Let us not forget that trials with the prone pilot Meteor also showed a better tolerance of increased g-loads, but it was not adopted for other, obvious reasons.

Interestingly the sidestick has found it's way into GA. The odd one or two aircraft have had it in the past but the Cirrus has it across the range as well as the Cessna Corvalis.

Mind you if you can afford a Cirrus or Corvalis you could probably afford an early block F16...

Absolutely right, Mel. If you think of Sin 30 you'll see how little difference the recline makes to heart-brain vertical distance and, therefore the effect of Gz. Especially when the pilot has his head forward - with all the neck issues that causes.

While BAe hosted the cockpit committee, the aircrew/Services from all 4 nations got their say on cockpit configuration matters; 180º decisions seemed to be quite common:)

I recall at the time that some of these decisions were made, the IAM were a little skeptical about the Gz claims made for the reclined seat. They said a more reclined state was required for significant gains but this increased the potential for injury on ejection.

I believe side sticks were explored as an early option but the majority of all concerned, aircrew and engineers, seemed to favour the centre stick. Arm pain (and bleeding) hardly seemed to get a mention at the time. Force sticks were also considered but many aircrew hated the idea. The F16 'first flight' episode always got a mention during discussions.

Maybe a stupid question from a (much older) generation: What was wrong with the old centre stick we'd all grown up with ?

D.

Never let science get in the way of a good story...

...take a look at the graph below. You will see that a 30deg reclined seat occupant still has some blood in their head at 6g whereas the more upright seat occupant is now sleeping! The 30deg recline gives you about 1 extra G of tolerance.

http://www.f-16.net/forum/download/f...fe59&mode=view

The arguments against the side stick are interesting. Why then did the F-22, and then later on the F-35 both arrive at a side stick as a solution?

Regarding one of the arguments, that of support for the arm. How is a centre stick any better than a side stick with a purpose built arm support?

Cheers.

If they were thinking about arm pain, then why did they leave the throttles so low down and put so many HOTAS switches on them? Are pilots not supposed to have any feeling in their left arm?

As far as I could tell, Typhoon cockpit design was a race-to-the-bottom compromise from the brightest minds around at the time. Trouble was that it would appear that the brightest European minds around at the time had backgrounds in F-104, Jaguar, Phantom & the cutting edge (at the time) Tornado - none of which could ever be described as paragons of ergonomic greatness.

The whole cockpit is a relic of the mid-1980s. A switch to cover the flap that covers the pickle button - seriously? Shift HOTAS & HOTAS with long-hold and short-hold functions? RPM gauges and a MIDS display where every other modern fighter in the world puts a data entry panel or an up front controller? You've got 3 nice big colorful MFDs and yet it was decided to do all data entry through the casio-watch-calculator buttons of the 'left hand glare shield' (that someone robbed out of a Jag 96)(because everyone loves typing with their left thumb, right)? A fold out panel that hides the standby instruments (but the front of the panel just shows you what tacan channel and what transponder codes you selected and haven't messed with for the last hour)? The list goes on... Hats off to the guys who are able to operate it effectively - I hated the thing.

Regards,
Single Seat, Single Engine, The Only Way To Fly

SSSETOWTF,

Amen to that !

D.

I see what you did there Leon, good comeback ;-)

The way that I heard it was that the edge of the support was acting as a stress raiser. As I said, it was a dit so I never saw any corroboration.

My recollection was that there were always aircrew in the active cockpit and teams of aircrew at human factors meetings. Perhaps it was the old adage of "9 aircrew and 10 opinions" coming into play :E

I have not flown side sticks, but lot center stick time fast jet.
With the center stick the upper leg acts as armrest, and it works for left handed or right handed operation. No adjustment necessary, it was always there and always the correct height. On long missions I operated the stick alternating left and right hand, or even with the knees for small corrections or to hold it tight for few seconds. For a look over the left shoulder to check six we would grab the stick with the left, lean forward, grab the left canopy rail with the right hand while moving the left shoulder back to the seat could look back to nearly 170°. With a right side stick this would not be possible, all turning could only be done by the head, not the whole body. When operating switches on the side consoles we just switched the operating hand for the stick, most of us were proficient to fly even close formation with one or the other hand.

If the gadgets in the cockpit allow to sit tight and check your six by by pure electronic means, and most of the flying is done by some automatic mode like in an airbus where the stick is only touched about 10 minutes per flight and both hands are free mto move most time, than the advantages of a center stick are not present and the Side stick can play its advatages to full degree.

There might be more therefore to the center stick in the typhoon than only old design.

But really I do not know the reason for the center stick in Typoon.

I've only got experience of sidesticks in very low weight aircraft (Moni, Shadow) and central sticks in side by side 2 seaters - so effectively sidesticks for both occupants (AX3 and Chevvron) but i've always found them much easier to use than a central stick or yoke.
The Moni in particular, even though it had a 'V' tail was very pleasant to fly; you just had to think what you wanted the aircraft to do and with virtually no control input, it did it.
A Friend of mine part owned a Cirrus SR22 and he had no problems flying from the UK to Menorca at about 170 kt ias in 3.5 hours using the sidestick.

Or more probably using the GNS 1000 auto...:). Well if it's there you're going to use it aren't you?

...Fnar Fnar

Leon,

Just two points. First you're comparing the "reclined" seat with an upright one. None of our seats is upright. Second your charts assume the pilot has his head back in the headrest. We know that not to be true.

The "facts" don't quite follow the chart.

Courtney

IIRC the Typhoon has a 15 degree seat - compared to the 30 degree seat in a Viper then they would have 5 times the blood pressure in their heads than the Typhoon driver. But as we both know, Typhoon has Chest Counter Pressure Garment (CCPG), full length speed jeans and inflatable bladders in the boots to help with G tolerance. This will do much more than 15 degrees of extra seat angle. However, as the Airmens' Supermarket always says "Every Little Helps..." :ok:

LJ

FWIW I agree with SSSETOWTF. The Typhoon's cockpit did suffer from the 'old and bold' influencing its design. Just look at it:

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4069/4...2d6_z.jpg?zz=1

Compared to the Viper cockpit that was designed 20+ years earlier! :eek:

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4001/4...2b07317415.jpg

The Typhoon is an ergonomic slum for its generation when you compare it to F22...

http://www.aviationexplorer.com/Comm...kpit_image.jpg

LJ

LJ,


I only flew the Typhoon once (from the back seat), and I thought it was pretty well laid out...at least compared with the F3 where someone loaded a shotgun with switches, fired, and then set them where the ricochets landed!


Oh, my last car had virtually no switches as everything ran off the central touchscreen...f&*king hated it! It took several days to find the seat heaters!


More buttons, less sub menus!!!