Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Best All-Round Canopy Visibility?  
User currently offlinefaro From Egypt, joined Aug 2007, 1561 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 8595 times:

For combat aircraft and in terms of all-round visibilty (360°, up & down), my money is on the Harrier II:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Joseph L. McGovern



The pilot is sitting much higher up in the cockpit than in the F-16/22 and has helicopter-like visibility to the front while conserving some decent, neck stretching visibility to the rear. The A-6 is also in this very-high-seat class although forward visibility is compromised by the maze of windshield re-enforcement pillars. Soviet 1950's combat canopies seem to be the absolute worst in this respect, pilots' heads barely make it above the cockpit sill.

Any thoughts?

Faro


The chalice not my son
23 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineUH60FtRucker From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 8594 times:

Speaking in regards to helicopters that I have flown, the H-60 is actually quite poor. Especially with the newer model, the dash takes up a large portion of my view. However, the H-6 has an amazing view, especially when the doors are off, it's as though I'm floating through the air.

And for Russian helicopters, the Mi-8 is probably the best. It's practically a wall of windows in front of you, with a very minimalistic instrument layout. While the Mi-24 was horrible. I felt as though I sitting in a tub (which I essentially was) with just my head poking out. The gunner's view is just atrocious.


User currently offlineA380Heavy From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2006, 267 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 8546 times:

The F-22A - Raptor must take some beating - a single piece canopy wih no framework!


Flown in:732,733,734,738,742,752,763,772,F27,DC9,MD-11,A300,A332,ATR72,DHC-6,Bell206,C172,Auster,PA-28
User currently offlineConfuscius From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 3868 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 8429 times:

Blackburn

http://www.airmuseumsuk.org/airshow/2004/Shut040606/800/images/545%20Blackburn%20Monoplane%20Type%20D.jpg



Ain't I a stinker?
User currently offlineGST From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2008, 934 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 8356 times:

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 1):
The gunner's view is just atrocious

That would seem to be a hell of a design error, okay, pilot viz could be reduced to the minimum required for safe flight in the pilots eye, but the gunner's view and firing arcs must surely have a higher priority than "atrocious" for a military chopper.

Quoting Confuscius (Reply 3):
Blackburn


You beat me to it, was going to suggest that it may be the SPAD A2. Between the pilot and the gunner you have pretty awesome view, but, yes, the gunner is more or loess screwed in any kind of crash scenario with that airscrew right behind him.
http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgur...6&ved=1t:429,r:4,s:0&tx=123&ty=115

Sorry its a link, but the img code wouldn't work for some reason


User currently offlinegarnetpalmetto From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 5413 posts, RR: 53
Reply 5, posted (3 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 8269 times:

Quoting faro (Thread starter):


The pilot is sitting much higher up in the cockpit than in the F-16/22 and has helicopter-like visibility to the front while conserving some decent, neck stretching visibility to the rear. The A-6 is also in this very-high-seat class although forward visibility is compromised by the maze of windshield re-enforcement pillars.

Problem here, though, is that the A-6 also had nopoor rear visibility

http://worldsairforce.webs.com/photos/-USA-Mlitary-jet-fighters/A-6E_Intruder_VA-52.JPEG

I'd wager the F-14 or F-15. In both cases, the pilot and RIO/WSO (on the F-15E) sit with their shoulders above the canopy rails and the bubble canopy gives a good 360 view. This image provides a good example:

http://www.check-6.com/gallery/img/carriers/f14_rio_twomey.jpg



South Carolina - too small to be its own country, too big to be a mental asylum.
User currently offlinegeezer From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 1479 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 7567 times:

I know a guy who tells me he has a pretty awesome view out of his F-22A; ( plus, with the hi-tech "gold", anyone on the outside can't hardly see in )


BTW..........take a look at a head-on shot of an F-16; the canopy looks like a fish bowl ! If you got your head against it, you could see straight down !



Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
User currently offlinehighlander0 From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2007, 165 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 7543 times:

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 1):
And for Russian helicopters, the Mi-8 is probably the best. It's practically a wall of windows in front of you,

Since the news broke and the Op finished a few years ago, RAF crews flying said that the Mi-8/17 wasn't great. There are no window's above you're head reducing visibility if you're banking hard. They were quite un-nerved by the kerosene cabin heater next to the fuel tank too   :S


User currently offlineGST From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2008, 934 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 7420 times:

Quoting geezer (Reply 6):

BTW..........take a look at a head-on shot of an F-16; the canopy looks like a fish bowl ! If you got your head against it, you could see straight down !

I doubt that the pilot whilst strapped into his seat could possibly get his head over to the canopy, and even if he did, the chines in front of the wings are starting to protrude from the fuselage below the pilot, so direct downward visibility would still probably be impossible.

[Edited 2011-03-20 04:52:27]

User currently offlineAirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2532 posts, RR: 5
Reply 9, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 7306 times:

In my opinion, if you have ever been up close with an F-16, the pilots view is as good as it gets. With the ejection seat tilted back 30°, the pilot can nearly look anywhere they can tilt their head and see what they need to see. With a GE F110 engine, JHMCS, and AIM-9X, an F-16 would be very difficult to beat 1v1.


http://www.flickr.com/photos/canon450d/2856829450/in/photostream/


User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8508 posts, RR: 12
Reply 10, posted (3 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 6913 times:

Quoting Confuscius (Reply 3):
Blackburn

The view directly downwards ain't so great, though.


User currently offlinebikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 2160 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (3 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 6907 times:

Quoting MD-90 (Reply 10):

The view directly downwards ain't so great, though.

I don't know if you consider Wonder Woman's jet as a combat aircraft. But you can look straight down in that plane.
http://www.engadget.com/2005/05/13/m...e-invisible-jet-from-wonder-woman/
  

bikerthai



Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
User currently offlinesonic67 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 292 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (3 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 6719 times:

Lockheed YO-3A Quiet Star
http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?id=1677996

It not mush of a combat plane but it has a over sized canopy.

[Edited 2011-03-25 21:52:01]

[Edited 2011-03-25 21:54:02]

User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12160 posts, RR: 51
Reply 13, posted (3 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 6548 times:

Why do you need to see anything? The Ryan NYP didn't need it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Spirit_Of_St_Louis2.jpg

        

[Edited 2011-03-27 17:08:22]

User currently offlineGST From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2008, 934 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (3 years 7 months 1 week 2 days ago) and read 6453 times:

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 13):

To be fair he had a periscope, give it a fisheye lens and all of a sudden the view becomes world beating :P


User currently offlineUH60FtRucker From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (3 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 6299 times:

Quoting GST (Reply 4):
That would seem to be a hell of a design error, okay, pilot viz could be reduced to the minimum required for safe flight in the pilots eye, but the gunner's view and firing arcs must surely have a higher priority than "atrocious" for a military chopper.

Many and many months ago, I actually posted about my opportunity to crawl all over an operational Hind. My general impression was that it was a piece of sh*t, it has been highly overrated.

One of the things I discussed was the horrible visiblity. The pilots sit in a virtual steal tub, on a very uncomfortable seat, in a very awkward cockpit living space. The structural frame of the aircraft severely restricts the view. And from a hover, you have a very difficult time seeing whats around/beneath you.

Anyway, I don't want to bore you with a rehash: here's the link:

Brazil Signs Air Force Deal For Mi-35 Helicopters (by Keesje Dec 2 2008 in Military Aviation & Space Flight)

Quoting highlander0 (Reply 7):
Since the news broke and the Op finished a few years ago, RAF crews flying said that the Mi-8/17 wasn't great. There are no window's above you're head reducing visibility if you're banking hard. They were quite un-nerved by the kerosene cabin heater next to the fuel tank too

I can understand the criticism about the lack of greenhouse windows... but then again, the Hip really isn't meant to be banked hard. It's a utility helicopter, and damn good one. It's really good at working in austere environments, moving a lot of men and materiel.

As for the cabin heater... that was the least of my fears. My biggest fear was seeing their maintenance standards! Good god!


User currently offlineUH60FtRucker From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (3 years 7 months 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 6124 times:

Ok so I finally had some time to go back and dig through my photo archives.

Here check out this one of the Mi-25 Hind pilot seat:


...It's a freakin' coffin. You really have to be moving at a good pace, to get the nose to dip down far enough that you have a good forward view. The right side view was decent, but the left side was horrible! Your head barely pokes above that wall of ancient buttons and switches. Horrible, just horrible.

Here is one of the forward gunner's seat:




...First, you have slightly better side views, but the structural frame beams of the windows are so thick they really hamper your scan. And look at where your feet go! Your knees are practically in your chest! And that seat? Remember the old jump seats on the C-141, that just exhausted you even before you jumped? Yeah, it felt like I was sitting in one of those. It's just one incredibly uncomfortable aircraft. And don't even get started on the subject of pilot safety during a crash. HA! Don't even bother, you're dead.


User currently offlinewalter2222 From Belgium, joined Sep 2005, 1300 posts, RR: 28
Reply 17, posted (3 years 7 months 5 days ago) and read 6096 times:

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 16):
Here check out this one of the Mi-25 Hind pilot seat:



Thanks for sharing these inside cockpit shots! I had never seen/noticed this asymmetrical built-up, is this a special version of the Hind?
I took this shot of a Czech Republic Air Force Hind, and from this viewpoint, it seems this version (Mil Mi-24V) lacks the wall with the ancient switches:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Walter Van Bel


This shot had me also thinking where the gunners legs/feet would be, but your inside shots made it very clear!

Best regards,

Walter



canon 340d ;-) - EFS10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM - EFS18-55mm - EF28-105mm f3.5/4.5 - EF100-400mm f4.5-5.6l is usm - ...
User currently offlinespudh From Ireland, joined Jul 2009, 301 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (3 years 7 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 6024 times:

I'm going with this if you stretch the definition of combat to reconaissance:

http://www.aviastar.org/air/england/edgley_optica.php

OV 10 Bronco or OV 1 Mohawk for actual combat capable.

If we're sticking to jets then I think I'm with the OP and the AV8B Harrier, bar the windshield framing he's got pretty panoramic viewing.


User currently offlinefaro From Egypt, joined Aug 2007, 1561 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (3 years 7 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 5946 times:

Quoting AirRyan (Reply 9):
In my opinion, if you have ever been up close with an F-16, the pilots view is as good as it gets. With the ejection seat tilted back 30°, the pilot can nearly look anywhere they can tilt their head and see what they need to see. With a GE F110 engine, JHMCS, and AIM-9X, an F-16 would be very difficult to beat 1v1.

The point with the F-16, F-22 and the like is that the pilot is pretty low down in the cockpit; the cockpit sill is at best a little below shoulder height. With the Harrier II, the baseline of the forward windshield is almost below knee height. That gives you unparalleled downward visibility on top of the generally very good azimuthal visibility. That is why I think the Harrier II is exceptional...

Faro



The chalice not my son
User currently offlineGST From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2008, 934 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (3 years 7 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 5918 times:

In a similar vein to the Edgley Optica, how about the BV141?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c1/Bundesarchiv_Bild_183-2005-0725-526,_Aufkl%C3%A4rungsflugzeug_Blohm_-_Vo%C3%9F_BV_141.jpg

In this case you have a nacelle limiting the pilots visibility on the left, but equally you have a much smaller panel than the optica so your left of center forward vision is superior.


User currently offlinepar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7397 posts, RR: 8
Reply 21, posted (3 years 7 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 5896 times:

Quoting garnetpalmetto (Reply 5):
I'd wager the F-14 or F-15. In both cases, the pilot and RIO/WSO (on the F-15E)

Are two sets of eyes looking around, as for the canopy.............. 


User currently offlinewn700driver From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (3 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 5591 times:

How about the OV-10 Bronco?


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Soetkin Vandecandelaere



And why is there something in the cockpit (right up by the front/center portion of the glareshield) that says "Dog Treats"?


User currently offlinegarnetpalmetto From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 5413 posts, RR: 53
Reply 23, posted (3 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 5517 times:

Quoting par13del (Reply 21):

Are two sets of eyes looking around, as for the canopy..............

As for their canopies....what? I've never seen anything bad said about them, and every picture/video I've seen from an F-14 or F-15 cockpit has shown a wonderfully panoramic view.



South Carolina - too small to be its own country, too big to be a mental asylum.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Best All-Round Canopy Visibility?
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Was All Top Gun Flight Deck Scene Film On Big E posted Mon Dec 20 2010 13:11:56 by 747400sp
C-17 Lightning Strike Loss Of All 4 Enignes posted Thu Sep 23 2010 22:27:25 by Zeke
All German Eurofighters Grounded - Phantoms Used posted Thu Sep 16 2010 07:15:20 by TheSonntag
B-17 Over Round Rock, TX? posted Mon Feb 22 2010 07:14:58 by BWI5OH
A400M Talks In Final Round posted Fri Feb 19 2010 07:07:12 by Revelation
Nasa Confirms All Light Travels At Same Speed posted Fri Oct 30 2009 05:48:25 by NoWorries
Why All The F-15's/F-18's At BFI? posted Sat Jun 27 2009 12:43:28 by Alexinwa
Best Airshow For Military Aircraft? posted Thu May 14 2009 02:09:33 by B787
What Does Iran AF Use All The 747's For? posted Tue Apr 14 2009 00:35:35 by Stickers
Which Boeing Model Is Best For New Air Force 1? posted Mon Mar 23 2009 18:13:34 by Nitepilot79

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format