Comparison of Spitfire/109 cocpit size

[Angus]

6 ft too
Only "dived" into the cockpit, and it seemed big enough.
Wish I could sit in a 109. The aircraft is clearly smaller though.
BTW, AFAIK the frontal area of the Griffon was smaller than the merlin!
(at least that was promptly posted on another thread)

[Pooface]

kurfurst, just do yourself a favor and stop talking:lol

[Charge]

"So, what you have is higher G tolerance in the Bf109 at the expense of making it a little harder to look to the rear whereas the Spitfire's pilot (or most other aircraft's pilots) will have more problems with G forces (this is something I'd like to see modeled in AH) but a little bit easier time looking to the rear."

I agree with you on this one Karnak.

The more upright sitting position (and preferably somewhat crouching)gives you ergonomically more freedom to move and turn your head to sides and thus to look behind your back. Of course it doesn't make looking back impossible in 109 but probably more straining in the long run.

I'd also like to point out that the upright position itself allows for better means of applying leverage to control column sideways but in Spitfire this feature was unfortunately negated by using the short span control column for aileron control. Pulling the stick was not a problem in Spitfire since the elevator forces were very low and the reclined position in 109 gave the pilot much needed better position to operate the heavy elevator of the 109.

-C+

[Angus]

You sit like in a racecar in a 109.
The Spitfire has stepped pedals for some compensation.
Some G suits were tried in late models, including the Mk VIII I belive.