Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik

IL-2 Sturmovik The famous combat flight simulator.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-18-2008, 10:49 AM
Feuerfalke Feuerfalke is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Codex View Post
Sorry...this is off topic but I had to post it. I was reading this thread and thought I'd try a little research. I entered into Google "German revi sight offset" and stumbled across this...LOL



Source: http://www.theaerodrome.com/forum/ga...-gunsight.html

Besides the fanboy talk, there's some rumor getting more substantive: CFS3 is coming and its the most probable reason for the information war going on between CFS and BoB.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-18-2008, 11:03 AM
Codex Codex is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hoppers Crossing, Vic, Australia
Posts: 624
Default

I just think it's hilarious as that was posted back in 2002
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-18-2008, 02:20 PM
KOM.Nausicaa KOM.Nausicaa is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 290
Default

Hello von G.

The Revi was offset to the right to gain a better forward view. To aim correctly it was sufficient to close the left eye.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-18-2008, 04:38 PM
Von_G Von_G is offline
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 8
Default

So it's off to the side to give an unobstructed view and for right eye aiming?
Any sources on this?

I have to wonder, if putting the sights off to the right like that was such a good idea, why didnt any other airforces do it?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-18-2008, 07:33 PM
KOM.Nausicaa KOM.Nausicaa is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 290
Default

Sources, in books yes. Maybe you can find something on the web.

Why didn't other airforces think of this? Frankly I don't know. If you ask me, it's one of those oddities of german engineering (I am german myself)....this is not the only one btw. They had also other stuff in the cockpit noone esle had that way.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-19-2008, 12:53 AM
Codex Codex is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hoppers Crossing, Vic, Australia
Posts: 624
Default

OK I may have found an explanation in the most unlikely place, a patent for the target reticle on telescopic sights believe it or not, but I am still not a 100% convinced this why the sights are offset.

Source: http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/wo.jsp?...7&DISPLAY=DESC

Quote:
GYROSCOPIC EFFECT: A spinning projectile from a rifled barrel is, in effect, a free gyroscope. When subjected to a twist or torque, it tends to rotate about an axis perpendicular to the axis about which the torque is exerted. The front wheel of a bicycle is a good illustration of this phenomenon. If the bicycle is tipped to the right when rolling forward, the front wheel resists tipping and instead its axle rotates to the right, turning the bicycle to the right.
While following its path, which is constantly curving downward, a projectile is subject to a force (air drag) on its nose from underneath, causing a twist or torque. If its spin is clockwise, this upward torque causes the projectile's nose to rotate and offset slightly to the right (like the bicycle wheel) as seen from the rear. This offset causes air drag to act unevenly and to push the projectile slightly to the right.
The effect of gyroscopic drift is difficult to analyze precisely because many variables are involved. Drift tables, which have been determined mainly from well-controlled army and navy tests, indicate that gyroscopic drift is roughly double that of Coriolis drift, and thus is also negligible for most purposes. It is interesting to note that with counterclockwise or left-twist barrel rifling, gyroscopic drift is to the left in the northern- hemisphere and more than cancels the effects of coriolis drift.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-19-2008, 04:12 PM
Von_G Von_G is offline
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 8
Default

Hmm...
That's interesting but it seems to be describing the offset of the projectiles nose, rather than the sight.

It seems the right eye thing, and keeping the view of the nose open are the best potential answers, although frankly neither one seems like an especially strong reason.
Maybe as KOM.nausicaa says, the germans just feel a need to be different!
Quote:
Originally Posted by KOM.Nausicaa View Post
...If you ask me, it's one of those oddities of german engineering (I am german myself)....this is not the only one btw. They had also other stuff in the cockpit noone esle had that way.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-19-2008, 06:22 PM
deadmeat313 deadmeat313 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Preston, UK
Posts: 35
Default

I thought the pilot had the option to mount the sight on the left if that was his dominant eye?
__________________
My whole life, all I've wanted to do is fly. Bomb stuff. Shoot people down. - - Topper Harley
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-19-2008, 10:54 PM
Codex Codex is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hoppers Crossing, Vic, Australia
Posts: 624
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Von_G View Post
Hmm...
That's interesting but it seems to be describing the offset of the projectiles nose, rather than the sight.

It seems the right eye thing, and keeping the view of the nose open are the best potential answers, although frankly neither one seems like an especially strong reason.
Maybe as KOM.nausicaa says, the germans just feel a need to be different!
Yes it describes the drag effect on a projectile's nose, but with it spinning through the air in a clockwise direction this effect will cause the projectile to drift to the right of its intended flight path, hence the need to have the gun sight slightly to the right in the pit.

But the thing that doesn't convince me of this idea being reason for offsetting the gun sight, is that I think the effect of this drift on weapons with a convergence of 300m or even 500m would be very minimal, and also the fact that allied planes had the sight in the centre.

I'm leaning towards KOM.Nausicaa descriptions.

Last edited by Codex; 01-19-2008 at 10:57 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:55 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.