P38 Lightning question

[stilton]

Always been a big fan of this aircraft

It had several unique features, the most unusual
to me was the use of a control yoke instead of a
joystick, I think this was to provide the pilot
with more leverage in roll control at higher airspeeds


Does anyone know of any other fighter that had a control yoke ?

[Dark Helmet]

The Beaufighter had a control yoke on top of a central pole. The Lightning still had a pole but it was offset to the right hand side.

[ORAC]

Just to muddy the waters..... Spitfire......

https://i2.wp.com/www.left-base.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Spitfire-Cockpit.jpg?fit=460%2C613

[GeeRam]

The Lightning still had a pole but it was offset to the right hand side.

^This.

It's probably a legacy design from the day when, multi's had yoke's and single had sticks.

That can be seen in the Mosquito, which may have been the only aircraft type that used both, with yoke wheel in the glass nose 'bomber/recce' versions, and a fighter type stick in the solid nose fighter/trainer versions.

[RetiredBA/BY]

Just to muddy the waters..... Spitfire......

https://i2.wp.com/www.left-base.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Spitfire-Cockpit.jpg?fit=460%2C613
On the Spitfire perhaps it was so one could put your left hand on the yoke, before releasing it with your right hand which was used to raise or lower the chassis, gear !

[NutLoose]

I think this was to provide the pilot
with more leverage in roll control at higher airspeeds
And when you lose an engine on one side.

Spitfire style yoke is common throught the whole of the British aircraft types of that period up to and through the likes of the Fairey Gannet etc. I often wondered as a stick is tailored to a hand, if wounded in one arm the likes of a Spit yoke would be easier to handle with the other.

[stilton]

And when you lose an engine on one side.

Spitfire style yoke is common throught the whole of the British aircraft types of that period up to and through the likes of the Fairey Gannet etc. I often wondered as a stick is tailored to a hand, if wounded in one arm the likes of a Spit yoke would be easier to handle with the other.

Not following you there, an engine failure and resultant yaw
would be compensated for with rudder

[NutLoose]

Secondary effect of Yaw is roll

And if in a combat aircraft if you are having to roll it, surely you would be fighting the live engine and hence need greater leverage of a yoke. ?

.

[olddog]

And the secondary effect of yaw is? Roll. Asymetric flight requires use of both rudder and aileron. - Nutloose - well done you beat me to it!

[Shaft109]

Which of the Yoke / Column / Spitfire style grip / Ram's Horn Concorde style felt the most intuitive?

But I suppose they were tailored for that specific application.

[sandiego89]

Does anyone know of any other fighter that had a control yoke ?


P-61 Black Widow had a yoke- if you include night fighters.

[NutLoose]

Which of the Yoke / Column / Spitfire style grip / Ram's Horn Concorde style felt the most intuitive?

But I suppose they were tailored for that specific application.

The Rams horn is an ergonomic design that is designed to eliminate fatigue on wrists etc, indeed the same idea is also used in cooking utensils, this will explain all.


EaziGrip® Frying Pan - EaziGrip Shop (http://www.eazigripshop.co.uk/blog/eazigrip-frying-pan.html/)

[OK465]

Does anyone know of any other fighter that had a control yoke ?

Do a search on F-102 or F-106 cockpit photos.

Not for ease of roll control in these two, but to conveniently access all the buttons and radar controls and minimize carpal tunnel. :}

Of course these were interceptors, not fighters.

[ORAC]

https://s3.amazonaws.com/dk-production/images/76024/large/f_106_cockpit_trainer_by_shelbs2-d4huhzq.jpg?1396436939

[pr00ne]

Mosquito fighters had a stick, Mosquito bombers had a yoke.

[chevvron]

The Rams horn is an ergonomic design that is designed to eliminate fatigue on wrists etc, indeed the same idea is also used in cooking utensils, this will explain all.


Also fitted to Tridents and some Islanders.

[NutLoose]

And jetstream

[50+Ray]

And Dominie

[brakedwell]

And Britannia

[pettinger93]

It is said that redundant ex Vulcan / Victor yokes were/are used as the control yokes for Trident submarines, and, I have to say, they do look very similar

[sandiego89]

I do not think that the unique F-102/F-106 control stick should be technically considered a yoke. It is a dual sided control stick, and the references such as technical manuals call it a stick. One side was for aircraft control, the other for radar, but they moved together in unison. Happy to be corrected, but I do not believe it was hinged at the bottom or center like a yoke for roll control. The stick moves the column like a stick. Still pretty neat, but I think it should be called a stick.

[megan]

Mosquito fighters had a stick, Mosquito bombers had a yoke. The pilots flying the fighter versions expressed a wish they had the bomber style yoke so they had more leverage.

As an aside, the XS-1 also had a yoke.

[Ali Qadoo]

I'd have thought that in an aircraft with an ejection seat, having a yoke would present an unacceptable risk of breaking the ejectee's femurs on the way out.

[50+Ray]

#20 Vulcan had a stick!

[sandiego89]

I'd have thought that in an aircraft with an ejection seat, having a yoke would present an unacceptable risk of breaking the ejectee's femurs on the way out.


Yoke configured aircraft with ejection seats, such as the U-2, the B-52 among others, had/have mechanisms to throw the column forward before the seat fires. Otherwise, yes the knees and legs would not appreciate it. The B-52 system is described here:


http://www.ejectionsite.com/b-52.htm

[OK465]

Yeah the 102/106 pilot interfaces are just yoke shaped, like what oxen wear.

Looking at ORAC's F-106 cockpit photo, it appears that it would fall into the category of an off-color yoke.

[ExAscoteer]

And Dominie

Dominie didn't have a yoke it had a 'bicycle handlebar' somewhat similar to that fitted to Concorde.

[Out Of Trim]

That's what he alluded to; A rams-horn yoke.

Also used in the BAC 1-11 :D

[ExAscoteer]

He alluded to the Dominie control column being the same as that in the Jetstream.

The two were very different.

[Brian W May]

He alluded to the Dominie control column being the same as that in the Jetstream.

The two were very different.

The thing they had in common was they were both shyte . . .

[ihoharv]

weren't the earlier U2's basically C130 yokes? Might account for the unexpectedly (?) high number of C130->U2 drivers..!

[BEagle]

The HS125 and Dominie had a 'ram's horns' control column.

Whereas the wretched Jetstream T1 had a yoke but with the angled sections from the boss sloping upwards, rather than the more normal downward style, surmounted by upright grips, rather than the more normal curved style. This added to the overall unpleasantness of the horrible apology for an aeroplane.

Of course the original de Havilland 89 Dominie had a normal yoke :8

[KenV]

FWIW, the C-17 is a big airplane with no ejection seats and has control sticks. The C-17 control stick is a bit unconventional in that the stick pivots fore and aft below the floor for pitch control, but pivots left and right at the top of the stick/bottom of the grip for roll control. This allows large deflections of the control grip "above" the pilots' legs (versus between the legs) when the flight controls are in manual reversion mode.

[PDR1]

Just to muddy the waters..... Spitfire......

https://i2.wp.com/www.left-base.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Spitfire-Cockpit.jpg?fit=460%2C613

The loop-top control column had been a traditional feature on many british fighters going back to WW1. Camel, Siskin, Gamecock, Bristol Bulldog and Hawker Fury (arguably the Spit's predecessor) all had them, so I suspect it was incorportaed into the Spit simply as being what pilots were "used to".

The actual column design is (IIRC) actually novel and innovative in having a fixed lower column with a hinged part above the knees. The whole column moved fore/afet for elevator input, but unly the upper part moved side-to-side for aileron input, thus allowing full aileron mevment unconstrained by the driver's knees/thighs etc. The upper colum pivit has a closed-loop chain drive to a sprocket on the base of the column which drives the aileron controls. Bothe the Bf109 and the Fw190 lacked this feature, making aileron control much more limited when pulling back-stick.

NALOPKT(&EFGAS),

PDR

[sandiego89]

FWIW, the C-17 is a big airplane with no ejection seats and has control sticks. The C-17 control stick is a bit unconventional in that the stick pivots fore and aft below the floor for pitch control, but pivots left and right at the top of the stick/bottom of the grip for roll control....


Similar to the A-4 Skyhawk (and some others), with the roll "hinge" halfway down the column, but the C-17 cockpit is a bit roomier than the A-4 ;), so not sure why they went with a stick in the C-17...was a fighter pilot on the decision panel? :E

[Bill Macgillivray]

All Canberra's had a yoke!

[megan]

PDR1 , I have seen it written that the Spitfire style "ring" on top of the column was so pilot could use two hands for addition purchase. Whether that is factually correct don't know.

[India Four Two]

megan,

Based on my one flight in a T IX, I would say you would definitely need two hands on the stick to roll at high speed. Even at 200 kts, I found the ailerons very heavy.

[KenV]

Similar to the A-4 Skyhawk (and some others), with the roll "hinge" halfway down the column, but the C-17 cockpit is a bit roomier than the A-4 ;), so not sure why they went with a stick in the C-17The predecessor for the C-17 was the YC-15. It originally had two yokes, but during testing they put a stick on one side. It proved to be better than the yoke for making the required precision landings, and the C-17 had two sticks from day one.

[melmothtw]

The predecessor for the C-17 was the YC-15. It originally had two yokes, but during testing they put a stick on one side. It proved to be better than the yoke for making the required precision landings, and the C-17 had two sticks from day one.

The C-17 and the Airbus stick configurations have always struck me as a bit odd, given that with the throttles located in the centre the captain has to fly the aircraft left-handed (appreciate the same is true for yolk aircraft, but that seems more intuitive like using the steering wheel on a left-hand drive car).

Does this actually present an issue, or is it something that comes pretty naturally?

[KenV]

The C-17 and the Airbus stick configurations have always struck me as a bit odd, given that with the throttles located in the centre the captain has to fly the aircraft left-handed (appreciate the same is true for yolk aircraft, but that seems more intuitive like using the steering wheel on a left-hand drive car).

Does this actually present an issue, or is it something that comes pretty naturally?In my experience, and in discussions with many pilots, flying "left handed" is not an issue. If it were, then left handed pilots flying "right handed" in the countless right handed only cockpits would be an issue. And it is not.

[Herod]

I've only got a few hundred hours on sticks, as opposed to a few thousand on yokes, but I always felt stick-right, throttle-left, or yoke-left, throttle-right was natural.

[Tay Cough]

I’ve flown lots of hours with all combinations. My preferences are stick right, throttle left and yoke left, throttle right. No issues at all with the other combinations though. I don’t even think about it especially.

[megan]

Does this actually present an issue, or is it something that comes pretty naturally?It would seem that it comes pretty naturally, though one accident sticks in the mind. Highly experienced F-16 instructor pilot thought he'd get checked out in a GA aircraft, a PA-28 in this case. F-16 guy left seat, shortly before touch down instructor asked for a go around. Muscle memory came to the fore, F-16 student pushed full forward with left hand and pulled back with the right. Not a good ending.

[melmothtw]

I've only got a few hundred hours on sticks, as opposed to a few thousand on yokes, but I always felt stick-right, throttle-left, or yoke-left, throttle-right was natural.

That would make sense to me, intuitively. Flying with stick left throttle right just seems a bit odd.

In my experience, and in discussions with many pilots, flying "left handed" is not an issue. If it were, then left handed pilots flying "right handed" in the countless right handed only cockpits would be an issue. And it is not.

Point taken, but speaking as a sometime leftie myself (depends on the task) we are often forced to adopt the rightie way of doing things through necessity (items often aren't made for left-handers to operate), and so it usually proves to be less of an issue.

[treadigraph]

I've mentioned this in several threads before - I'm left handed with very limited flying experience in Cessna 152/172 and K-13 gliders. I've flown the 152 both left and right seat and had no problem with left hand yoke/right hand throttle or vice versa. Flying the K-13 was different and my natural hand on the stick was certainly the left and it would take considerable practice to get used to flying righted with the same precision. Aero tows were a bit tricky!

Oddly enough, I write left handed, use a spoon left handed, fork in left hand knife in right, yet I am utterly right handed when it comes to using a computer mouse (doing complicated and intricate graphics work) or on the odd occasion I've played cricket or golf.

[melmothtw]

Oddly enough, I write left handed, use a spoon left handed, fork in left hand knife in right, yet I am utterly right handed when it comes to using a computer mouse (doing complicated and intricate graphics work) or on the odd occasion I've played cricket or golf.

It's not that odd, I'm the same (though for different tasks). I think it has something to do with my previous point about lefties having to adopt some rightie tendencies out of necessity (ever tried using 'normal' scissors left handed?).

It is curious, but as others have attested to in this thread it seems easier to use a yolk ambidextrously than it does a stick. I wonder if that is the primary reason that most side-by-side flightdecks use this system, which again makes me wonder about the C-17 and Airbus.

[treadigraph]

I get along with scissors fairly well, right handed potato peelers are another matter - I have an ambidextrous (?) spud peeler.

Computer joysticks I have to use left handed - be interesting to see how I got along with the right seat side stick in an Airbus.

[melmothtw]

Computer joysticks I have to use left handed - be interesting to see how I got along with the right seat side stick in an Airbus.

It does seem to be an odd set-up - the leftie co-pilot in the rightie's seat, and the (presumably) rightie Captain in the leftie's seat.

Perhaps a yolk was the way to go...

[Captain Dart]

‘Yolk’ is not ‘eggsactly’ right. It’s ‘yoke’ (as used on beasts of burden).

I think older, traditional Brits may have used the quaint term ‘spectacles’.

[melmothtw]

An eggcellent observation, Captain Dart. Quite correct.

[ValMORNA]

Captain Dart,


As a fairly-old and traditional Brit I have used a 'Human Yoke' to carry water from the well to an older and traditional village cottage. Far less time-consuming and painful than taking one bucket at a time by hand.

[PDR1]

British pilots making spectacles of themselves? Surely not - you must be yoking!

PDR

[Jetex_Jim]

To go back to the P38.

Is it true that USAAF P38s had both clock and counterclockwise engines installed and the ones the RAF operated both turned in the same direction?

[layman]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_P-38_Lightning

Model 322 / 3 delivered / RAF order: twin right-hand props and no turbo


Wilson, S, 1996, Zero, Hurricane & P38, Aerospace Publications, Canberra
Lightning 1 (RAF designation)

667 ordered (417 for the French, 250 for RAF) but cancelled after the 3 delivered for evaluation

The 140 already built were transferred to the USAAF as fighter trainers & for defence on the West Coast (and retained RAF serials during their service career)

[TBM-Legend]

RAF offered some to RAAF but they were rejected as being to complicated and somewhat an under-performer. The RAAF did operate several F-4 recce birds in Australia and New Guinea.

[Blacksheep]

Never saw a yoke in a Vulcan.

[melmothtw]

Never saw a yoke in a Vulcan.

Yes, the Vulcan is another 'odd' one in that regard.

Interestingly, all fast jet side-by-side types that I can think of (Hunter, Lightning, T-36, Jet Provost etc) had dual stick and throttles, so that the pilot was always flying right-handed. Perhaps this was because they were built as trainers first, and so were meant to replicate the experience of the single-seater, but it does perhaps show that flying 'leftie' with a stick is not quite as natural as some have suggested.

PS; Apologies for taking the thread away from the P-38, again.

[2 TWU]

Two right hand sticks for the 2 seat Lightning only partly true. The T4 was like that but the T5 had throttles on the cockpit wall at both sides so the right seat had right hand throttles, left hand stick.

[cavuman1]

I am left side dominant, including handedness. The only activities I perform right-handed are batting a baseball and golfing. (My father wouldn't spend the extra few hundred bucks for left-handed clubs when I was 10.) Etiquette does not permit me to discuss urinary guidance issues.

I always found the Cessna aircraft I flew - 150's, 152's, 172's, 185's, and 320's - as well as a Beechcraft V35 - to be an ergonomic and neurologically sound fit for me. Fly the craft holding the yoke gently in my dominant left hand while taking care of navcom, throttle quadrant, trim, flap selection, good-looking passenger's left thigh, etc. with my right hand. Though I had no difficulty switching to the right side in both fixed and rotary winged craft, that did not feel as intrinsically comfortable as flying with my left hand.

Yet I find stick control suits me best of all. Starting in a Blanik LET L-13 and graduating to Grob 103's, I always found stick and rudder to be the most intuitive setup. :ok:

Note that the title's icon and the smiley-faced emoticon above are both left-handed. As my right-handed father used to say: "There are only two kinds of people in the World. Those that are left-handed and those who wish they were!" :}

- Ed

[treadigraph]

Yet I find stick control suits me best of all. Starting in a Blanik LET L-13 and graduating to Grob 103's, I always found stick and rudder to be the most intuitive setup.

- Ed

Do you fly gliders left handed, or do you manage well right handed?

My left hand on the stick was usually rewarded with a clip round the ear 'ole and a crisp reminder from the instructor that left hand is needed for cable release and airbrakes!

[cavuman1]

I always used my right hand on gliders' control sticks. It felt natural and reserved my left paw for actuation of the speed brakes/spoilers and release knob. I'm trying hard to remember back thirty-eight years to the Ross Barnett Reservoir in Jackson, Mississippi, where I took my initial soaring instruction, but I clearly remember climbing into the cockpit and having my elderly instructor place my right hand on the stick. He said "Y'all use this here contraption along with them there rudder pedals to maneuver this here aereoplane. (sic)" I do recollect with absolute clarity wondering why an all metal beast with forward swept wings would have flight characteristics any better than a greased anvil. It did, but not by too much! :}

After release from the Piper PA-25 Pawnee tow plane on my first flight, I spied a vulture spiraling upward in a well-developed thermal close to our position. I banked into the thermal and was immediately rewarded with a +2,000 f.p.m. variometer reading. My Good Old Boy instructor, who had flown a Waco troop carrying glider during the Normandy invasion and who had amassed thousands of hours subsequently (without being shot at!) whispered loudly from the rear seat: "Son, I reckon you is gonna be right good at this here soarin'!") :E

- Ed :)

[megan]

Is it true that USAAF P38s had both clock and counterclockwise engines installed and the ones the RAF operated both turned in the same direction?The RAF aircraft turned in the same direction as they used the same power plant as the P-40 for commonality, but as mentioned by others they never took delivery except for a few for test purposes.

USAAF aircraft all had props that turned outboard at the top, the prototype had props that turned inboard at the top. The USAAF set up produced a more stable gun platform because of reduced pitching moments with power alterations.

[Dan Winterland]

The RAF aircraft turned in the same direction as they used the same power plant as the P-40 for commonality, but as mentioned by others they never took delivery except for a few for test purposes.

I believe it was a combined French/British order just as for the P40 and Wildcat. Although the last two were delivered (just to the UK as France had fallen at that stage), the RAF test pilots flying the first batch didn't like the handling of the P38 and the order was cancelled. I gather it did have the yoke because of the high aileron forces.

[TBM-Legend]

Yamamoto didn't like the P-38 either!

[Fareastdriver]

The de Havilland Hornet had handed Merlins that rotated inwards at the top. This was to reduce that asymmetric efforts of losing an engine in the same way as the P38 prototypes. However on the Hornet this didn't give rise to the stability problems that the P38 had. In fact, it could hold it's own with single engine fighters of it's day on one engine alone.

A slim fuselage with a single rudder compared with twin booms and two rudders directly behind the propellors seems to be a good a reason as any.

[PDR1]

I've always wondered why they chose those rotation directions for the P38 because it increases the bending stresses at the wing roots, whereas "inwards at the top" (as per Hornet etc) actually provides bending relief. So the P38 must have had a higher structure weight than was strictly necessary.

PDR

[megan]

FED, the twin boom layout would have been dictated by the necessity to house the turbo chargers, intercoolers and all the plumbing. Look at the bulk of a P-47 to house the identical items, a single fuselage would have required nacelles of enormous size. The USAAF had a penchant for turbos rather than engine driven supercharges as on the Merlin.

[GreenKnight121]

Indeed - here is the system in a P-47:

https://pre00.deviantart.net/10e7/th/pre/i/2012/015/5/1/p47_schematics_by_plumpener-d4mgsia.jpg

[Fark'n'ell]

Yamamoto didn't like the P-38 either!

Not for long.