colin Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 Looking at the pictures, if the seat is attached to the floor how high would the brackets be holding it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kopperhed Posted May 8, 2016 Share Posted May 8, 2016 Hi everyone Where the ridiculous assumption that the cockpit is "shallow" and must sit on a "wing top" [!] is originated from? I'm not kidding you, its blatantly shown on the box preview. If it has been stated that the cockpit floor on the real plane is the top of the wing, why is the cockpit floor shown in this picture a good half inch above the wing? Look how shriveled the seat and rudder pedals are, shrunk in order to accommodate the floor. Even the ammo box had to be placed into the fake floor, and its normally suspended above it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Óttar Posted May 8, 2016 Share Posted May 8, 2016 Thbolt I've heard for years that "the floor of the cockpit is basically the top of the wing in the real aircraft", but placing seat and controls at the "top of the wing" is impossible. What would be the pilot's field of view? Compare seated pilot to the man standing behind him. Look at the mechanic, who sits atop of the wing, and then look at the pilot, who actually sits higher. Your photo showing cockpit floor to good advantage kopperhed It is of great interest to me who made the initial statement that the cockpit floor on the real plane is the top of the wing? What is the source of this statement? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurent Posted May 8, 2016 Share Posted May 8, 2016 (edited) I'm not into warbirds so I don't know much about the P-40 but on this P-40E internal diagram (source: http://www.largescaleplanes.com/reviews/review.php?rid=927), the cockpit floor isn't the wing. Edited May 8, 2016 by Laurent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
occa Posted May 8, 2016 Share Posted May 8, 2016 I recall seeing a photo of the whole wing without the fuselage attached, maybe that would clear it up ? I only forgot where that was. Re the photo Ottar posted, from the position of the shoulders that would actually hint to that the floor IS the top center wing. Maybe the confusion comes from assuming the cockpit floor sits on the bottom part of the wing which would not make sense indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homebee Posted May 8, 2016 Author Share Posted May 8, 2016 https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10207394398232907&set=a.10207383348996683.1073741866.1075405438&type=3&theater V.P. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
occa Posted May 8, 2016 Share Posted May 8, 2016 This photo tells me it was a separate floor indeed, the guy would not be able to stand in the cockpit without the wing attached otherwise. Or maybe he has his feet on a frame, confusing lol ... It's hard to tell what's on the center of the top wing here: Photos are from here: http://www.belgianaviationnews.be/2015/05/vintageandwarbirdspictures-curtiss.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
occa Posted May 8, 2016 Share Posted May 8, 2016 Here's the proof the floor was the basically on the same level as the center of the wing top: http://the-wanderling.com/p-40 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurent Posted May 8, 2016 Share Posted May 8, 2016 P-40F servicing manual: http://www.avialogs.com/viewer/avialogs-documentviewer.php?id=3132 Page 45 indeed suggests that the top of the wing is the cockpit floor. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkmouth Posted May 8, 2016 Share Posted May 8, 2016 (edited) Comparing a crew member sitting on the wing to the pilot on a seat in the cockpit is a flawed approach to proving your point as the latter sits on a seat, not the cockpit floor (which in the case of this aircraft is the top surface of the wing)... Looking at the pictures, if the seat is attached to the floor how high would the brackets be holding it The seat is on rails which fit into sockets on the wing top which serves as the cockpit floor. Thbolt I've heard for years that "the floor of the cockpit is basically the top of the wing in the real aircraft", but placing seat and controls at the "top of the wing" is impossible.... It is of great interest to me who made the initial statement that the cockpit floor on the real plane is the top of the wing? What is the source of this statement? Then believe the impossible. I have no idea who made the initial statement but my experience with working with these warbirds tell me that the wing upper surface served as the cockpit floor as it is where you can find the shut off valves, hand pump, and fuel gages. This photo tells me it was a separate floor indeed, the guy would not be able to stand in the cockpit without the wing attached otherwise. Or maybe he has his feet on a frame, confusing lol ... It's hard to tell what's on the center of the top wing here: Occa, you are correct in that the worker has his feet on stringers to keep from falling through, note the position of his legs? There is a crouched factory worker in the second photo. Anyway, people won't believe unless they see so I fortunately have all the manuals and here are some scans from the erection of a Tomahawk: Regards, Edited May 8, 2016 by sharkmouth 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
occa Posted May 8, 2016 Share Posted May 8, 2016 Then believe the impossible. I have no idea who made the initial statement but my experience with working with these warbirds tell me that the wing upper surface served as the cockpit floor as it is where you can find the shut off valves, hand pump, and fuel gages. ..... Occa, you are correct in that the worker has his feet on stringers to keep from falling through, note the position of his legs? There is a crouched factory worker in the second photo. Anyway, people won't believe unless they see so I fortunately have all the manuals and here are some scans from the erection of a Tomahawk: Regards, ^^ Agreed to all points ^^ Thanks sharksmouth, that's the final proof there in your images from the manual. The stand alone one piece wing assembly helped to make the P-40 such a sturdy airplane, that was quite good engineering then ... it wouldn't make sense to introduce a separate cockpit floor, wasn't necessary at all. It would help sometimes if kit makers would learn about and understand the basic construction features of the subject they are modelling. I am not pointing fingers at Bronco at all, almost every maker makes such mistakes. Cheers, Martin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Esposito Posted May 8, 2016 Share Posted May 8, 2016 Ok....so what does all this mean for the kits cockpit accuracy? Is the Bronco kit cockpit accurate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkmouth Posted May 8, 2016 Share Posted May 8, 2016 Ok....so what does all this mean for the kits cockpit accuracy? Is the Bronco kit cockpit accurate? It means that the pilot's seat is literally on the raised floor, the rear bulkhead is too short, the rudder pedals don't have enough room to hang properly, the ammunition box doesn't hang but goes through the floor... everything is compressed. Regards, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tbolt Posted May 8, 2016 Share Posted May 8, 2016 (edited) Thbolt I've heard for years that "the floor of the cockpit is basically the top of the wing in the real aircraft", but placing seat and controls at the "top of the wing" is impossible. What would be the pilot's field of view? Compare seated pilot to the man standing behind him. Look at the mechanic, who sits atop of the wing, and then look at the pilot, who actually sits higher. Your photo showing cockpit floor to good advantage kopperhed It is of great interest to me who made the initial statement that the cockpit floor on the real plane is the top of the wing? What is the source of this statement? You do realize that in most aircraft the seat base doesn't sit on the floor?! Anyway thanks Sharkmouth for the good pictures. Edited May 8, 2016 by Tbolt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MIkeMaben Posted May 8, 2016 Share Posted May 8, 2016 (edited) As Tbolt said, the seat is mounted to a rack where the seat height was adjustable, so using the seat as an indicator of where the floor is wouldn't be useable. It does appear (to me) that the floor was integral to the top of the wing surface. Edited May 8, 2016 by MIkeMaben 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Óttar Posted May 9, 2016 Share Posted May 9, 2016 Page 43 of the manual posted by Laurent clearly distinguishing cockpit floor from "upper surfaces of the wing within the cockpit" http://www.avialogs.com/viewer/avialogs-documentviewer.php?id=3132 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurent Posted May 9, 2016 Share Posted May 9, 2016 (edited) Cockpit floor = wing top Edited May 9, 2016 by Laurent 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Óttar Posted May 9, 2016 Share Posted May 9, 2016 Laurent I'm well aware of this. Manual called it upper surfaces of the wing within the cockpit. It is not the same, as cockpit floor. Manual makes a distinction Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurent Posted May 9, 2016 Share Posted May 9, 2016 I'm well aware of this. Manual called it upper surfaces of the wing within the cockpit. It is not the same, as cockpit floor. Manual makes a distinction The text does but there's no photo to back it up. For all I know, perhaps it's a change of context. It's the wing top when it isn't assembled to the fuselage and it's the cockpit floor when it is. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troy Smith Posted May 9, 2016 Share Posted May 9, 2016 Laurent I'm well aware of this. Manual called it upper surfaces of the wing within the cockpit. It is not the same, as cockpit floor. Manual makes a distinction Manual is for P-40 F ,P-40 B/C is different http://modelingmadness.com/review/allies/us/tc/cleaverp40b.htm The problem with that is, the P-40B cockpit is about 10 inches deeper than the cockpit of the later-model P-40s, which had a fuselage that was reduced in fuselage depth and cross-section. As the only modeler I know of who has sat in both the P-40C restored by Fighter Rebuilders and the Planes of Fame P-40N, allow me to explain the difference: in the early P-40, the seat lets you sit like you’re in a chair, in an upright position, due to the cockpit depth. The seat in the later P-40s is right on the cockpit floor, and your feet are out in front of you nearly horizontally, while your shoulders are above the cockpit sill. The cockpit floor of a P-40 is right above the upper surface of the one-piece wing, so fuselage depth is the controlling factor. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkmouth Posted May 9, 2016 Share Posted May 9, 2016 (edited) On 5/9/2016 at 3:49 AM, Óttar said: I'm well aware of this. Manual called it upper surfaces of the wing within the cockpit. It is not the same, as cockpit floor. Manual makes a distinction I'm well aware of the procedure to remove and install the wing but I can't find your quote in my quick perusal of pages 43-44. I wrote that the upper wing serves as the cockpit floor so each time you see "cockpit floor" it refers to the upper wing surface within the fuselage where the pilot resides. The cockpit still extends further forward and there is an area behind the rudder pedals (from the pilot's viewpoint) where the oil tank and (from the P-40C on) armor plate was found. This area can only be reached through the cockpit and is past where the pilot resides thereby making it the wing surface. The only way to make the distinction is to put it in context once I find that quote. Is it referring to the area forward of the rudder pedals, the area behind the back plate armor where the fuel tank is, or where the pilot is located during the operation of the aircraft? Regards, Edited August 22, 2019 by sharkmouth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
occa Posted May 9, 2016 Share Posted May 9, 2016 As Tbolt said, the seat is mounted to a rack where the seat height was adjustable, so using the seat as an indicator of where the floor is wouldn't be useable. It does appear (to me) that the floor was integral to the top of the wing surface. That's the photo I was looking for ! Does this^^ still not convince you Ottar ? These items on the top wing center are all visible in photos of the cockpit floor 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Esposito Posted May 9, 2016 Share Posted May 9, 2016 Awwwww. So are you guys sure? Can't believe they did not fix that. Looks like Airfix... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
occa Posted May 9, 2016 Share Posted May 9, 2016 Awwwww. So are you guys sure? Can't believe they did not fix that. Looks like Airfix... Dunno how you mean that but Airfix have depicted it correctly in the CAD representation: I don't think they will botch this up 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Esposito Posted May 9, 2016 Share Posted May 9, 2016 Dunno how you mean that but Airfix have depicted it correctly in the CAD representation: I don't think they will botch this up Thanks. I mean that Trumpy boss released this kit in the past and messed up the cockpit. Will wait for the Airfix kit. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now