Aircraft canopies

[sharkman]

Been having a couple thoughts lately about model aircraft canopies.

I know the norm is to have crystal clear canopies for all aircraft with no dirt, smudges, fingerprints, etc. on them. One advantage is that one gets to see all the little details in the pit area (especially if it is a closed canopy).

I'm just curious how realistic this actually is. Most of us I think try to capture our models in a state as "real" as possible, an accurate representation of the real thing. Most of the working aircraft I have been around (and it's not that many) have been very well maintained overall and do have "clean" windows, but they are in no way spotless!

Any aircraft I've seen at the few air shows I've been to have always seemed to be spotless as well so I don't think they are a fair representation.

What I'm curious about is aircraft that would have been in a battle situation for a long time. Spitfires operating from grass fields, 109's in the heat of battle, float planes on the ocean (I spend a lot of time on boats and any salt that gets on a window doesn't come off that easy)! Does anyone have any direct experience??

I've noticed that a lot of people do some fantastic weathering on aircraft, some more heavily than others, but they all have crystal clear canopies. I've noticed it's also fine for armor and auto modelers to make mud covered windows with wiper streaks.

Just wondering why this has become the norm (not that we want a big fingerprint in the glass) but if one was to try and simulate some level of grim on a window and entered said model in a contest would they be penalized for trying to more accurately represent the real thing???

:hmmm

 

[moon puppy]

I think the old adage of "lose sight, lose fight" comes into place. If you can't see the enemy because the canopy is dirty no point in even engaging. I think others can answer better but I recall seeing crew chiefs (or someone) waxing canopies with some sort of compound making them spotless. Even on the Buff. I've been around a lot of private aircraft and know that you'll have frosting in the corners, guess it's from stress or something. But can we see that in scale? Well the way I build yeah...

Just my take on it, the paint may be sandblasted down to the metal, oil streakin' down the belly and mud in the wheelwells but I think they would have had the canopy spotless, espeically back in the day where the MarkI eyeball was basically the only sensor they had for locking on a target.

 

[sharkman]

Fair enough Bob, if all you have are your eyes and what you're looking through then, yes you would want them as clear as can be!

Not sure how someone would model it, but I'm sure there are those out there who could do it!!

Thanks!

 

[jknaus]

All the a/c I have worked on have the canopies and windscreens cleaned regularily. For a/c flying low over the ocean I know ours went through a bird bath and which rinsed the salt off. A/c are generally kept clean which makes it easier to see when there are problems. If you dont notice an oil or hydraulic leak thenstuff happens. Therefor any thing oily etc was wiped down right after flight. Now as for other dirt, well when firing guns you get a nice soot stain aft of the gun. And a/c flying in Germany when we used to be there were filthy after a couple of flights because of the industrial air pollution. So generally I would say windscreens and canopies are clean because you need to see, oil and grease is minimal because if you let it build you might miss a tell tale, and general cleanlieness was dependant on where it flew and amount of use. If that helps any.
James

 

[RichB]

Military aircraft canopies are always kept clean. Nicks and scratches are sanded and polished out if within damage limits, otherwise the canopy will be replaced. Even during the BoB, aircraft just back from a flight could be dirty (bugs, oil, etc) but when they were being refueled, rearmed and serviced for the next launch the last job done was to clean and polish the canopy and windscreen before the Erks could go for a smoke and tea.

Cheers,
Rich

 

[Rhino]

I concur with the above! 'Pup's "Lose Sight, Lose the Fight" is particularly poignant.
James has a unique, correct and accurate point of view as well.

 

[phantom II]

Fair enough Bob, if all you have are your eyes and what you're looking through then, yes you would want them as clear as can be!

Not sure how someone would model it, but I'm sure there are those out there who could do it!!

Thanks!

I got to tell you , I have replaced many canopies and windshields because of a flaw in the glass .

Other that that, they said pretty clean as a fighter pilot needs good vision..

Cheers, Christian B)

 

[Skinny_Mike]

I can give you my experience with the bomber test fleet at Edwards, for what that's worth, but the last thing the crew chief did before declaring crew ready was to clean off the LCD displays and the windshield. I fondly remember them getting annoyed with us engineers if our preflights ran too long But up until flight day (the bombers typically only flew once a week) the windshields were filthy! Bug guts, rain streaks, whatever got hit last time out.

Maybe it all just depends on your timing...

 

[phantom II]

I echo that sentiment . Florida is bad anyhow with the salt air and the buggs .

The birds got cleaned every morning ( when scheduled ) but most of the time they flew two to three times a day .

Best to be on the early flight . Busy out there with a fleet of F-4' :frantic

Cheers, Christian B)

 

[sharkman]

Forgot to comment on this..... :smack

Thanks everyone! That sheds a lot of light!

I appreciate it!

 

[Sharkmouth]

LOL, I thought this was about how to attach, prepare, polish kit and vacuum-formed replacement model canopies.

During my acquisition of my Airframe and Powerplant licenses (Aviation High School), canopy cleanliness was stressed for the reason Bob mentioned, pilot's visibility of the outside world. During restorations (Silver Springs for the NASM or the HARP) we would clean and/or replace canopies due to visibility issues. However, during combat, light crazing occurred and became a problem when the sun hit it as it formed glare. Polishing didn't help so a replacement was required.

Exceptions were the bubbles of helicopters. Combat repairs included stitching cracks together after stabilization (drilling a hole at the apex to relieve the stress which would continue the crack) and polishing. Of course, a replacement was ordered to be ready for the next strip down or overhaul.

Upon return from sorties (and preflight), a walk around with a rag and clipboard was performed to wipe away fluids and note their location. After completing work on the aircraft, the locations where fluid was found was revisited to see if the fluid returned (indicating a leak) For preflight, the location of wiped away fluid would be constantly checked for the reason James stated.

Regards,

 

[moon puppy]

Then again, there are these situations...

Looks like the pilot is still spitting oil.

 

[Sharkmouth]

Looks like the pilot is still spitting oil.

Nah, he's just being slick!

Regards,

 

[Hippy Ed]

Then again, there are these situations...

Looks like the pilot is still spitting oil.

Houston Oilers fan? :hmmm interesting...

 

[ausf]

Then again, there are these situations...

Looks like the pilot is still spitting oil.

Pretty much what happens every time I airbrush while wearing a new pair pants. Color cup awaaaaaaay!

Isn't that the short-lived emergency night camo? If out after dark, pull lever...

 

[phantom II]

Good grief it looks more like tar than oil. :frantic Would have been a great time for windshield wipers :fencing

 

[moon puppy]

That's actually Ian Flemming testing the ill conceived oil slick evasion option, didn't work but gave him a great idea for his book.

 

[ausf]

That's actually Ian Flemming testing the ill conceived oil slick evasion option, didn't work but gave him a great idea for his book.

Aston Martin P-47?

 

[moon puppy]

How cool would that be? But if it's the book, wouldn't it had been a Bentley, Bentley R type no doubt.

 

[ausf]

Honestly, I never got the Bentley angle, seemed too clunky for chases. Nor Hoagy Carmichael, but I saw the movies before I read the books.