Offset cockpits
Thread Starter
Offset cockpits
Inspired by seeing the PR9... Does anyone remember why the Canberra B(I)8 and PR9, and the Sea Vixen, had offset cockpits?
May be a different explanation for each since the SV had side-by-side seating and the Canberra was tandem. Was it to provide the pilot with a view unobstructed by the nav's head? Or on the Sea Vixen, there was not enough length in the nacelle for tandem and side-by-side/same level would have been too much drag?
Or were they afraid that the nav would get distracted by the pretty clouds floating by?
May be a different explanation for each since the SV had side-by-side seating and the Canberra was tandem. Was it to provide the pilot with a view unobstructed by the nav's head? Or on the Sea Vixen, there was not enough length in the nacelle for tandem and side-by-side/same level would have been too much drag?
Or were they afraid that the nav would get distracted by the pretty clouds floating by?
The original Canberras all had a crew access door fitted in the fuselage 8 O'clock position with the pilot's seat offset to the left. The PR9, although a new-build, was based on the PR7 but with a modification to the B(I)8 nose. The latter was itself a modification of the original Canberra and although it incorporated a 'fighter' style cockpit, access was still gained through the side hatch and so the pilot's seat maintained this offset position. The modified nose for the PR9 incorporated an opening cockpit for access and dispensed with the side hatch. The rear navigator position was also dispensed with and a new navigator station built in front of the pilot. Navigator access was through the hinged nose! To have put the pilot exactly on the centreline would have necessitated a redesign of the flying controls and much of the cockpit.
It was hardly noticeable from a handling point of view, but did give a better view of the ground when using the port-facing oblique cameras.
The PR9 had a large space below and to the right of the pilot where the access door would have been. This became a great place to store baggage etc, but was covered with the sliding fuel panel. Not a good place to drop you map!
It was hardly noticeable from a handling point of view, but did give a better view of the ground when using the port-facing oblique cameras.
The PR9 had a large space below and to the right of the pilot where the access door would have been. This became a great place to store baggage etc, but was covered with the sliding fuel panel. Not a good place to drop you map!
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: People's Republic
Age: 68
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Canberra seating and crew access
Good afternoon,
The main build of Canberras starting with the B2 had an entrance hatch on the starboard side of the fuselage level with the pilot's seaat which was offset to port. The nav and any other crew sat in the rear in a suitably dark space. The space saved by having an offset pilot's seat allowed access to the nose for bomb-aiming, recce runs etc. Some types I believe had a fold-out jump seat adjacent to the pilot's seat.
The T4 had 2 pilot ejection seats side-by side. The starboard seat was a "swing" seat which was hung from an overhead pivoting beam. To get access before flight, the seat was swung firstly forward in order that the nav could get in the back using a degree of contortionism, then back for the pilot and instructor to gain access. The RHS occupant had to strap in while in a forward crouching/standing posture which was rather awkward. The seat was theen swung to the central (normal) position for flight.
The BI(8) had access from the side hatch directly into the nose seating position (I believe).
The PR9 had the opening nose for the nav to get access to his cupboard and an offset fighter-style canopy for the pilot.
As you say, the fuselage void was a very useful storage area. However, for route flying the bomb bay/flare bay provided stacks of space.
Happy days.
Regards,
Vernon
The main build of Canberras starting with the B2 had an entrance hatch on the starboard side of the fuselage level with the pilot's seaat which was offset to port. The nav and any other crew sat in the rear in a suitably dark space. The space saved by having an offset pilot's seat allowed access to the nose for bomb-aiming, recce runs etc. Some types I believe had a fold-out jump seat adjacent to the pilot's seat.
The T4 had 2 pilot ejection seats side-by side. The starboard seat was a "swing" seat which was hung from an overhead pivoting beam. To get access before flight, the seat was swung firstly forward in order that the nav could get in the back using a degree of contortionism, then back for the pilot and instructor to gain access. The RHS occupant had to strap in while in a forward crouching/standing posture which was rather awkward. The seat was theen swung to the central (normal) position for flight.
The BI(8) had access from the side hatch directly into the nose seating position (I believe).
The PR9 had the opening nose for the nav to get access to his cupboard and an offset fighter-style canopy for the pilot.
As you say, the fuselage void was a very useful storage area. However, for route flying the bomb bay/flare bay provided stacks of space.
Happy days.
Regards,
Vernon
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: .
Posts: 2,173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
as a 10-year old cub scout being allowed to clamber in and out of a grounded Sea Vixen airframe at Yeovilton, we were told the nav was down in the little cubby hole because the screens for the radar and other gear weren't bright enough to be visible in daylight.
The original 'Fishbowl' canopy was a bad design for a few reasons,lack of headroom/visibility and bad optics for weapon aiming being 3 of them,fitting the offset canopy was a cheap way of fixing them...not for our crews the good common sense redesign that the americans did for the B57b...where the nav could actually see out !! 
Thread Starter
I believe the answer about the Canberra. The Sea Vixen comment sounds reasonable too - and perhaps the difference between that and others is that the U.K. considered them all-weather fighters whereas things like Skyknights, Vautour IINs and Yak-25s were night fighters and the problem did not arise. The Javelin prototype had a metal rear canopy, but presumably display brightness improved and the later versions had clear hoods. The Sea Vixen was harder to change, but later versions had a perspex panel in the coal-hole hatch.
Last edited by LowObservable; 21st Jul 2013 at 17:54.
An excuse to post a gratuitous B57 pic
I love this pic
The Americans elegant solution to the same canopy problem(s) which the B2 derivatives had....
The Nav/Wso is leaning down...probably fiddling with the winch gear
I love this pic
The Americans elegant solution to the same canopy problem(s) which the B2 derivatives had....
The Nav/Wso is leaning down...probably fiddling with the winch gear
Last edited by longer ron; 21st Jul 2013 at 16:00.
I worked on Canberras as a rigger in the 70's so am aware of the construction of the fishbowl canopy,as well as limited height for the pilots head - it was of 'double bubble' design ... ie 2 separate perspex canopies with an air gap between them.
During the 70's the only chap that 'blew' the canopies at EE unfortunately died and there was nobody else with the experience to do the job...
ISTR that the first few canopies which came through as replacements from the new blower were restricted to day only flying as they were not optically perfect.
From Page 41 of B57 Canberra at war by Robert Mikesh talking about the canopy redesign ....
There you are gents...for the B(I)8 any gunsight had to be behind flat glass and for the PR9 it gave the pilot a higher seating position without a major redesign of the fwd fuselage.I doubt there was even room for a gunsight to be safely mounted behind a fishbowl canopy !
rgds LR
During the 70's the only chap that 'blew' the canopies at EE unfortunately died and there was nobody else with the experience to do the job...
ISTR that the first few canopies which came through as replacements from the new blower were restricted to day only flying as they were not optically perfect.
From Page 41 of B57 Canberra at war by Robert Mikesh talking about the canopy redesign ....
The original double layered glass would flex with changes in temp and pressure,esp during the ground attack phase of the mission.It therefore became impossible to place a gunsight behind this canopy and have acceptable harmonisation and accuracy.The sight had to be behind a flat glass panel.
rgds LR
Sporty flag that B-57 is towing, longer ron! That'd make low angle-off attacks fun for the crew!
big v , how did you find life on the PR9 after the mighty 'tombs on 56(F)?
big v , how did you find life on the PR9 after the mighty 'tombs on 56(F)?
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: UK
Age: 78
Posts: 389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Canberra cockpits
The other big difference between the PR9/SC9 and the rest of the fleet was that the 9s had no transport joint being built by Shorts.
The transport joint was a means of fastening a fuselage, just about any one , to a cockpit, again various as in the RAE miscellany. It may be seen on some photographs as a slightly tilted vertical line behind the cockpit
The 9s were a direct build and so no tranport joint was made and this meant exchanges was impossible. When the cockpit fatigue life was used up the aircraft was scrap
The transport joint was a means of fastening a fuselage, just about any one , to a cockpit, again various as in the RAE miscellany. It may be seen on some photographs as a slightly tilted vertical line behind the cockpit
The 9s were a direct build and so no tranport joint was made and this meant exchanges was impossible. When the cockpit fatigue life was used up the aircraft was scrap
Sporty flag that B-57 is towing, longer ron! That'd make low angle-off attacks fun for the crew!
I suspect the tow operator is head down in the cockpit feverishly trying to reel out the remaining 5,000 ft of 3/16ths cable It is a B57E 'Cadillac' and Bob Mikesh recalls that he had to use 100% power for up to an hour to regain and maintain 200 kts from the initial 130 kt flag launch speeds and gradually work back to the continuous 96.5% power setting !
Last edited by longer ron; 21st Jul 2013 at 17:13.
It was a clear day when this 18 year old Halton apprentice graduate arrived at RAF Marham.
I was told to report to 101? Canberra Sqn at the other side of the airfield.
My J/T stripes were brand new but the tech W/O ordered me, and my National Service English Electric Apprentice LAC and SAC, to check out the fuel problem on a B2 Canberra on the ramp.
I knew nothing about the Canberra and the NS guys just wanted to go home for the weekend.
My Halton training and attitude meant I spent the weekend testing and re-testing. Monday morning, I reported that the fuel probe capacitor needed replacing. The W/O said "better be sure coz it means removing the cockpit to get to No 1 tank to replace the probe.' The NS guys shrugged in agreement and the A/C went to the hangar.
Almost the next day we were, as a Sqn, sent to Malaya. I sat in that jump seat referred in other posts, just below the pilot, through Habbanyia (Iraq) and Negombo (Sri Lanka/Ceylon) to arrive at RAF Butterworth for a secondment.
At this time the President of Egypt (Nasser) closed the Suez canal and UK/France declared war on Egypt. The Sqn, including me, was ordered back to Malta and continued on to bomb airports in Egypt.
I'm now 76 years old and accumulated over 20,000hours as an F/E on Hastings/VC10/B707/L1011 and finally 10 years on B747...... but cannot get out of my mind...
was it REALLY necessary to remove the cockpit module to replace the fuel capacitor probe on an EE B2 Canberra?
I was told to report to 101? Canberra Sqn at the other side of the airfield.
My J/T stripes were brand new but the tech W/O ordered me, and my National Service English Electric Apprentice LAC and SAC, to check out the fuel problem on a B2 Canberra on the ramp.
I knew nothing about the Canberra and the NS guys just wanted to go home for the weekend.
My Halton training and attitude meant I spent the weekend testing and re-testing. Monday morning, I reported that the fuel probe capacitor needed replacing. The W/O said "better be sure coz it means removing the cockpit to get to No 1 tank to replace the probe.' The NS guys shrugged in agreement and the A/C went to the hangar.
Almost the next day we were, as a Sqn, sent to Malaya. I sat in that jump seat referred in other posts, just below the pilot, through Habbanyia (Iraq) and Negombo (Sri Lanka/Ceylon) to arrive at RAF Butterworth for a secondment.
At this time the President of Egypt (Nasser) closed the Suez canal and UK/France declared war on Egypt. The Sqn, including me, was ordered back to Malta and continued on to bomb airports in Egypt.
I'm now 76 years old and accumulated over 20,000hours as an F/E on Hastings/VC10/B707/L1011 and finally 10 years on B747...... but cannot get out of my mind...
was it REALLY necessary to remove the cockpit module to replace the fuel capacitor probe on an EE B2 Canberra?
was it REALLY necessary to remove the cockpit module to replace the fuel capacitor probe on an EE B2 Canberra?
But yes I can see the possibility of having to unbolt the sharp end to do a 1 tank change...as far as I remember there was no access through the rear seat frame/pressure bulkhead !
rgds LR
Edit...might depend on Mark...I am talking B2/T4 - ISTR that the PR7 had a bay behind the rear seat frame ?
Last edited by longer ron; 21st Jul 2013 at 19:36.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Sneaking up on the Runway and leaping out to grab it unawares
Age: 61
Posts: 684
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There you are gents...for the B(I)8 any gunsight had to be behind flat glass and for the PR9 it gave the pilot a higher seating position without a major redesign of the fwd fuselage.
If the B(I)8 required an offset canopy in order to have a flat windscreen for the gunsight, how did the B(I)6 cope?
The B(I)6 was an interim mark of Canberra produced as an Interdictor whilst the RAF awaited its B(I)8s. Essentially a B.6 airframe, the B(I)6s were modified to take a bomb-bay fitted 4x20 mm gunpack and underwing pylons for bombs and rockets. The B(I)6 in RAF service served only with 213 Sqn in Germany, the first of the RAFG Night Intruder Squadrons formed at RAFG Alhorn in July 1955 and later moving to RAFG Bruggen.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Sneaking up on the Runway and leaping out to grab it unawares
Age: 61
Posts: 684
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm fully aware what a B(I)6 was!
What I was asking was, how did the B(I)6 cope with using the gunsight / gunpack if it didn't have the flat screen that was required by the gunsight of the B(I)8?
What I was asking was, how did the B(I)6 cope with using the gunsight / gunpack if it didn't have the flat screen that was required by the gunsight of the B(I)8?
What I was asking was, how did the B(I)6 cope with using the gunsight / gunpack if it didn't have the flat screen that was required by the gunsight of the B(I)8?
You misunderstood my point...it was only used by 1 sqn while the redesign for the B(I)8 came into service,so obviously even EE had recognised there was a weapon aiming problem
Last edited by longer ron; 21st Jul 2013 at 21:44.