This is a gem of a thread !
From a slightly different perspective, I trained first as a fitter on Mr.Camm's finest.
He may have designed wonderful 'if it looks right it is right' aeroplanes, but he certainly didn't bother too much about the fitter's role, skinned knuckles and a rich vocabulary were essential items if working on a Camm design, especially the Hunter and to a slightly lesser extent Harrier 1 / AV-8A ( the Hawk is a bit more friendly due to its' role ).
One day I had the misfortune to be transiting through Brough after Harrier trials in Scotland ( I was a technical photographer long since ) and managed to get a look at some Phantoms being overhauled.
The thing which made a big impression on me was the row of opening panels along the spine, panels everywhere it seemed, designed for real not double-jointed people 'in the field'.
What with that and the similar approach - and actually designed cockpit, rather than the British approach of ' coating everything with adhesive, then firing the instruments all at once from a big gun ' on the Harrier II, I'm quite a fan of the U.S. Approach to combat aircraft.