BF109 - Can't we just have the gunsight in the middle?

[KOM.Nausicaa]

Originally Posted by Lixma

And here is what a pilot with two eyes open would see....

No that is not what he would see.

[Lixma]

Originally Posted by KOM.Nausicaa

No that is not what he would see.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflex_sight

Because reflex sights provide an illuminated reticle, they are often used with both eyes open (the brain will tend to automatically superimpose the illuminated reticle image coming from the dominant eye onto the other eye's unobstructed view), giving the shooter normal depth perception and full field of view.

OK, what would he see?

[b101uk]

We should remember wile most people brain can superimpose 2 slightly different images given they have 2 eyes and do it ALL the time , some people have different eye dominance so would not be able to process info from a RH sight without training unless they used the left eye instead for the sight (regardless of if they are left or right handed)

Likewise not everyone (fewer people) in all would be able to use a magnified image in one eye and normal focuses in the other eye, thats why fewer people have both eyes open with telescopic sights than with reflex sights.

Remember the brain is a powerful with respect to image processing, given that what out eye see’s and feeds to the brain is upside-down and the brain flips it the right way up and that the brain if we were to ware some special glasses that flipped the image upside-down after a few weeks to a couple of months the brain would flip the image so we would the correct way up agene as experiments have shown.

[KOM.Nausicaa]

Originally Posted by Lixma

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflex_sight



OK, what would he see?

Thanks I know how a reflex sight works.

The whole mistake you are doing since I do not know how many posts, is to assume the reflex sight is set up to project into the right eye by default. It's an assumption, and it's wrong, because the pilots head is not in the position to make that work by default - for many reasons. It only works if you lean slightly right and forward. Note, not much forward - most here have no idea how small the Bf109 cockpit is, and how close you are to the instrument panel. The sim gives a wrong impression of that.

What the sim shows in the normal view (half cut of circle) is indeed what you see if your head is in the "default" position, and the leaning right and forward (shift F1) is pretty much spot on. What is NOT correct is the subjective impression of distance to the panel in the sim.

[Lixma]

I'm too tired to repeat myself tonight so i'll limit myself to this....

Originally Posted by KOM.Nausicaa

What the sim shows in the normal view (half cut of circle) is indeed what you see if your head is in the "default" position

No it doesn't.

CoD's default view is what a Cyclops would see; a being with one eye looking straight down the centre-line of the aircraft. To my knowledge no Cyclops ever flew for the Luftwaffe....although I confess I have no hard data on the issue.

Poor Lixma. Hopes getting high that finally people understood and then somebody jumps in that obviously hasn't read all posts or did understand them.

Lixma's right. Period.

[KOM.Nausicaa]

No he is not. He is dead wrong. The sim default view is what you see, it is correct -- except for being much closer to the panel IRL. A small movement is enough to put your body/head into position. But you do NOT see the full circle as he pretends. I have experienced it myself in a cockpit replica 1:1 with working REVI once. (109 artisanal replica) There was a youtube video about that thing, but it's a long time ago. Can't find it.


And yes I am German. Btw, If someone is interested he can experience it at the technical museum in Berlin, but with a FW 190 cockpit. Same principle and REVI position though.

Lixma ist spot on. Obviously you did not bother to read the thread. I say it in German to get myself understood.

Lixma hat absolut recht. Was wir heute im Spiel sehen, berücksichtigt nicht stereoskopisches Sehen mit zwei Augen. Das Spiel tut so, als hätte der Pilot nur ein Auge. Natürlich, wenn man das Cockpit einfach nur mal so sieht, denkt man, das, was Lixma sagt, kann gar nicht stimmen, und genau das habe ich auch anfangs gedacht. Dann habe ich aber mal genau nachgelesen und versucht zu verstehen, was Lixma uns zu erklären versucht. Und dann verstanden. Man kommt zu dem falschen Schluss, dass Lixma Unrecht hätte, weil man selber keine Erfahrung hat mit derartigen Vorrichtungen und dadurch falsche Schlüsse zieht. Es gibt auch viele Leute, die, wenn sie einen Science Fiction Film sehen, denken, es sei ganz normal, dass das vorbeifliegende Raumschiff Motorengeräusche von sich gibt.
Eine Kamera und damit jedes Video gibt den wirklichen Sachverhalt absolut falsch wieder, weil eine Kamera nicht über stereoskopische Sicht verfügt, da sie nur ein Auge hat.

Mach mal einen Versuch:
Nimm mal Deine Hand und halte sie 10 bis 30 cm vor eines Deiner beiden Augen, aber lasse Dein anderes Auge ebenfalls offen. Dann schaue auf etwas dahinter (z.B. den Bildschirm), aber so, dass das eine Auge mit der Hand im Blickfeld die Hand immer noch sieht. Was Du sehen wirst, ist eine halbdurchsichtige Hand, die sich dem Hintergrund überlagert. Das Hirn verbindet nämlich das, was beide Augen sehen, zu einem einzigen Bild. Das heißt, das Gehirn überlagert das Bild, dass das Auge mit der Hand sieht, mit dem Bild, dass das andere Auge sieht. Genauso funktioniert das mit dem Revi. Wenn jetzt das eine Auge den Zielkreis sieht und man hält das andere Auge offen, wird das Gehirn beide Bilder verbinden und der Pilot sieht einen Zielkreis, aber nicht auf dem Revi, sondern halt sonst wo.

[Lixma]

Originally Posted by KOM.Nausicaa

I have experienced it myself in a cockpit replica 1:1 with working REVI once. (109 artisanal replica).

You cannot compare sitting in a replica for an actual aircraft under field conditions. Under field conditions, in war, the Revi will be adjusted to suit whoever is flying the particular aircraft.

I am 173cm tall. Imagine I jump into a 109, fine-tune the gunsight so I get a clear image in my right eye as I look forward (just as the makers intended), and then jump out again.

Now imagine someone else hops in straight after, perhaps 190cm tall. He will be forced to stoop, bend over or lean in order to see the reticle. Because it was not adjusted for him.

So, he adjusts the sight to his preference and jumps out.

Now I jump back in and now I can't see the reticle without moving/leaning/Shift-F1ing myself into position.

If I get into a BMW-3 straight after a 150cm tall man has just got out, I will probably bash my knees on the wheel or fascia if I do not adjust the seat. But it would be wrong to claim that bruising one's knees is a known feature of the BMW-3 series. In a similar vein, if I go to the museum and jump in to the nearest 109 on display I would undoubtedly have to manoeuver my head in order to get a clear image of the reticle....because the Revi isn't adjusted for me. It's adjusted for someone else (probably no-one in particular).

OK, just a couple more things before the caffeine wears off.....

You mentioned the cramped nature of the cockpit. It's safe to say the 109's cockpit dimensions are legendarily claustrophobic. Therefore can you think of a worse idea than to install a gunsight into this aircraft that requires the pilot to start shifting about? I can't.

What possible advantage is it to install a gunsight in a high performance aircraft that requires the pilot to start leaning over just to be able to see the gun-sight? I can think of no advantages at all. None.

[Laurwin]

Originally Posted by Lixma

I'm too tired to repeat myself tonight so i'll limit myself to this....



No it doesn't.

CoD's default view is what a Cyclops would see; a being with one eye looking straight down the centre-line of the aircraft. To my knowledge no Cyclops ever flew for the Luftwaffe....although I confess I have no hard data on the issue.

for the record there was atleast one cyclopean Luftwaffw pilot as you would put it. He lost his eye in earlier combat, but he returned to duty, he fought until 1945. It's kind of embarrasinf that I forgot his name, but he most likely served in one of the staffels of JG26. He was an older veteran ace compared to the raw recruits that provided bulk of pilot reserve.

Although he did get a little bit assistance from his wingman, during landings (because with only one eye he couldnt tell depth so easily). Probably wingman landed alongsode him oer in front of him.

Then on japanese side there was saburo sakai who became cyclops ( or a pirate if youd prefer that lol)

Do you guys know idf saka was able to bag any kills over americans after he got wounded?