Rifle Scopes FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hair? Any interest?

[gyr]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

Chris and Rafael:
The SFP-FFP combo sounds great.- do you have an idea of the size -suntenssion of those 2 reticles? Because in my modest opinion, the problem with the FFP is that in a scope with a wide power factor (i.e. 3-18), a FFP reticle will either be too thin at 3 x so that it can be used for long range shots on small targets at 18; or too thick at x 18 if it is to be used comfortably at close range-fast shots.

As someone has said already, the FFP reticle could be thin since ranging would not start until shooting far. But the fixed size reticle.. you wouyld need a compromise.

Oh.. why not a FFP reticle for ranging and a "reversed plane" reticle in the center that is thicker at 3x and gets thinner at x18 ?

 

[gyr]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

sorry for the typo.- subtension

 

[doc76251]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

gyr,

What you describe are the problems that we have hopefully worked out. The biggest trick is designing a SFP reticle that will be the right size to be usefull in highpower ranging and yet no be so big when the power is dialed down to obliterate the ranging marks. Add to the problem that SFP reticles are MUCH larger than FFP reticles so there is a ratio and proportion effect that needs to be dealt with on the order of 5.X:1 in the case of USO.

It will be a ballance of sizes that will work together to achieve the goal.....that sounded communist but that is the idea. Maybe we'll call it the "Gung-Ho" reticle

Cheers, Doc

 

[Rafael]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

Doc;

I had a phone conversation with J.Boyette last night about this.

You would have gotten kick out of it.
In a matter of a few minutes he thought up many of the ideas you and I came up with last year when you were in the sandbox.....only it didn't take him as long as it took us.

He had some fresh ideas too.
____________
gyr;

I don't know if you read through the entire thread.....a tedious task. Still, we talked about the things you bring up.
Many of us are looking at this thing the way you are.
There are a bunch of different FFP & SFP combinations I would like to try, but each reticle will cost about $1000.00 to make.
Get's kinda expensive to try alot of different things.
We will probably keep it pretty simple for the first one and go from there as we get some hands-on experience.....if that's alright with USO.

 

[gyr]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

Rafael.- I have been reading part of the thread in the past but to be honest not all of it.- sorry for repeating ideas already discussed.

 

[Rafael]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

gyr;
I didn't mean to put you off, excuse me if it sounded that way.
You did nothing wrong, glad to see you are interested.

There are alot of ideas floating about different reticles.
There are a ton of different directions we could take this in.

Keep thinking on this we try to get the first one made.
We will be posting pics, I am sure.
Once that happens I think all of us will be solidifying our ideas into one or a few reticle pairs that will hopefully improve it even more.

As to the particulars of your idea...
Yes, the RFP reticle does get smaller, in proportion to the target as you dial on power. I agree that this is a most desirable feature and the first one will should work that way.

Cheers

 

[gyr]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

No problem,didnt take any offence at all, .- excuses not needed.

 

[Rafael]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

Okay, but it shows good judgement on your part...not reading it all.
It gets pretty damn boring.

 

[Arcangel8654]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

Chris madrid have you dealt with the company for the svd scopes before and how is there service? I have experience with russian svd scopes and they are very good..

 

[Rafael]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

Arcangel;
Chris let me know he may be away from the computer for a few days. Just wanted to let you know so you didn't think he was ignoring you. I am sure he will reply when he gets time.

 

[Arcangel8654]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

Thanks Rafael..

 

[Rafael]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

You are most welcome.

 

[chrismadrid]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

Never dealt with POSP.RU directly. Sorry I cant post much. I'm a nurse at the mo' when not at work. Good to know the scope's OK.

 

[chrismadrid]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

I have an observation or two.

My <span style="font-weight: bold">subjective</span> feeling is that the brain (my brain anyway) is happy with current FFP reticles in FACTOR-3 zoom ranges. And not so much outside.

By that I mean that if it's acceptable at x power it's still acceptable at 3x power. At less than x too fine and at more than 3x too big. In reality I think it's just a bit shy of 3 (I need to really sit and test but closer to 2.7/2.8 - see why natural Log's are bugging me Raf!) - but that may be getting fussy.

SO I think that one mechanism to use is make tick marks you wont use at low mag, invisible at low mag (finer lines).

ALSO feel that the tick line width needs to reduces a little as we move towards the centre (the little is the maths I need to sit and think more about) so that at lowish mag it's still visible but is not QUITE as fat at higher mag. Will be imperceptible if I get it right. It's all to do with proportion of FOV - not JUST actual subtension.

The Brain is not a linear calculator. If you think about it - If you zoom 2 times the AREA covered by the line is 4 times the size (twice as fat, twice as long). Three times, 9 times as big - 5 times, 25 times as big. This is not yet rationalised - but I hope you see what I'm at.

Personally I don't need (or particularly like) cross "hairs" - I quite like floating aim and reference points (ticks, chevrons (less so), rings, dots, whatever)

My thopughts right now are sort of :-- Centre floating dot with perhaps four SHORT radial "the dot's here in the middle" lines/shallow arrowheads in SFP (maybe at 45º/135º/225º/315º?) and reference/holdover marks in FFP as normal. But OK this is personal and not to everyones tastes.

If I can get time later today - I'll write to POSP. That reticle looks simple and yet seems to do it all!

 

[Rafael]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

Chris;
A few thoughts on this....

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <span style="font-weight: bold"> SO I think that one mechanism to use is make tick marks you wont use at low mag, invisible at low mag (finer lines). </span> </div></div>
This has been considered. This is why I was talking about making the 1MOA ticks short enough that they disappear behind the RFP reticle at lower powers. Have you considered this and do you think it will help? For instance, my request for the first build is to have an RFP x-hair of .125MOA at full power. This should result in the RFP becoming .625 or so in thickness when you dial down on the 5-1 power factor scope.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <span style="font-weight: bold"> ALSO feel that the tick line width needs to reduces a little as we move towards the centre (the little is the maths I need to sit and think more about) so that at lowish mag it's still visible but is not QUITE as fat at higher mag. Will be imperceptible if I get it right. It's all to do with proportion of FOV - not JUST actual subtension.
</span> </div></div>
That's certainly worth considering. Some have suggested doing away with the finer grads towards the center. This may be a good compromise.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <span style="font-weight: bold"> Personally I don't need (or particularly like) cross "hairs" - I quite like floating aim and reference points (ticks, chevrons (less so), rings, dots, whatever)
</span> </div></div>
I am torn on this issue. Full spanning lines are nice for holdovers, viewing relationship of targets to obstructions/references. I guess you could still have them in the FFP.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <span style="font-weight: bold"> My thopughts right now are sort of :-- Centre floating dot with perhaps four SHORT radial "the dot's here in the middle" lines/shallow arrowheads in SFP (maybe at 45º/135º/225º/315º?) and reference/holdover marks in FFP as normal. But OK this is personal and not to everyones tastes.
</span> </div></div>
I need to try out a center-dot scope to see if I like using it.
The nice thing is that it should be a simple thing to have different RFP designs waiting to be paired with a fairly standard group of FFP offerings so the user can mix and match to suit them.

Looking forward to hearing more from you, and learning a bit more about how the mind/eye works with these things.

 

[chrismadrid]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

Raf - I need time with a slide rule, graph paper and a SHARP pencil. I cant do MOA to m'radian/cm conversions in my head. But finding daytime is a bother at the moment - this stuff needs light or I cant see the lines (must get reading glasses

)

But yes - I have considered hiding ticks behind the line. This with progressively thinner tick lines.

But been wondering if MAYBE it might help if the SFP lines are tapered a bit. Say 2.5 times thicker at the edge than the centre in a factor 5 zoom scope.

This because I want finer grad's near the centre.

I need to sit a draw a reticle at x, 2.5x and 5x. see what proportion of image gets masked.

Centre dot scopes - you'll get an idea with a cheapish Russian scope. Fine Dragunov reticle maybe

- dont spend loads - I have one of these at home here in the research bin.

I paid A LOT less though. I'd not pay USD200. 40 seemed fair.

Have one or two ideas from friends I need to play with. Glen Seekins sent me some drawings as did a mate in the UK who JW@USO knows.

 

[Rafael]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

That's not a scope, it's a funnel with optics!

When I get some time, I intend to do some more drawings in Visio.
I think I can easily scale them in there for the power differentials.

 

[Rafael]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

Just so you guy's know....
Still working on this with USO.
We are getting closer.

I am curious.
How many of you who would like this in MOA have actually considered an IPHY(Inch Per Hundred Yards) reticle and adjustments instead?
The math for ranging gets REAL easy. Doc76251 pointed this out to me when I was being rather obtuse.
I have swung over to the dark side.

 

[Lindy]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

I think U.S. Optics already has one IPHY reticle, the PCMOA reticle. I'm not sure they intended that, though - but someone who has one reported that's what it is.

The reticle and the adjustments ideally should match - which raises the question of whether U.S.O. could do adjustments in IPHY.

 

[Rafael]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

Lindy;
I am told they can do IPHY adjustments as well as MOA and Milradian.

 

[Huckleberry]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

IPHY or it is not worth doing. Simplicity will be the key to success.

 

[Rafael]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Huckleberry</div><div class="ubbcode-body">IPHY or it is not worth doing. Simplicity will be the key to success. </div></div>

Yes, but the use of so few words is not the key to understanding.
How is IPHY not simple?

 

[Rafael]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

The majority of Americans think in inches/feet/yards/.... I do.
The majority of us do not learn use of MOA or Milradians until we are pretty far along in our education on shooting.

A 20" target appears as 10 IPHY at 200 yards. What is more simple than that? Forget inch to MOA or inch to Mil conversions.

Different, certainly. Simple, definitely.

 

[SiLo]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

Would it be possible to convert existing USO reticules to dual plane?.

 

[Rafael]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

Good question, needs to be answered by the gent's at USO.

 

[Lindy]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

IPHY is just another angle.

There is nothing sacred about either an MOA or a milliradian. I've used the IPHY ranging reticle in the Horus H25, and it's pretty simple.

You can even do the IPHY math with a Mildot Master with a little trick, if you want.

 

[doc76251]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

Raf, I think he was agreeing with you.

IPHY is very easy to do in your head, the constant is 100 as opposed to MOA which is 95.5 and mils in 27.778.

As Raf said, USO is capable of all three variations for the asking, WITH dials to match.

Cheers, Doc

 

[Rafael]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

Damn but I can be stupid at times.
Please excuse my poor interperetation of your post, Huckleberry!

 

[Hateca]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Rafael</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Just so you guy's know....
Still working on this with USO.
We are getting closer.

I am curious.
How many of you who would like this in MOA have actually considered an IPHY(Inch Per Hundred Yards) reticle and adjustments instead?
The math for ranging gets REAL easy. Doc76251 pointed this out to me when I was being rather obtuse.
I have swung over to the dark side.

</div></div>

IPHY (SMOA) is just what I did. Couldn't wait and designed my own reticle in SMOA and had the adjustments also done in SMOA.

http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthre...2196#Post372196

 

[Rafael]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

I dig that reticle, Randy!
It took me a while to come around to IPHY, but I am leaning that way now.

 

[Huckleberry]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

I was in agreement.

 

[Rafael]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

Thanks, Huckleberry.

 

[Regular Guy]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

Yes

IPHY

1/3 inch clicks (.25 too fine and .50 to coarse)

 

[Rafael]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

Can USO do 1/3 clicks?

 

[Rafael]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

Here are some of the latest drawings that are still in-progress.
The pictures are VERY large, needed to get the detail required.
Because of this, I am only posting links.
The pics that include a target image are just to give you an idea how the reticle will look in real life.

Dr. Jim Clary was gracious enough to allow me to use the pic from a web article he wrote. Nice gent! His article can be found here: http://www.chuckhawks.com/f-class_shooting.htm

The pics of the reticle superimposed on the target pic are not realistic as they should be scaled in size with the power changes, but I do not have a large enough image that will work at low power AND with the resolution required to be useable at high power. You get the idea, though. Just imagine that you moved closer to the target as you lowered the power.

Doc76251 worked with me on this design.
This is intended to be an IPHY or MOA reticle, the Mil version would have to be a bit different. Doc gave his input on the size of the thin and thick secions of the tics and it was his idea to do the roman-numerals. I don't think I have them quite the way he wants them, but you get the idea. I am sure the reticle will change over the course of working on it further.

http://members.cox.net/friesen2/USODP/DF..._full-power.jpg
http://members.cox.net/friesen2/USODP/DF...c_mid-power.jpg
http://members.cox.net/friesen2/USODP/DF...c_low-power.jpg

Expand the pics to full screen as some of the components dont show up at reduced window size.
Keep in mind that unless I make the pics even larger, there is some error in the way the computer saves the image, resulting in some reticle components looking thinner or thicker than I drew them. The proportions are perfect in the original drawings.

 

[paradigmsk8er]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

wow. that reticle is awesome

 

[LOBO]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

Very nice.

Chris

 

[Lindy]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

Just a guess from the size of the full-power image, but it looks like the small tick marks would be one IPHY each - is that correct?

 

[Rafael]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

Thanks, gent's.

Lindy;
Yeah, I should have mentioned that.
The small tics are 1 IPHY or MOA apart, "5" ticks graduate to fatter but are shorter than the "10" tics.
This could be done in IPHY or MOA.

At low power, you lose the "1" tics behind the SFP crosshair.
The images assume 17 power, about 10 power, and about 3.2 power.....the range of the SN-3 I intend to order if this can be done.

 

[BretShooter]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

Any thoughts to moving the windage center crosshair up a minute or two? Not that USO scope are short on elevation.

Oh, and why Roman numerals vs arabic? If the odd numbers are smaller than the even, it would allow more room for an larger "even" font, if that makes sense.

 

[Rafael]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

That's an interesting suggestion, Bretshooter.
We also talked about leaving off the upper half of the upper tic-marks. This would go along with your suggestion.
Certainly something to think about!

The roman numerals are poorly executed by me but it was Doc's idea of another ranging tool.....creating different width objects for comparing to objects being ranged.

 

[Rafael]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

On second thought, Bretshooter, the SFP reticle needs to remain in the center in both axis.
If it is off-center at all, it would end up at different points along the FFP reticle depending on the power setting.

One of the restrictions of using two reticles together is that the two only remain aligned at the very center.

 

[Regular Guy]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Rafael</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Can USO do 1/3 clicks? </div></div>

I don't think they do -- yet

 

[Rafael]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hai

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SF340Driver</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Rafael</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Can USO do 1/3 clicks? </div></div>

I don't think they do -- yet

</div></div>

I wonder if this means a thread-pitch change or a new detent ring? I hear the tooling for a new detent ring is rather costly.

 

[akm]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hair? Any interest?

great idea look forward to seeing it

 

[Rafael]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hair? Any interest?

The latest reticle images are here:
http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Main=6141&Number=388475#Post388475

 

[JBW3]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hair? Any interest?

RAF,
We could do 1/3 clicks, just need tyo change the thread pitch. You're absolutely right that the detent ring is way expensive to change!
John III

 

[Rafael]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hair? Any interest?

That's great, John!
I didn't think it would turn out that simple, was not sure you could do a thread-pitch in between the two existing setups.
So, we would get 30 IPHY or MOA per rev?

I like that!
Good call, SF340!

 

[Rafael]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hair? Any interest?

John;
Are the 3.2-17 reticles interchangeable with the 1-10 reticles or are they different? How about the SFP reticles?

Latest Dual-Focal-Plane reticle images here:
http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Main=6141&Number=388475#Post388475

 

[doc76251]

Re: FFP ranging reticle with static-size cross-hair? Any interest?

Here is my reasoning for Roman Numerals vs Arabic

RAF and I both feel there needs to be SOMETHING in the reticle that allows for quick referencing of what line you are holding. Since we're at it why not make it useable for another purpose. Given the appropriate dimentions you can use the Roman Numerals as a fine measuring aid resolving 1/2 IPHY / MOA or LESS.

It also illustrates rather nicely why RAF does the drawing and I do ideas and make him pull his hair out while trying to explain it to him.

Cheers, Doc