RAF P-40B Control Column

[Dave Fleming]

As above - would the RAF Tomahawk have had an RAF style spade grip or a US style control column (He asks having broken the top off his Airfix one.....)

[brewerjerry]

Hi

From the pilots notes AP 2013A Tomahawk I, ( unfortunately my copy has no photos )

1. Cockpit - The cockpit is fully equipped and has the normal stick and rudder pedal controls

3. Control Column - The control column is of the conventional design. The control column hand grip has two switches; the one on the top of the grip is a push button and operates the landing gear; the other is a trigger switch and operates the firing of the guns

I don't have photos for anything before the kittyhawk and this manual AP2014A, shows a US style stick.

Sorry but all my manuals, etc, are for D models onwards.

P-40B/C stuff is hard to get hold of.

cheers

Jerry

Edited October 26, 2011 by brewerjerry

[Terry McGrady]

As above - would the RAF Tomahawk have had an RAF style spade grip or a US style control column (He asks having broken the top off his Airfix one.....)

Hi Dave ,

Jerry is spot ion . US Style Control Column

Cheers

Terry McGrady

[Dave Fleming]

Thanks guys - I had hoped my clumsy breaking of it (after fitted to the model) could have an unexpected positive outcome, but at least the US style is easier to scratchbuild!!

[John]

Hi

From the pilots notes AP 2013A Tomahawk I, ( unfortunately my copy has no photos )

1. Cockpit - The cockpit is fully equipped and has the normal stick and rudder pedal controls

3. Control Column - The control column is of the conventional design. <snip>

cheers

Jerry

Given that this is from an RAF publication, I'd take that to mean spade grip?

John

[brewerjerry]

Given that this is from an RAF publication, I'd take that to mean spade grip?

John

Hi

open to personal interpretaton.

For example the hurricane AP actually refers to it having a 'spade grip'... whirlwind likewise...

So personally I would think the american type stick was being refered to.

Cheers

Jerry

[mhaselden]

I'm unaware of any US-procured fighters for the RAF having spade grips. The RAF did supply several "Government Furnished" components for all aircraft orders - examples include guns, radios, gunsights etc but these were typically installed after the aircraft had been erected by an MU or similar organisation. I don't see a huge stock of spade grips being sent to American factories - too much effort for not enough benefit. Certainly the Buffalo and Mustang never had a spade grip and I very much doubt that any other types, P-40 of any flavour included, would have had the spade grip.

[John]

I'm unaware of any US-procured fighters for the RAF having spade grips. The RAF did supply several "Government Furnished" components for all aircraft orders - examples include guns, radios, gunsights etc but these were typically installed after the aircraft had been erected by an MU or similar organisation. I don't see a huge stock of spade grips being sent to American factories - too much effort for not enough benefit. Certainly the Buffalo and Mustang never had a spade grip and I very much doubt that any other types, P-40 of any flavour included, would have had the spade grip.

The thought occurred because I remember buying a decal set for the accurate Miniatures P-51A when it came out and it included a resin spade grip for the RAF version. I would have thought it was something that would have been installed after delivery?

John

[Fernando]

The thought occurred because I remember buying a decal set for the accurate Miniatures P-51A when it came out and it included a resin spade grip for the RAF version. I would have thought it was something that would have been installed after delivery?

John

Hi, John,

I understand (and I remember having seen the picture) that the prototype only NA.73 had a spade grip. Even so, from the picture I seem to remember shows a "normal" stick (i.e. one piece) with the spade grip in place of the "pistol grip", and not the "cranked stick" (i.e., two parts, where the stick itself moves backwards-forwards and it is the upper portion which gives the lateral movement) peculiar to British made fighters.

Fernando

Edited October 27, 2011 by Fernando

[Terry McGrady]

The thought occurred because I remember buying a decal set for the accurate Miniatures P-51A when it came out and it included a resin spade grip for the RAF version. I would have thought it was something that would have been installed after delivery?

John

Just goes to show that you can't always trust Decal Manufacturers . The Pilots notes I have for Mustangs and P40's show US style "sticks" n the cockpit photos .

There was one photo published and bandied about the 'net showing a Prototype or mock up Mustang with a spade grip . Many people on seeing it have assumed that the "Spade Grip" was fitted to them all

Another case of "Internet reality" differing from the truth . An all too often occurence I'm afraid

Cheers

Terry McGrady

[mhaselden]

We need to remember that this was as much an integration issue as anything else (at least in the terms of 1940s technology). As previously noted, RAF control columns only moved fore and aft to control the elevators. The side-to-side motion for aileron control was accomplished using an upper section that rotated around a fulcrum More importantly, the spade grip also included other controls, the most notable being the wheel brake lever. In British aircraft, the brake lever was hand-operated, with differential braking being applied using the rudder pedals. Wheel brakes on American aircraft were typically operated by the pilot pushing his toes onto the upper portion of the rudder pedal.

Why am I banging on about this? Because the differences in control ergonomics and functions would make it far more challenging integration task than simply lopping off the offending American pistol grip and replacing it with that nice, circular British spade grip.

[Dave Fleming]

Makes complete sense Mark (although when did British aircraft designers look at ergonomics.....). I just recalled someone stating once that control columns had been replaced on some American aircraft.

[ColFord]

I'll make the point regarding a very limited number of early N.A. Mustang Mk.I aircraft that had the US factory supplied 'pistol' grip top replaced by the circular 'spade' grip top from what I was informed by those there at the time an RAF Harvard Mk.I. Was apparently a fairly simple swap over job as the electrical wiring in the control column and grip top was the same, the mounting was the same - both for NAA products. The modification was made as a personal modification for a couple of senior officers who were in command of ACC Mustang Squadrons, and was based on their personal preference for that type of grip based on their flying career with the RAF up until then. So put onto the CO's 'personal' aircraft. Not a widespread thing and something that dropped out of favour as the US style grip became more prevalent and turnover of aircraft increased.

Now given these same Squadrons were also operating the Tomahawk, with the same CO's, it has made me wonder if they might have tried something similar with the Tomahawk. Something I never thought to ask them when I was making my inquiries and unfortunately the last of those who had flown a Mustang Mk.I with a spade grip when he had flown the CO's personal Mustang and had flown Tomahawks before that passed away last year.

The couple of surviving pilot's I am in contact with who flew Tomahawks, only flew them for a number of hours at 41OTU as a stepping stone between the Harvard and the Mustang, or later on the Squadron as a 'hack' and only recall the US style grip.

ADDED EXTRA INFO - The important thing to remember is, very limited number of Mustangs had the control column modification, it utilised a component already available through the RAF stores system, it was a component already manufactured by NAA for the RAF Harvard Mk.I, so it was a simple modification. It was not taking a control column top section that was from a different manufacturers aircraft or with different controls fitted, and making modifications to make it work. It was a solution already developed by NAA for the Harvard Mk.1, which from what I was told was about a ten minute job to swap over.

Regards,

Edited October 28, 2011 by ColFord

[mhaselden]

although when did British aircraft designers look at ergonomics.....

Oh British aircraft have always been ergonomically designed. Unfortunately, their model was a 5ft 6in male with 4 arms, each 6 feet long, only 2 legs but with shin bones twice the length of the thighs, and bestowed of absolutely no desire to procreate (or, perhaps, any such desire was eliminated following said model's first flight in a British-designed aircraft!).

[John]

We need to remember that this was as much an integration issue as anything else (at least in the terms of 1940s technology). As previously noted, RAF control columns only moved fore and aft to control the elevators. The side-to-side motion for aileron control was accomplished using an upper section that rotated around a fulcrum More importantly, the spade grip also included other controls, the most notable being the wheel brake lever. In British aircraft, the brake lever was hand-operated, with differential braking being applied using the rudder pedals. Wheel brakes on American aircraft were typically operated by the pilot pushing his toes onto the upper portion of the rudder pedal.

Why am I banging on about this? Because the differences in control ergonomics and functions would make it far more challenging integration task than simply lopping off the offending American pistol grip and replacing it with that nice, circular British spade grip.

It was the grip specifically I was thinking about, rather than the full control column. Further to ColFord's post above, Harvards were the other type I was thinking about.

John

[Dave Fleming]

It was the grip specifically I was thinking about, rather than the full control column.

Actually, me too as well.

[mhaselden]

But "just the grip" still involves more controls, per my earlier posts. See these examples:

Now, you could remove the brake lever and re-plumb the firing button but, again, is it worth the effort to do that for every US fighter you're receiving? In combat ops, it would further slow the delivery of replacement airframes to the front-line squadrons, and necessitate a regular supply of these ad hoc spade grips. It just doesn't make logistical sense to me.

Edited October 28, 2011 by mhaselden

[brewerjerry]

Hi

If it were fairly common, there would have been mention in the pilots notes, but then maybe for senior officers different things happened, (R.H.I.P.) but for 'normal rank and file' it would be normal stuff, as aircraft were usually shared.

In the end if you are building a particular aircraft, a photograph will kill any arguments you have when you built the model.

Failing that I personally would go for the normal US fitting.

Cheers

Jerry

Edited October 28, 2011 by brewerjerry

[Test Graham]

Logistic sense may be less obvious than that. The RAF changed the seat belts in US-supplied aircraft to the British standard which would be equally non-sensible: but is it? The aircraft can be expected to operate wherever the RAF did. It would require spares to be provided, and the greater the type-specific number of such spares the greater the logistic load. If every aircraft used the same seat-belts and the same stick and indeed whatever else could possibly be common, the lower the logistic problems. The less stuff to be transported around the world, the less to be handled, stored and recorded, the fewer people to train on that particular bit, no extra part of the manual to be written and printed (and transported around the world) and - not least - less chance that part XY would not be in stock when an aircraft fell sick.

[mhaselden]

I believe the Sutton harnesses were factory fitted.

As to the logistics issue, I very much doubt there was much call for additional handgrips given the (relatively) short operational lives of most airframes. However, changing from a US to a UK grip at the MU level would induce a greater logistical burden.

[Dave Fleming]

I'm convinced, US grip it is - and I doubt anyone is going to prove me wrong!!

Edited October 28, 2011 by Dave Fleming

[HBBates]

It was a stick ....in all Curtiss H81/P40/Tomahawk....but the Seat was diffrent in the P40 vs the Tomahawk ..the airfix kit has the US P40 type seat

http://www.freewebs.com/p40-tomahawk/

=========================

DESCRIPTION:

Tomahawk Mark IIB, AK184: cockpit interior, port side. Photograph taken at Air Service Training Ltd, Hamble Hampshire.

http://www.iwmcollections.org.uk/dbtw-wpd/...mp;FG=0&QS=

Edited October 30, 2011 by HBBates

[Edgar]

The Sutton harness is a fairly safe bet, since orders, in a file in Kew, dated February 1941, state that, among other necessary spares, a "harness type A" should be included for every airframe, and, in a later order, when the U.S. offered to deliver direct to the Med, the list of spares also stipulated that Sutton harnesses should be sent out from the U.K.

This comes from the Tomahawk I Pilot's notes:-

Edgar

Edited October 30, 2011 by Edgar

[Wez]

This comes from the Tomahawk I Pilot's notes:-

Edgar

I'd say that was pretty conclusive then! No apparent change between the Mk.I and II in HB's post either.

Interesting that the Sutton Harness was supplied as GFE too.

Thanks for posting.

Wez

[Dave Fleming]

Thanks again chaps - very useful stuff - I decided to raid the spares box for the sprues of an old Academy kit I started years ago (as in painted the cockpit and stuck the wings together) - the top of the control column is close enough for me in 1/72. Interestingly, it's got a square seat back - I'll probably leave the round Airfix one as my cockpit will be closed, and it's my model! Future ones may be squared off however!!

Dave