Simviation Forums

A description of the plane can be found at

http://www.scribd.com/doc/12874446/The- ... ts-of-1944

Observe such details as:

Maximum beam 411 cm. Wider than A320.
Two decks.
Wing 1,8 m thick. A man could walk erect in the wing, and there are doors to the wing passages in front of the wingbox. The rear of wingbox is a luggage hold.

The captain is NOT having flight controls. Two pilots are sitting at controls, but the captain sits behind them, facing left.

The upper deck is slightly narrower than lower. Maximum 4 seats abreast+ aisle on upper deck, except the 5 seats at the end of the aisle. And the aisle is off center, 3+1. Lower deck seat arrangement is 3+2. Lower and upper berths are offered on both decks.

So, between Martin Mars (that did not enter service), Latecoere 631 (which did enter service) and Saunders-Roe Princess which did not enter service, which of them would you rather fly as a passenger? As a pilot? As a captain?

The captain is NOT having flight controls. Two pilots are sitting at controls, but the captain sits behind them, facing left.

Not sure where you read that. The flight deck sounds more like the bridge of a ship. Not sure what the job of Captain of a civil flying boat would involve. Perhaps he had to dine & dance with the passengers like they do on cruise liners. During WWII the captain of large RAF aircraft could be any member of the crew & not necessarily a pilot.

So, between Martin Mars (that did not enter service), Latecoere 631 (which did enter service) and Saunders-Roe Princess which did not enter service, which of them would you rather fly as a passenger?

I'm not keen on being a passenger in any of them

The captain is NOT having flight controls. Two pilots are sitting at controls, but the captain sits behind them, facing left.

Not sure where you read that. The flight deck sounds more like the bridge of a ship.

Why, page 4!

On the left behind the pilots, there is the captain, and then flight engineer. On the right, behind the pilots, there is the radio operator, and then navigator.

The captain is NOT having flight controls. Two pilots are sitting at controls, but the captain sits behind them, facing left.

Looks more like a misplaced arrow to me. Whoever was responsible for producing the diagram has more than likely misinterpreted the draft somewhere along the line IMO.

During WWII the captain of large RAF aircraft could be any member of the crew & not necessarily a pilot.

Always though it came later than that, although I could understand it to a point if it happened on the Coastal Command fleet. As far as Transport and Bomber Command it was invariably the pilot AFAIK, even with NCO captains and commissioned crewmen.

During WWII the captain of large RAF aircraft could be any member of the crew & not necessarily a pilot.

Always though it came later than that, although I could understand it to a point if it happened on the Coastal Command fleet. As far as Transport and Bomber Command it was invariably the pilot AFAIK, even with NCO captains and commissioned crewmen.

I agree that the captain was usually the pilot or vice versa. I believe that Bomber Command pilots usually picked their crews during training. However, although I can't quote sources I've read several accounts in histories of RAF Bomber Command WWII operations where the navigator (for example) of a particular crew was the captain.

During WWII the captain of large RAF aircraft could be any member of the crew & not necessarily a pilot.

Always though it came later than that, although I could understand it to a point if it happened on the Coastal Command fleet. As far as Transport and Bomber Command it was invariably the pilot AFAIK, even with NCO captains and commissioned crewmen.

I agree that the captain was usually the pilot or vice versa. I believe that Bomber Command pilots usually picked their crews during training. However, although I can't quote sources I've read several accounts in histories of RAF Bomber Command WWII operations where the navigator (for example) of a particular crew was the captain.

How odd. I can understand the Nav being captain in certain situations (as they do nowadays with the Nimrod etc), but can't see what value it would have had in BC. Something I just haven't come across.

Until now. The following link refers to 1941/2, but has some interesting info (from an apparently dead forum):

http://www.rafcommands.com/cgi-bin/dcforum/dcboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=4579&forum=DCForumID6

Good evening all...

Interesting read.

In my day the Captain of the aircraft was usually in the "Left Seat" on fixed wing aircraft and in the "Right Seat" when flying helicopters in the military and the civilian world of aviation.

I understand now from my serving children that is not always the case, the Aircraft Commander may not even share flying duties on some missions.

During WWII the captain of large RAF aircraft could be any member of the crew & not necessarily a pilot.

Always though it came later than that, although I could understand it to a point if it happened on the Coastal Command fleet. As far as Transport and Bomber Command it was invariably the pilot AFAIK, even with NCO captains and commissioned crewmen.

I agree that the captain was usually the pilot or vice versa. I believe that Bomber Command pilots usually picked their crews during training. However, although I can't quote sources I've read several accounts in histories of RAF Bomber Command WWII operations where the navigator (for example) of a particular crew was the captain.

How odd. I can understand the Nav being captain in certain situations (as they do nowadays with the Nimrod etc), but can't see what value it would have had in BC. Something I just haven't come across.

Until now. The following link refers to 1941/2, but has some interesting info (from an apparently dead forum):

http://www.rafcommands.com/cgi-bin/dcforum/dcboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=4579&forum=DCForumID6

Thanks for that link C. I was beginning to think I imagined it.

This reminds me of something else. In the early part of WWI most aircraft were two-seater reconnaissance types. I don't know about the other air forces but in the RFC the observer was in command of the aircraft. The pilot was regarded as the driver or chauffeur. I recall watching a pretty good TV series about it some years ago but forget the name of it now.

PS. It was entitled Wings. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0164305/combined

[quote]I am sorry but you do not put Generals in Battleships and Admirals in Tanks do away with your Air Force and paint everybody green.

Good evening all...

Hi Doug I can remember my grandfather telling me they called them "PBOs" for Poor Bloody Observer.

They did have their own badge in both World Wars and I believe it was half a wing with a big "O" on the end for the Royal Flying Corps and a full wing with a big "O" in the center for the Royal Naval Air Service. Not sure if the Army had an Observer Badge.

Would be interesting to know if "Observer" was an army trade but had an air force or navy badge.

Hi Doug

The RFC was part of the Army until it was combined with the RNAS to form the RAF in 1918. Many of the aircrew were ex-cavalry officers. It was assumed that flying an aeroplane was much like riding a horse.

The Lysander was originally a two-seater intended for Army-cooperation work. Four squadrons were sent for spotting & light bombing duties with the BEF in France but were easy targets for the Luftwaffe & suffered heavy losses. The Lizzie was withdrawn from this role after the fall of France & relegated to communications & air-sea rescue duties until it found a niche in its most famous role - ferrying special agents to & from occupied France. These Special Duties Lysanders were based at RAF Tempsford but often operated from RAF Tangmere which was nearer to the coast.

Air-sea rescue Lysanders operated from my local airfield at Shoreham for most of WWII along with the Supermarine Walrus for picking up ditched aircrew.

PS. This is the Shuttleworth Collection's Lysander complete with ladder & long-range belly tank taken at Old Warden last year. You might be interested to know that it's an ex-RCAF target tug built in Canada. It's been painted to represent V9367 / MA-B of 161 (Special Duties) Squadron based at Tempsford which is not far from Old Warden.

Thanks for the picture and info Doug.

I do not see any weapons in the wheel pants of that aircraft, the one in British Columbia has a weapon (machine gun) I think built into the wheel pants and I can't quite remember what else it had for weapons as we ran out of time to see everything.

I wonder if the Lizzie was a true STOL aircraft and how it compared to the German Fieseler F156 Storch?

Sorry think I am dragging you off topic.

The forward firing guns are fitted in the wheel spats just above the landing lights. Not sure the Shuttleworth Lizzie has them. Charlie will know. (Note the side panels have been removed in my photo for some reason.) It's actually a Mk IIIA which also had twin machine guns in the rear cockpit. These have been removed to convert it into a Mk III SD (Special Duties) version. The undercarriage could also be fitted with winglets with bomb attachments. See the photo here. http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/History/1940s/Lysander.html

For a large aircraft the Lysander has a remarkable STOL performance which made it ideal for operating from tiny unlit fields at night. Not sure how it compares with the Fieseler Storch which is much lighter. We shall soon see as Peter Holloway's Storch recently completed its first test flight at Old Warden after an extensive restoration.

Thanks Doug...wonderful information...

Cheers...Happy Landings...Doug