Spitfire Controls

Unlike the toe brakes on aircraft produced by others, brakes
on Brit airplanes were activated by a single lever.

The Piper Colt had a single brake handle, but at least it was a trike.
It must have been a bear, handling a taildragger on the ground without
differential brakes, especially on asphalt.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

The Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
Viva Bush! weblog www.vivabush.org

Unlike the toe brakes on aircraft produced by others, brakes
on Brit airplanes were activated by a single lever.

The Piper Colt had a single brake handle, but at least it was a trike.
It must have been a bear, handling a taildragger on the ground without
differential brakes, especially on asphalt.

They had differential brakes. with the pedals center, when the lever is pulled,
you got pressure to both brakes, if you have the left pedal in, you get left
brake, if you got right pedal in, you get right brake. The system is very easy
to operate, just I don't like air systems, it can be a bitch finding a leak.
Matt Gunsch,
A&P,IA,Private Pilot
Riding member of the
2003 world champion drill team
Arizona Precision Motorcycle Drill Team
GWRRA,NRA,GOA

right hand at the top of the circle (at the 12 o'clock
position) and fire using his thumb. I would think this would get
tiring on the wrist

I don't think Dowding expected his pilots to survive long enough to
sue him for carpal tunnel syndrome

As to the main question, it's a good one but I can't help. I can't
imagine a fighter without a stick. As a matter of fact, I don't
particularly like using a wheel on any aircraft, especially when
taxiiing.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

The Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
Viva Bush! www.vivabush.org

N-6 twisted the electrons to say:
I am unable to tell exaclty from pictures, but are there seperate
triggers to fire the cannons only, the machine guns only, and both the
cannons and MGs at the same time?

Early spitfires had machine guns only, and had a round button on the
stick. Later on when they went to a mixed machine gun/cannon armament[1]
they fitted a rectangular button. If pressed in the centre it fired both
types of gun, if pressed at the top it fired one sort and if pressed at
the bottom it fired the other (can't remember which way round tho!).

Later on they went cannon-only and I suspose went back to the round
buttons?

[1] That's the 4x 303 and 2x 20mm combination. There where some high
altitude conversions done with 2x .50 and 2x 20mm, and I don't know
what arrangements they had ...
--
These opinions might not even be mine ...
Let alone connected with my employer ...

btw, I have often read that japanese pilots were unhappy with the MG/cannon
(A6M, J2M) firing with different ballistic behaviour, but never heard about
Spit pilots complaints except about the early Hispano jamming and recoil
shake.
Any hints ?

Yann

I am unable to tell exaclty from pictures, but are there seperate
triggers to fire the cannons only, the machine guns only, and both the
cannons and MGs at the same time?

Early spitfires had machine guns only, and had a round button on the
stick. Later on when they went to a mixed machine gun/cannon armament[1]
they fitted a rectangular button. If pressed in the centre it fired both
types of gun, if pressed at the top it fired one sort and if pressed at
the bottom it fired the other (can't remember which way round tho!).

Later on they went cannon-only and I suspose went back to the round
buttons?

[1] That's the 4x 303 and 2x 20mm combination. There where some high
altitude conversions done with 2x .50 and 2x 20mm, and I don't know
what arrangements they had ...
--
These opinions might not even be mine ...
Let alone connected with my employer ...

In article ,
"Yann D" writes:
btw, I have often read that japanese pilots were unhappy with the MG/cannon
(A6M, J2M) firing with different ballistic behaviour, but never heard about
Spit pilots complaints except about the early Hispano jamming and recoil
shake.
Any hints ?

The Japanese 20mm cannon used on the A6ms was a low velocity weapon
with a fairly poor ballistic coefficient. (So lots of drop). The
20mm Hispano used by the Brits as a high velocity weapon with a better
shell design, and it matched fairly well with the trajectory of teh
Browning .30 and .50 guns over teh ranges normally encountered in
combat.

--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster

N-6 wrote:

Anyone out there that has flown or been in the cockpit of a
Supermarine Spitfire? I am wondering about the circular control
"handle" particular to the British fighter and how it seems to me that
it would have been quite awkward or uncomfortable to use (compared to
a conventional fighter stick) especially in a dogfighting situation
(i.e. when manuvering and firing guns at the same time). Due to the
placement of the triggers, the pilot would apparently need to grip the
handle with his right hand at the top of the circle (at the 12 o'clock
position) and fire using his thumb. I would think this would get
tiring on the wrist and perhaps make precision aiming difficult. So
what's it really like? I am unable to tell exaclty from pictures, but
are there seperate triggers to fire the cannons only, the machine guns
only, and both the cannons and MGs at the same time?

Already answered by someone else.

Also, is it true that the prop pitch/rpm control was automatic on the
Spit, so the pilot did not have to worry about it during a dogfight
unlike most other allied prop-fighters? I believe the German fighters
(109 & 190) also had automatic control of this function. I've only
flown a couple fixed-pitch propellor Cessna's in my life, but I'd
imagine having to simultaneously manage both the engine throttle and
propellor pitch/rpm during a dogfight would be somewhat of a heavy
workload for the pilot, so in this respect I gather the Spitfire would
have been easier to control than most other prop-fighters.

No, prop/rpm was manual, although the Spit progressed from a wooden
fixed-pitch prop to a metal two-pitch prop to a constant-speed prop in
slightly over a year. AFAIK, there was nothing like the FW-190's
Kommandogerat (IIRR that's what it was called). As a practical matter,
though, the workload in a dogfight was minimal -- you put everything
(mixture/prop/ throttle) full forward and left it there. It was how
quickly you could change from cruise settings to combat settings in a
hurry where the single power lever had the advantage.

Guy

Anyone out there that has flown or been in the cockpit of a
Supermarine Spitfire? I am wondering about the circular control
"handle" particular to the British fighter and how it seems to me that
it would have been quite awkward or uncomfortable to use (compared to
a conventional fighter stick) especially in a dogfighting situation

Never flew a Spit (Dammmit), but I can tell you that "especially in a
dogfighting situation," being able to move the stick with both hands
would be an advantage. After a few minutes of trying to get on the
other guy's six it's hard manual labor, even with trim tabs. I
imagine that was the reason for the circular top on the stick.

It was not a "wheel." It didn't turn. It operated just like an
ordinary stick except that it was hinged part-way down and "bent" left
or right when aileron was applied.

vince norris