Jump to content

WW1 cockpit


Ernie
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hi guys,
 
Some years ago, I had a photo from a magazine that showed a WW1 cockpit. The thing about this cockpit was that it was increadibly dirty, held together with bits of string and tape, and generally really beaten up. I suspect it was closer to reality than the pristine examples we sometimes see
 
Does anyone have such a pic, or something similar. Of course, I'm happy to pay or whatever
 
ernie
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Advert


Wow doesnt that just bring it home to you ... no fancy HUDs in there eh, and I love the fact that you can actually see control cables running off the stick back to the tail feathers!
Pair of earphones hanging on a coat hook, and that seat is just great!
Theres more instrumentation in one small pod alone on my modern car dashboard, than in the entire aeroplane.  I Always reckon that in many ways these things must be easier to fly than the modern 'planes due to their relative simplicity - its all the complex systems of radar, radio, GPS, and the hundreds of bits of data that seem to bombard the pilot in a modern aircraft that has put me off wanting to learn to fly fullsize - I just know I wouldnt cope with all the classroom and navigation stuff.  However, I reckon I could just jump in this thing, and fly it by the seat of my pants.....and navigate by looking around. I thought that also when wifey went for a flight in a tiggy moth last year.
 
I have had a few sessions in light aircraft, and also a chopper, but of course, didnt have to worry about all the ancillary stuff in a half hour trial flight, and an instructor sitting alongside .
 
Great find BEB -Not too sure about the dodgy looking stains on the floor mind
Bit off topic I know, but the OP has had his answer I reckon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a point but I am not sure WW1 front line fighter aircraft had time to get really grubby. They were normally flown by the same pilot and maintained by a dedicated crew.
After all the average life expectancy of a pilot was only measured in weeks and even less for the airframe!
However the cockpit of a training aircraft, just as now, would be a completely different matter.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting point Simon.
 
The photo is of a Pup cockpit during WW1. As far as I know (I am happy to be corrected on this!) whilst Pups certainly were used as trainers after the war, they were not during the actual conflict itself - except perhaps some minor use in "combat update training" as described in James McCullough's (C de G, MC and bar, VC) book "Flying Fury". So, if that's true then the picture shows an operational WW1 cockpit as far as we know, and the fact is it is stained and some what "lived-in"!
 
One thing that might explain it. Whilst it is certainly true that in the earlier days of the war all the pilots were "gentlemen" and the ground crews would "know their place" and exhibit due care and deference over Mr So-and-so's airplane. Later in the war - especially mid to late 1918 - there is much evidence to show a state of complete exhaustion among both pilots and ground crew on both sides. Consider the large number of "aces" who had sucessfully survived from say 1915 only to be either shot down or killed in crashes following mechanical failure (caused by a lack of due dillegence on behalf of ground crews?) in the period April to Oct 1918. This might account for a fall in standards? Its possible.
 
BEB  

Edited By Biggles' Elder Brother on 26/11/2009 18:11:40

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to J M Bruce's very detailed article on the Pup in "Flight" January 1954:
 
"After its withdrawal from squadron service at the end of 1917, the Pup was widely used by Training Squadrons, and was eagerly sought after by senior officers for their personal use."
 
So it could indeed be a training Pup in 1917/8.
 
Its an interesting photo. It looks like a cartridge case chute from the centre of the cockpit and exiting under the floor to the right. This makes sense as the Vickers ejected downwards but I have not seen this feature on any of the current day cockpit pictures.
 
This is nice "pilots eye" view of a Vickers firing.

Edited By Simon Chaddock on 26/11/2009 19:19:59

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, having checked the Bruce article I have (I haven't had a chance to read it yet hence my uncertainty on this!) he does say effectively all of the 1918 production went into training squadrons - presumably they were not basic training though? So that bears out McCullough point above.
 
Interestingly this article uses the Pup cockpit picture I posted above - but printed the other way around! Obviously I'll have to check now which one is correct, not much point building the model with a cockpit that was a mirror image of reality!
 
BEB
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Timbo, for simplicity of flying you should try a flexwing microlight.....compass, ASI, VSI (perhaps), EGT (exhaust gas temp), altimeter & a map on yer lap.....thats about it!! Obviously you could add more if you wanted.....theres a joke about microlight pilots always flying "IFR" (which usually means Instrument Flight Rules & is down to visibility etc). In the microlight world this means "I Follow Roads"!!!!
 
Amazingly you can buy a flexwing microlight these days whose performance will just about match a WW1 scout...in speed, climb & service ceiling anyway. Not sure it would take two Vickers .303s though.....!!!
 
To get somewhere near back on topic how about this pic of a Harrier GR3 cockpit......this office has seen some action...
 

Sorry for being a long way off a WW1 cockpit but I thought it might be of interest.....


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted by Biggles' Elder Brother on 26/11/2009 18:09:52:.  You might like to read 'No Parachute' by Arthur Gould Lee where he describes his combat experiences flying Sopwith Pups against Albatros D IIIs on the Western Front.   Although armed with one Vickers against the Germans' twin Spandaus they were more than able to hold their own at high altitude.  The Pup stayed in service for far too long after obsolescence and Lee's squadron (no 46) greeted re-equipment with Camels with a sigh of relief.
 
The photo is of a Pup cockpit during WW1. As far as I know (I am happy to be corrected on this!) whilst Pups certainly were used as trainers after the war, they were not during the actual conflict itself - except perhaps some minor use in "combat update training" as described in James McCullough's (C de G, MC and bar, VC) book "Flying Fury". So, if that's true then the picture shows an operational WW1 cockpit as far as we know, and the fact is it is stained and some what "lived-in"!
 
One thing that might explain it. Whilst it is certainly true that in the earlier days of the war all the pilots were "gentlemen" and the ground crews would "know their place" and exhibit due care and deference over Mr So-and-so's airplane. Later in the war - especially mid to late 1918 - there is much evidence to show a state of complete exhaustion among both pilots and ground crew on both sides. Consider the large number of "aces" who had sucessfully survived from say 1915 only to be either shot down or killed in crashes following mechanical failure (caused by a lack of due dillegence on behalf of ground crews?) in the period April to Oct 1918. This might account for a fall in standards? Its possible.
 
BEB  

Edited By Biggles' Elder Brother on 26/11/2009 18:11:40

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info Martin, I'll certainly look out for that.
 
I'm at the "research" stage with the Pup at the moment. I've always liked the "lines" of the plane so have decided to build one. As always I try to find out as much as I can about a plane I plan to build - I find the research half the fun.
 
There certainly is a surprising amount of material out there on the Pup. On top of important mentions of it in books of memoirs such as you cite and that of McCullough, there is a windsock datafile (sadly out of print, but I have managed to secure a copy), a "profile" article, which I refer to above, and a couple of lesser articles. There is also a book dedicated to the Pup - which I have on my "Christmas Wish List" at Amazon in the hope that "her indoors" or one of the kids will take the hint!
 
So far my research shows you are absolutely right. The Pup enjoyed an early advantage due to its extreme agility. But by mid 1917 this was being eroded by improved German machines and by late 1917 it was quite frankly becoming a bit of a liability!
 
Thanks again for the tip. I am hoping to do a build blog on the Pup once a I start -  probably in the new year.
 
BEB
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...