spitfire head movement

[Ball]

Again i would like to bring up the fact that the spitfire head movement is nowhere near as much as other aircraft, such as the 109.  why?

[Krusty]

Have you flown the 109s lately? There's almost no head movement up or forward. You only get side to side. You can't even "move up" far enough to get the center of the reticle off the gunsight in the 109s. It's sad.

[Ball]

you can move forward much further than you can in a spitfire!

[croduh]

Compare spitfire head to 163 , hellcat, mossie...
You can almost get out of those planes

[FBplmmr]

Originally posted by duh
Compare spitfire head to 163 , hellcat, mossie...
You can almost get out of those planes

Hellcat view is alot different since the patch... the canopy frame supports  exist now.

[Krusty]

You can't use the first-generation skins as comparison. Standards were less strict. Compared to the newly-remodeled planes, it seems about the same. I can raise my head in a spit, and move it side to side to see around the nose fairly well.

What exactly are you trying to do with the head position, ball?

[Ball]

http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=150667

[Krusty]

Ah, that old thread.

Well first consider that was with the old 109s. Now we have the new 109s.

Here's a thought, though. You point out the 109 cockpit is more cramped, and the spit more spacious. Well given equal head movements in both planes, you're going to get "closer" to the windows in the 109, because they're closer to the pilot's face. See what I mean? Maybe the head movements are identical, but the fact that the canopy is so confined in the 109s makes it "seem" to give more movement?

Compare it to the Hurricane. Compare it to the P51. Compare it to other spacious cockpit planes. I personally don't have too many problems with spitfire head movements, but that's just me.

[Ball]

Originally posted by Krusty
Here's a thought, though. You point out the 109 cockpit is more cramped, and the spit more spacious. Well given equal head movements in both planes, you're going to get "closer" to the windows in the 109, because they're closer to the pilot's face. See what I mean? Maybe the head movements are identical, but the fact that the canopy is so confined in the 109s makes it "seem" to give more movement?

that would mean that distance moved would be the same on both planes, which is not the case.

like guppy, i have been in a spitfire in real life.  i had no probs at all moving about.

[Krusty]

Were you strapped securely in place with all the belts? So securely that you wouldn't shift in your seat when slammed around by high-G manuvers? Sitting in my chair here, without taking the pressure off my shoulders, I can't move my head too far forward. In fact, I think HTC is a tad too generous with sideways movement, but I don't mind (otherwise we'd not be able to see squat).

I'm not trying to be argumentative, mind you. I've seen photos from the side of pilots sitting in spitfires, and of 109s. The gunsight on the 109 is just closer to the pilot's face. This is why it has a huge padded leather protector on it, to prevent beaning the pilot at times.

Perspective wise, anything that's closer is going to look larger in a 2D surface (like a monitor displaying AH). So it looks like the view moves a heluvva lot further but that's just perspective and distortion, maybe?

Only HTC can really say why this is, but I don't think you'll get a response unless you ask really nicely (where is that "Bribes" link??)

[Ball]

Originally posted by Ball


Again i would like to bring up the fact that the spitfire head movement is nowhere near as much as other aircraft, such as the 109.  why?

[Krusty]

No, no, the sprinkles go on TOP of the sugar, which goes on top of the question! You fool! You've ruined it!

[Ball]

Originally posted by Ball



Again i would like to bring up the fact that the spitfire head movement is nowhere near as much as other aircraft, such as the 109.  why?