff into a small cabin....

Like this?




Russell Kent

[Russell Kent]

BllFs6 wrote:

> Hi all
>
> This thread reminds me of something I've been wondering about the past year or
> 2....
>
> Okay, you have side by side seating...in which you either have a nice wide
> cockpit and pay a substantial weight/aero penalty....or you have your shoulders
> rubbing the canopy on one side and the passengers on the other....
>
> Or, you can take inline seating....but now the passenger gets to stare at the
> back of the pilots head and really cant help with watching guages (well they
> can if you install 2 of everything....another penalty there) or flying or
> digging up maps etc etc....
>
> So, what about a mixture of the two?
>
> Imagine side by side seats.....but you slide the passenger seat back roughly 2
> feet.....if you do that and allow the passengers legs to be lower than the
> level of the pilots hips....you can have a pretty narrow cabin that would still
> allow a decent amount of elbow/hip/shoulder room .....and perhaps even allow
> for the left (say) passengers leg to be under the pilots seat....
>
> Anyone ever seen an arrangement like that?
>
> Seems to me that it might be a more efficient and comfortable way to pack
> people and stuff into a small cabin....

Arrg.... Let me try that again.

Here is a URL to a project with staggered seating.

http://www.canard.com/~noselift/Stagger_EZ/body_stagger_ez.htm

Russell Kent

[Henry Bibb]

"Jay" > wrote in message
om...
>
> Zenith planes use single stick between the 2 passengers, either person
> can use to fly. If the seat was bench style, I could sit in the
> middle when flying solo, and push the 2 outside rudder pedals of the 2
> pairs (or move cables to the 2 middle ones). You don't really need a
> bucket seat in an airplane as you do in a car because most forces are
> normal to the plane defined by the wings and thrust vector. It would
> just be a nice roomy single seater at that point. Anyone seen
> anything like this before?

Luscombe model 8. Conventional sticks, but the technique
works.

Henry Bibb

[Leon McAtee]

> So, what about a mixture of the two?
>
> Imagine side by side seats.....but you slide the passenger seat back roughly 2
> feet.....if you do that and allow the passengers legs to be lower than the
> level of the pilots hips....you can have a pretty narrow cabin that would still
> allow a decent amount of elbow/hip/shoulder room .....and perhaps even allow
> for the left (say) passengers leg to be under the pilots seat....
>
> Anyone ever seen an arrangement like that?

There is an article in an old Popular Mechanix or Science where just
that seating arangment was proposed for a "next generation" trainer.
IIRC Rutan had something to do with the article........

>
> Blll

For the original poster - Since she doesn't like the look of the back
of your head, have you considered turning her around and let her look
where you have been? This arngment also has the added benefit of
having the pilot and passanger's CG closer together than the
traditional arangment.

[Ron Wanttaja]

On 18 Dec 2003 18:00:42 -0800, (Leon McAtee) wrote:

>> So, what about a mixture of the two?
>>
>> Imagine side by side seats.....but you slide the passenger seat back roughly 2
>> feet.....if you do that and allow the passengers legs to be lower than the
>> level of the pilots hips....you can have a pretty narrow cabin that would still
>> allow a decent amount of elbow/hip/shoulder room .....and perhaps even allow
>> for the left (say) passengers leg to be under the pilots seat....
>>
>> Anyone ever seen an arrangement like that?
>
>There is an article in an old Popular Mechanix or Science where just
>that seating arangment was proposed for a "next generation" trainer.
>IIRC Rutan had something to do with the article........

I believe the DH Mosquito had just such an arrangement...at least if I
remember "633 Squadron" correctly.

Ron "Vesuvius" Wanttaja

[Martin Morgan]

BllFs6 wrote:

> Hi all
>
>
> This thread reminds me of something I've been wondering about the past year or
> 2....
>
> Okay, you have side by side seating...in which you either have a nice wide
> cockpit and pay a substantial weight/aero penalty....or you have your shoulders
> rubbing the canopy on one side and the passengers on the other....
>
> Or, you can take inline seating....but now the passenger gets to stare at the
> back of the pilots head and really cant help with watching guages (well they
> can if you install 2 of everything....another penalty there) or flying or
> digging up maps etc etc....
>
>
> So, what about a mixture of the two?
>
> Imagine side by side seats.....but you slide the passenger seat back roughly 2
> feet.....if you do that and allow the passengers legs to be lower than the
> level of the pilots hips....you can have a pretty narrow cabin that would still
> allow a decent amount of elbow/hip/shoulder room .....and perhaps even allow
> for the left (say) passengers leg to be under the pilots seat....
>
> Anyone ever seen an arrangement like that?
>
>
> Seems to me that it might be a more efficient and comfortable way to pack
> people and stuff into a small cabin....
>
>
> take care
>
> Blll

Burt Rutan staggered the 2 front seats (a little) in his Boomerang. The
idea was just to get the shoulders from hitting each other.

The Percival Gull had 3 seats all staggered. The middle seat could fold
out of the way to give a "tandem" with a walk way.

I'm sure there are lots of others, the 2 mentioned are reported to work
very well.

Martin
Pitts S1-S

[Jay]

(Leon McAtee) wrote in message >...

> For the original poster - Since she doesn't like the look of the back
> of your head, have you considered turning her around and let her look
> where you have been? This arngment also has the added benefit of
> having the pilot and passanger's CG closer together than the
> traditional arangment.

Thats actually one I've toyed with in my own designs for the reasons
you've mentioned but it looks like nothing like that exists in kit
form which is more likely to happen.

In previous posts people had complained about looking backwards but
apart from takeoff and landings, when you're up high, the relative
motion is so slow, there is very little difference in the feeling of
forward or backward. I've flown commercial backwards and you don't
notice except for having lots of leg room.

The down side of having the other set backwards is that the other
person will NEVER fly the plane which would me many wives. I like the
idea of having a single seater that can act as a 2 place for checkout
though.