Ataros, thanks, that's interesting but what we have in the diagram is a compromise setting rather than convergence. The closest the diagram comes to convergence is at 200m. As things stand, the cannon converge at 200m (but at some undisclosed height above the line of sight (which seems highly problematic to me), and the MGs converge at 400m, along the line of sight but at a range where the cannon rounds are beginning to become widely dispersed, and in fact, much more widely dispersed than the diagram suggests because the recoil would introduce extreme horizontal and vertical dispersion at that range.
However, even assuming that the diagram describes a standard LW setting for the E 3/4, (and I suspect possibly it does) it is nevertheless calculated using the know trajectories of the 8mm and 20mm rounds. Physics being what they are, we can calculate where an 8mm round will be relative to a 20mm round when fired from the same point. However, you can't just change those values around as you please. For example, using your diagram, we cant set the vert. convergence at 200m for both the 8 and 20mm rounds and then change the horizontal convergence from 400m (as in the diagram) to 600m. That would be physically impossible because it would require the trajectories of the two types of ammo to deviate from what gravity dictates.
So, I appear to be back where I started from trying to work out why there are two separate convergence values that are not necessarily related to each other.
Can someone please point out where I'm getting my wires crossed.
|