Vert/horizon convergence still reversed?

[AbortedMan]

Just wondering if the convergence values in the loadout screen are still reversed and labeled wrong.

I've been tryin to do some testing in quick missions to fine tune my gunplay but I don't feel confident that my settings are represented correctly...the tracers always seem to be at the same angle no matter how extreme I set my convergence.

[Varrattu]

Originally Posted by AbortedMan

Just wondering if the convergence values in the loadout screen are still reversed and labeled wrong.

Where does that rumor come from?

~S~

[David198502]

yes they are still reversed...you should be able to recognize it if set one of both to the max value which is i think 1000.
then you should clearly see the difference.

[notafinger!]

Yes, they are most certainly still reversed.

[Talisman]

Originally Posted by notafinger!

Yes, they are most certainly still reversed.

This might me a silly question, but should both convergence settings be set the same for the same gun? For ex, on my Hurricane if I want MG convergence at 200 yds, I pressume I set both convergence settings to 200, or am I missing something?

Talisman

[ATAG_Snapper]

Some like to set up a "cone of fire" for a given distance.

[pupo162]

Originally Posted by Talisman

This might me a silly question, but should both convergence settings be set the same for the same gun? For ex, on my Hurricane if I want MG convergence at 200 yds, I pressume I set both convergence settings to 200, or am I missing something?

Talisman

Not really.

if i recall correctly german 109s in the BOB had an horizontal convergence of 200 meters, and a vertical convergence of 400 meters. According to other in-mates at my squadron, if you set this the gun sight will be perfectly centered for this shot.

[Troll2k]

A small point.

The units on the convergence setup screen is in meters.The setup rings on the Spitfire and Hurricane gunsights are in yards.

Also to me horizontal"convergence" implies that the bullet path of at least 2 guns spaced apart in the horizontal plane meet in at a point in front of the plane.

Vertical"convergence" seems a misnomer as there is only 1 gun in the vertical
plane and therefore nothing to converge.(I guess some planes had guns in both the horizontal and vertical planes).I would call the vertical "convergence" more of a "droop".

I guess the 109 nose cannon does not have a horizontal convergence(as it is only 1 gun) but does have a vertical droop.

[pstyle]

Originally Posted by Troll2k

Vertical"convergence" seems a misnomer as there is only 1 gun in the vertical plane and therefore nothing to converge.(I guess some planes had guns in both the horizontal and vertical planes).I would call the vertical "convergence" more of a "droop".

I guess the 109 nose cannon does not have a horizontal convergence(as it is only 1 gun) but does have a vertical droop.

indeed, I'm not entirely sure how relevant vertical convergence is for wing-firing MGs/ Cannon. Afterall, they're only displaced vertically by a few inches from each other, even assuming some wing loading/ warping.

The furthest MGs on the spit are around 18 feet (i don't know the exact distance) apart (that's 6 or 7 metres), so the forward firing cone is quite narrow. Perhaps the worst thing one can do, is set the convergence TOO close to the aircraft, which would result in very large spread at range.

[FG28_Kodiak]

Bf109 E1 / E3 and E4 all uses the same convergences. wing mounted MG/Cannon set to 200/400m and over Engine mounted MGs 400/400m.
Picture for E3 (E1 and E4 are the same):