Author Topic: P-51 Gyro Gunsight (Read 3739 times)

DREDger · « **on:** January 16, 2007, 03:52:40 PM »

As I understand it the P-51 had a 'gyro' gunsight, or a 'K-14 lead computing gunsight' as I read off the internet.

Somehow, and I am not quite clear on the particulars, but this was used to eliminate the guess work on deflection shooting.

Anyway, was wondering why we don't have this in AH?

I bet this has been discussed before, so sorry if I'm Johnny come lately on this.

Simaril · « **Reply #1 on:** January 16, 2007, 04:01:39 PM »

Good shots didnt use it, because as a 1st generation application it wasnt all that reliable. It also required significant effort to input the required info in real time, in the middle of a dogfight.

From a game standpoint, it isnt worth the coding effort. It wouldnt improve the accuracy of good shots, and it could turn into a crutch that kept players from improving INTO good shots.

Lastly, the US iron doesnt need the help. It's plenty good enough even wthout the K-14.

If you want, you can find and install the K-14 gunsight LOOK (without the lead computing feature) within the curent setup. My default gunsight -- used in almost every plane -- is the K14.

Murdr · « **Reply #2 on:** January 16, 2007, 04:04:49 PM »

If you get that, I better get my P-38L rear warning radar at the same time

Pawz · « **Reply #3 on:** January 16, 2007, 04:10:07 PM »

Quote

It wouldnt improve the accuracy of good shots, and it could turn into a crutch that kept players from improving INTO good shots.

LOL:rofl

they can ho better

Guppy35 · « **Reply #4 on:** January 16, 2007, 04:11:31 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Simaril
Good shots didnt use it, because as a 1st generation application it wasnt all that reliable. It also required significant effort to input the required info in real time, in the middle of a dogfight.

From a game standpoint, it isnt worth the coding effort. It wouldnt improve the accuracy of good shots, and it could turn into a crutch that kept players from improving INTO good shots.

Lastly, the US iron doesnt need the help. It's plenty good enough even wthout the K-14.

If you want, you can find and install the K-14 gunsight LOOK (without the lead computing feature) within the curent setup. My default gunsight -- used in almost every plane -- is the K14.

Where'd you see that Sim? Most of what I read says that the K-14 made a big difference when it arrived. There was some 'selling" of the idea to the old timers, but overall it made a fairly big splash. I know Bud Anderson talked about the difference in his book.

The RAF equivilant Mk II Gyro gunsight also got rave reviews with dramatic improvements in shooting once pilots got used to it.

DREDger · « **Reply #5 on:** January 16, 2007, 04:12:02 PM »

Good shots didnt use it, because as a 1st generation application it wasnt all that reliable

I bet that is true. I read some more and found it was labor intensive as far as iputing info..namely wingspan of enemy airplane. In real life if you were fighting allies you basically had the 109 or 190 (Europe of course) In this game you'de have whole slew of planes to input wingspan of.

Anyway thanks for response...probably not a good idea.

Viking · « **Reply #6 on:** January 16, 2007, 04:34:18 PM »

The US, UK and Germany (don't know about Japan) all introduced gyro-sights late in the war. Neither is modeled in AH though. There is a lot of fancy late war technology that isn't modeled, not that it would make much difference. Probably not worth the time and effort; better to spend it on new planes and other updates.

Simaril · « **Reply #7 on:** January 16, 2007, 04:38:52 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Guppy35
Where'd you see that Sim? Most of what I read says that the K-14 made a big difference when it arrived. There was some 'selling" of the idea to the old timers, but overall it made a fairly big splash. I know Bud Anderson talked about the difference in his book.

The RAF equivilant Mk II Gyro gunsight also got rave reviews with dramatic improvements in shooting once pilots got used to it.

I hate it when people ask me that.

As a non-researcher, I'd have to say that I read it somewhere! I recall coming across the comment not long ago, so I'll think about it and may come up with the reference....but no guarantees.

Thinking of other similar applications, I HAVE read that the targeting computer used much later -- Viet Nam era -- was found in testing to significantly improve the accuracy of the average pilot. I had read that it wasnt used much -- specifically because "no pilot would admit to being average!"

Soulyss · « **Reply #8 on:** January 16, 2007, 05:23:06 PM »

At the office so nothing in front of me, but as a recall. The gunsight would make an average shot better, but many of the aces or "good" shots flew with the gyro caged and used it as a standard reflector sight. In order to use the K14 you needed a tracking solution on your target to feed info into the computer (target wingspan if I recall correctly) And you had to hold the piper on target while the computer did it's thing, sudden violent manuvers would topple the gyroscope. I think the situations where the K-14 proved beneficial are the exception rather than the rule here in AH.

Also and I'm not sure if this was standard practice or not but at least in same cases with the K14 the guns were not set to converge to a single point but rather fire a box pattern. In Anderson's book he talks about flying up behind someone putting the pipper on him and missing completely. The only conclusion he could come to was that he shot AROUND his target due to close range.

zorstorer · « **Reply #9 on:** January 16, 2007, 06:28:20 PM »

LOL I am sure everyone who wants it will remember to cage the gyros during manuvers, only uncage them when flying nice and easy...oh yea then adjusting the range....then....oh then it's time to fire.....and most likely miss

xXx · « **Reply #10 on:** January 16, 2007, 11:06:21 PM »

I believe the gunsight also had issues regarding malfunctions after negative G manuevers. I believe I read somewhere that the gunsight would actually freeze at the bottom the glass-sight if negative Gs were loaded onto the airframe while the sight was active. This would render the sight useless until it was reset on the ground.

Can anyone else confirm this.

I'll admit my memory isn't the greatest.

DiabloTX · « **Reply #11 on:** January 16, 2007, 11:33:43 PM »

Gyro sight explained

Squire · « **Reply #12 on:** January 17, 2007, 08:42:33 AM »

It was a boon to most fighter pilots, as most pilots were (and are) average deflection shooters.

It got fairly positive feedback from both the USAAF and the RAF/RCAF that used them in the 1944-45 Spits.

Would it be a nice perk add-on? sure. No different than gondolas or DTs or other things that improve a fighter in game.

Strange it was included in an old game like Air Warrior, but not in AH?

I wont hold my breath waiting to see it added though...

Mace2004 · « **Reply #13 on:** January 17, 2007, 10:24:36 AM »

Actually, a lead computing optical sight (LCOS) of this type is very simple to use. It's just taking into account the angular accelerations of the firing aircraft and ballistics to compute where the rounds will be when they're at the range set in the sight. The circular reticle is simply a method for the pilot to accurately determine when a target is at the predetermined range. If you set the wingspan for a 109 the reticle will just touch the wingtips at the desired firing range so the pilot knows when to fire.

The sight doesn't actually know anything at all about what the target is doing or it's actual range, it's just telling the pilot where the bullets will be after one bullet time of flight (time from firing to the pre-determined range). If the 109 is at a greater range then the pilot puts the reticle a bit in front of him, if the 109 is closer then the reticle goes a bit behind him. Also, by knowing the relative sizes of targets you can just have a set reticle size and fire when the relative size of the reticle to the target is correct. There have also been sights that have multiple rings for different sized targets.

The sights that came along later (Korea and Vietnam era) added radar ranging so that the LCOS could now compute where the bullet will be at the actual range of the target. All of these sights have had the same issues with settling time and a need for stable tracking to give accurate readings. When maneuvering the reticle bounces all around the sight and take a few seconds to stabilize once the aircraft reaches a steady state solution. Even so they also still have a fixed reticle centered at the normal gunsight position (usually called the armament datum line) so in essence you have both a fixed and LCOS sight in one so even if the LCOS failed or wasn't stable you'd still have a good fixed sight.

I don't doubt that pilots were very hesitant to adopt and rely on the new and unproven technology, especially with the first version where the pilot had to put his eye to an eyepiece. I can't imagine trying to maneuver and gun someone with my eye glued to an eyepiece but after the switch to a reflector it would have been pretty useful.

dtango · « **Reply #14 on:** January 17, 2007, 10:24:58 AM »

From well-known aviation enthusiast, Joe Baugher:
http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/p51_10.html

Quote

The P-51D/K introduced the K-14 computing gyro gunsight, based on a British (Ferranti) design. When it first appeared, it was considered almost miraculous. The pilot needed only to dial in the wingspan of the enemy aircraft he was chasing and then feed in the target range by turning a handgrip on the throttle lever. Everthing was then done by an analog computer. All that the pilot had to do then was to get the wingtips of his target lined up on the bright ring projected on the gunsight, and press the trigger. The K-14 was fitted almost from the start of P-51D production, the P-51K receiving this sight from mid-1944. This sight played a major role in the P-51D's impressive score of aerial victories.

Here's a little more detailed description of how the K-14 was operated:
http://forums.ubi.com/eve/ubb.x?a=tpc&s=400102&f=23110283&m=8901059682

Quote

The K-14 gunsight was a mechanical computing gunsight. In essence it used gyros and linkages to compute the correct lead on the intended target. The pilot set the wingspan with a control on the sight(ie Bf109, FW190, Bf110, etc...) and then adjusted the range to target by rolling the grip on the throttle (just like the throttle on a motorcycle) Rolling the grip would adjust the six diamonds which formed the sighting circle, either expanding or decreaseing the diameter of the circle.
In use the pilot rolled the throttle grip to make the circle correspond to the target wingspan, any time the target wingspan filled the pipper (circle) from edge to edge the sight would compute the lead and bullet drop to impact target provided you had a steady hand and could hold the dot on target for two seconds. The sight had a fixed image on the reflector plate as well as a floating pipper. In a turning G fight all you had to do was put the floating pipper on target (assuming the target was the one selected on the sight) adjust the sight pipper diameter (with the throttle grip)to fit the target wingspan and shoot. That's why the K14 was dubbed the ace maker. Most pilots kept the target select on the sight set to the 109 as they encounterd it most often.
One fault the sight did have was that during high G or a quickly induced G load the gyros would tumble rendering the computing part of the sight useless.

From the above it should be clear that:[list=1]
inputing the wingspan was nothing more than setting a selector switch to the appropriate aircraft (e.g. 109, 190, 110 etc.). Bear in mind that most WW2 fighter planes had about the same wingspan of ~30ft (~10m). That's why in the quote above you could just leave the span setting at "109" and not change it.
inputing range was done by rolling the k14 throttle grip back or forth to visually set the range.
That seems like a snap to use.

Here's a pic of the gunsight with the operating sequence:

Here are load of combat-reports from pilots regarding the K-14 gunsight:
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mustang/combat-reports.html

Quote

2nd Lt. John M. Creamer, 18 November 1944, 4th FG "I used the K-14 Gyro Gunsight and I'm sure it was a definite advantage in the combat."
Capt. John C. Fitch, 18 November 1944, 4th FG "I used the K-14 Gyro Gun Sight and believe it is superior to the fixed sight."
Capt. William J. O’Donnell, 18 December 1944, 4th FG “I used the K-14 sight and found it to be excellent for deflection shooting and superior to the reflector sight.”
1st Lt. George C. Smith, 27 September 1944, 4th FG "The K-14 sight was very helpful. I don't think I could have hit the 190 without it."
Capt. Richard P. Gatterdam, 2 November 1944, 20th FG "I wish to express my unqualified recommendation of the K-14 sight which I used in getting this destroyed."
Lt. Col. John L Mc Ginn, 11 September 1944, 55th FG
1st Lt. Edward H. Beavers, 23 September 1944, 339th FG “The K-14 sight, which I used for the first time, is an excellent instrument and is far superior to our old sight.”
Capt.Donald W. Johnson, 26 November 1944, 339th FG Three (3) Fw 190's destroyed. “All my shooting was done at 300 yards or less and with the K-14 sight it was easy.”
1st Lt. George T. Rich, 18 November 1944, 339th FG “We quickly outclimbed the e/a and, having a K-14 gunsight, I opened up at around 600 yards.”
Capt. William T. Whisner, 2 November 1944, 352nd FG “I was using a K-14 sight which I believe to be very effective.”
1st Lt. George S. Montgomery, 14 March 1944, 353rd FG “Right away with the aid of my K14 sight, I started hitting him.”
1st Lt. Billy J. Murray, 14 January 1945, 353rd FG
1st Lt. H. W. Brown, 11 September 1944, 355th FG Three (3) Me 109's destroyed. "The K-14 sight is a pilot's dream. The accuracy in deflection shooting is unbelievable."
Capt. Charles W. Lamer, 6 October 1944, 355th FG "I used the K 14 sight in these encounters and it was extremely successful."
1st Lt. Robert O. Peters, 20 July 1944, 355th FG Five (5) destroyed. "I was flying YF-S, a P-51 B5 equipped with a new K-14 sight. The sight was perfect and so easy to use in combat that I was amazed. The accuracy was perfect as it always showed hits at the point of aim. Without it I probably would have barely damaged one or two E/A. The sight is a miracle. I had only had one hour practice on it before."
1st Lt. Thomas L. Wood, 14 January 1945, 355th FG "The K-14 sight made the whole thing so easy it was unbelievable. It is something no good fighter plane should be without."
Lt. Col. Donald A. Baccus, 26 November 1944, 356th FG "I used the K-14 gunsight for the first time in aerial combat on this mission. It worked magnificently. It is so much superior to the old type reflector sight that there is no comparison."
Capt. James W. Browning, 5 December 1944, 357th FG "I took the second and with the K-14 made quite a deflection shot. I observed hits in the engine and cockpit."
1st Lt. William R. Dunlop, 19 September 1944, 357th FG “I used the K-14 sight to do the above fireing and consider it far superior to the old sight.”
Capt. John B. England, 13 September 1944, 357th FG "Without the K-14 sight and my "G" suit I don't believe I would have gotten this Jerry as he was headed for a heavily defended airdrome."
1st Lt. Frank L Gailer, 7 October 1944, 357th FG “I was using a K-14 sight and feel that it is the best thing yet as far as sights go.”
1st Lt. Harold O. Hand, 2 November 1944, 357th FG “I was using a K-14 Gunsight and I think it is much better than the regular ring and bead sight, because it eliminates the guessing of range and lead.”
1st Lt. Harry H. Hermansen, 24 August 1944, 357th FG “I highly reccommed the K-14 sight for deflection firing.”
1st Lt. H. P. Howell, 13 September 1944, 357th FG “I used a gyro sight on this mission on a P-51D which I found very effective and easy to use.”
Capt. Thomas E. Hughes, 2 November 1944, 357th FG “The K-14 Sight is a vast improvement over the old type sight – once you have an E/A properly lined, it is difficult to miss him.”
1st Lt. Howard E. Moebius, 18 September 1944, 357th FG “As I was using the K-14 sight, less than 50 rounds were expended.”
1st Lt. William B. Overstreet, 29 July 1944, 357th FG The gyro gunsight (k-14) worked extremely well and I think was responsible for getting the hits at first”
1st Lt. Donald J. Pasaka, 19 September 1944, 357th FG “In closing may I add that the K-14 sight is really perfect. In fact it is hard to miss after you once get on him.”
1st Lt. Richard C. Roper, 19 September 1944, 357th FG “I had a K-14 sight. It worked perfectly at all angles of deflection and at extreme ranges.”
1st Lt. Charles E. Yeager, 12 October 1944, 357th FG “To my estimation the K-14 Sight is the biggest improvement to combat equipment for Fighters up to this date.”
1st Lt. Emery C. Cook, 23 December 1944, 359th FG "I hit the e/a at a 60 degree angle and attibuted it to the fact that I was using the K-14 gunsight, which I consider a boom to fighter-piloting."
1st Lt. Chester R. Gilmore, 11 September 1944, 359th FG "My ship is equipped with a K-14 sight and it worked perfectly. I turned on the gyro and put the pip on the cockpit of the E/A. Immediately on firing I observed strikes on the cockpit and he mushed yup into the cloulds."
1st Lt. Robert M. York, 27 November 1944, 359th FG Four (4) Me 109's destroyed. "My K-14 sight was working perfectly."
2nd Lt. Claire P. Chennault, 12 September 1944, 361st FG "I was using the K-14 gun sight and found it excellent."
1st Lt. Roy W. Orndorff, 31 December 1944, 364th FG "When he at last spun and broke he was just right for a K-14 sight."

Cheers!

Tango, XO
412th FS Braunco Mustangs