Bf 109 Side-Hinged Canopy

[brustcan]

Given the awkwardness of the side-hinge conopy I've always wondered why that style was initially chosen by Messerschmitt. Anyone know?

More importantly why was it retained in over 10 years of production? Surely it could not have been too hard to change to the superior rear-slide arrangement?

Hello! Why Messerschmitt chose to have the canopy open to the right is not known. And the same
right opening canopy continued on all his fighter models: Bf-109, Me-209, Me-309, Me-163, Me-262.
His final design for the Spanish Air Force was the HA-200, a two seat, twin jet engine trainer that
flew for the first time on August 16, 1955. BOTH PILOT CANOPIES OPENED(hinged) TO THE RIGHT!

The pros and cons of the hinged to the right vs the sliding backwards, is that with the sliding canopy
the pilot on take off and landing would have a better chance of getting out of the plane.

The original canopy fitted to the BF-109 prototypes was lightweight, thin bracing, and could be
easily opened by the pilot with one hand, to the right. The E-3 had the revised canopy design
with a heavier frame, all flat glass panels, and attached to which was the head armour plate.
This canopy was more difficult to open, because of it's weight, and ground crew now assisted
the pilot in the opening and closing of it. I had a chance to sit in a BF-109G, and it took both
hands to close it, and it was even more difficult to open it.

In crashes pilots would often be trapped in their planes, because the canopy was jammed.
In case of fire, it was fatal for the pilot. A couple of years ago Black 6(BF-109G-2) was
lost during an air show in England. The pilot landed upside down in a farmers field, and was
trapped inside the plane, because he could not get the canopy open. He was lucky that there
was no fire, until he was rescued.

The ERLA Machinenfabrik in Leipzig assembled the Bf-109 under licence. It came up with a
better vision canopy the Erla Haube. It also opened to the right, and on the first versions
had the radio mast attached to the canopy. The improved version had the mast located
further back, and the steel armour plate was removed and "Galland Armour"(bullet proof
Glass)was fitted to improve vision even further.

A sliding canopy would have saved a lot of lives. It could have been done....the Czech Avia
Company after the war moved the radio mast back and fitted a rear sliding clear blown
canopy on their S-199(Bf-109G airframes). Cheers brustcan.

[Pips]

Many thanks for that info brustcan. So even when designing Jets Messerschmitt still retained the hinged canopy? Amazing. I'm fascinated as to why, but looks like no one knows the reason.

[Kocur]

Hinged canopy is more simple to design and produce, you dont need any rails, especially think how to hide them inside, not to disturb airflow (Fw-190, P-51D). All it takes is a pivot in the canpy framing and thats it. Apart from (illusive) advantage of flying with cocpit open, sliding canopy has one advantage only as it seems: if the plane noses over, sliding canopy gives better chances of being open-able than hinged one, as there migh not be enough space between canopy and ground to drop.

There are no differeces between both styles in case of emergency in flight: in both cases canopies were simply DROPPED, not opened manually like in normal operation.

[Uninen]

Was the canopy "jettisonable" in Bf 109? (and if it was, from which variant and more details if possible.) I've really ever heard no mention about this and i have few books of the specific aircraft even, but what i know is that Fw 190 had the feature, with 20mm blanks i think 4 (or just 2 of these) used to jettison the canopy in emergency.

Regards.

[Meyer]

Was the canopy "jettisonable" in Bf 109? (and if it was, from which variant and more details if possible.) I've really ever heard no mention about this and i have few books of the specific aircraft even, but what i know is that Fw 190 had the feature, with 20mm blanks i think 4 (or just 2 of these) used to jettison the canopy in emergency.

Regards.

Yes it was, all variants I think....



That's the handle to jettison it, left side of the cockpit.

Regards.

[Uninen]

Ok, thank you.
But if you could, or somebody else tell little more of the details of the system.

Regards.

[luigi]

Hinged canopy is more simple to design and produce, you dont need any rails, especially think how to hide them inside, not to disturb airflow (Fw-190, P-51D). All it takes is a pivot in the canpy framing and thats it. Apart from (illusive) advantage of flying with cocpit open, sliding canopy has one advantage only as it seems: if the plane noses over, sliding canopy gives better chances of being open-able than hinged one, as there migh not be enough space between canopy and ground to drop.

There are no differeces between both styles in case of emergency in flight: in both cases canopies were simply DROPPED, not opened manually like in normal operation.

Are you sure? Maybe not in each and every aircraft: I read recently an account of a P47 pilot who had his P47 C shredded to junk by a FW190 who twice flew next to him, the pilot looking in disbelief that the Thunderbolt kept flying util he finished off its ammo, saluted and went away. The american pilot wasn't able to jump because teh cockpit would not open he wouldn't slide it back but for a few inches because a piece of metal bented by a bullet would prevent the cockpit from sliding back. The pilot made it home somehow and survived to tell it, but he could not drop his canopy, apparently.

Regards

[Kocur]

Naturally not in each and every plane! Say early Yaks sliding canopies were not droppable. I meant mature designs only

[Juha Tompuri]

Was the canopy "jettisonable" in Bf 109? (and if it was, from which variant and more details if possible.) I've really ever heard no mention about this and i have few books of the specific aircraft

You mean you haven't read this or the Finnish original?



Regards, Juha

[Grendel-B]

So much for ripping the canopy off.

It is funny to see how so many Finns defend the 109 simply because it was a FAF type. Had the FW 190 been an FAF fighter instead, I am pretty sure far fewer Finns would join the über-109 club.

As for every conceivable reason, try mounting the 109 from the starboard side. I am not saying it is a major limitation, but it is a limitation.

So much? What about discomfort to the pilot? The turbulence? The effect to the aerodynamics of the plane? The rearwards sliding canopy does not is not simply intended for high speeds.

Also, what is funny in Finns having knowledge on the 109? If FiAF had had FW 190s, then Finns would have broader knowledge on the FWs. But as things were, Finland had for example Fiats, Brewsters, Fokkers and yes, 109s. Therefore, we have still living pilots who have flown those planes. We have some of those in museums, we have manuals, test flight datas, and real pilots we can ask questions. We don't have any of those on FWs, or P51s or Spitfires. So what is exactly funny in knowing information about the primary FiAF fighter from 1943 until later 50s?

Also, why would anyone try to mount 109 from starboard? The canopy opens right. Therefore, pilots steps in from left. The problem here is.... Um, what problem, I fail to see one. Sorry, I fail to see your logic.