to AussieEngineer. Yes, interesting as to effect of speeds on rates, but not all that applicable to this subject as it is not the maximum roll rate achievable, but rather the roll rate a one particular stick pressure. The Hellcat and Wildcat were both credited by Brown (see my earlier post) with quite good roll rates, but were control heavy a/c requiring a LOT on physical strength to fly in combat. At the indicated pressure the Spitfire and FW (which were both very light) would probably be at or near maximum, but most of the other a/c would have more roll rate to give. Heavy and light both had advantages. Light was less tiring to fly in combat, mut more tiring in cruising flight (had to be 'flown' more, rather than allowed to 'fly itself') and were generally poorer shooting platforms. Heavy was just the opposite. USAAF study made during the war (will try to find the article, but not too hopeful, I read it several months ago) by veteran combat pilots, considered the Hellcat too heavy, the Mustang too light and the Thunderbolt and Corsair nearly ideal.

8 squadrons had seafires III, 4 squadrons had Seafire IIC and 4 squadrons had Seafire XV this compairs with a squadron strength of a maximum 19 squadrons of corsairs operating from british cariers in all theaters during 45 and 14 squadrons of hellcats. so whilst a lot closer Than i Thought I would hardly say the great majority.

Now I might be wrong on this, perhaps WWII aircraft pilots were more akin to English Longbowmen of the middle ages in terms of stature, but 50lbf as a lateral stick load is pretty enormous. It's just under twice that recommended by health and safety for a seated push or pull. H&S website So some fighters may have had more to give, but could the average pilot extract it?

50 lbs isn't all that much for someone trying not to get killed, and fighter pilots usually developed very well muscled wrists and foreares. Even at that, Hellcats were often flown in combat with pilots using both hands on the stick and occasionally grabbing for the throttle. Also, H&S rules are written (today) for the safety of the average Joe couch potato, not for 20 year old adrenaline junkies. It didn't need a longbowman, but it did need someone who had gotten used to doing it, if he was going to keep it up for long.

For comparison, the trigger pull of a modern, double action only pistol (to be delivered with one finger) is usually 12-17 lbs.

So at what point does it become alot? Pulling 6.5 (US) gallons sideways may not be a limit but it's not an inconsiderable amount. You also have to compare like with like. A trigger pull is against the solid grip of the rest of your hand. A snap roll is bought about by a force applied laterally to an object about half a metre in front of you, which is a little harder to apply.

Yes, the sideways motion is different, but the entire arm and shoulder are available to apply pressure, and the pilot is fixed in the seat so he has the same leverage as pulling a trigger. Seventeen pounds with one finger vs six or eight times that with the entire arm doesn't seem unreasonable to me. It's a different business than lifting the weight and holding it up. One of the things many pilots liked about the Spitfire was that there was very little work to flying it due to the light controls, but there were drawbacks to that. It was remarkable because it was so unusually light.

I'm not sure but I think ~50lbs may have been the most force a pilot could expect to be able to put on the stick. Some of those aircraft may not have had full deflection of the ailerons at high speed. Thats why you get the peaks, the maximum deflection with the fastest airflow over the aileron produces the maximum rate of roll, but anything past that the ailerons can't be physically held at maximum deflection. The exception is the P-38L with hydrolically boosted ailerons, but even with them it didn't have an advantage untill it reached high speed, over most of the flight evelope it still roled slower. It really needed them too, because when you look at the P-38J line pretty much everything in the sky could switch maneuvers much much faster.

50 lbs seems pretty lite to me. As I said earlier, if you can apply 17 lbs with one finger ... The earlier Lightnings were worse. The power boosted ailerons came with the P38J-25, I assume the numbers here were for an earlier model of the J. Which is why the Lightning pilots used pitch instead of roll to change maneuvers. Trouble is, the data disagrees with too many reports from folks who should know. Brown (see my earlier post) was a career operational test pilot, and flew all models of the Seafire as well as Hellcat, Wildcat and Corsair. He didn't consider the Seafire's roll rate anything to remark on, but specifically referred to the high rate for the Hellcat and Wildcat, as well as the heaviness of their controls. In spite of that, the Hellcat was certainly his favorite.

50lbs isn't that light, think about holding a 50lb bag of cement with your arms partially outstretched. The spitfire was never renowned for it's rate of of roll, but on the other hand it wasn't really critised for being a slow roller, like pre-boosted aileron P-38s were. It's somewhere in the middle on that chart, with the clipped wing version being a lot better. Although, the Hellcat and Wildcat aren't on that chart I'd reckon you'd find they were somewhere in between The P-40 and the Focke Wulf. I think the issue is mainly to do with speed. The zero could out roll the hellcat and wildcat below 250mph but above those speeds they could easily out roll it. The same would probably be true with at least the clipped wing spits.