The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - November 20, 2008

Dunnigan's and Bay's Latest

Advertisement



New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Squad Battles: Winter War
2.Silent War
3.Manoeuvre
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 

Online Giving

Utah SEO Firm

Xango

Smiley Gifts for Babies

Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
United Kingdom Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Question on SUSAT
YelliChink    8/7/2007 5:00:21 PM
Recently I came through a game with L85. The reticle sucks, so I tried to find the real SUSAT reticles, and the game was right on that one. Upon all the reticle designs, why did the Royal Ordnance chose the worst possible one? IMHO, it could be better without the reticle. Is it kind of a trick so that enemy cannot use SUSAT because untrained personnel cannot use the reticle? Anyway, I don't know how to use it. The mil-dot is so much better, and PSO-1 on Dragunov is not bad either. But the one on SUSAT? That's just horrible.
 
Quote    Reply
 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted

YelliChink       8/7/2007 5:01:36 PM
 
From UK MOD website.
 
So, could somebody tell me the wisdom of putting a reticle like that?
 
Quote    Reply

flamingknives       8/10/2007 2:12:46 PM
What's wrong with it?
Tip of the spike is the point of impact and the spike is lit up in low light conditions.
 
Quote    Reply

Lynstyne    Virtues   8/10/2007 3:02:36 PM
 
The SA80 in combination with the SUSAT sight is the most accurate battlefield rifle the British army has ever had - the introduction of which caused a change to the marksmanship test - it has been claimed to be most accurate battlefield rifle the in the world (which may or may not be true). So i suspect that whilst its not to your taste it does the job.
 
Unless im mistaken the SUSAT has better low light abilities than many other sights such as the red dot type.
 
The SA80s faults im sure have been done to death elswhere - and probably by me
 
Quote    Reply

flamingknives       8/10/2007 5:04:11 PM
I suppose that it might depend on what you are trying to do with it. If you are trying to aim off for windage and elevation, then mil-dot scopes would be better. The SUSAT, however, can be set for range and windage (though your average squaddie isn't going to be too worried with points of windage) which probably isn't modelled in whichever game is the reference.

A point I missed earlier. I don't think that RO picked the sight. The government was using the SUIT, which was very similar (and even more horrifying to those brought up on crosshairs, as the spike came down from the top.)

The SUSAT is a wonderfully simple recticle, with no clutter that distracts from aiming or observation.
 
Quote    Reply

neutralizer       8/10/2007 11:58:51 PM
From a Human Factors Engineering angle I'd go as far as suggesting that SUSAT is a product of genius.  What the aiming mark does is act as an 'arrow' pointing at the target.  Great applied psychology.  And most UK recruits have not been 'corrupted' by experiencing other types of sight and have nothing to unlearn.
 
Quote    Reply

Rasputin    Europeans like the single column post sights?   8/11/2007 7:24:41 AM
Someone had written that Europeans prefer a single column post for their sights, which the Russians also had similar preferences to in the SVD sight, just a single cheveron column. So i guess the British despite all their efforts to be different are still very European at heart, as they literally stick to the definition of the letter and stick a post for their optical sights.

Conversely the same European author who happened to be erm :) British also wrote of the horrors (in his opinion) of the plain American cross sight (I guess that would mean the cross hairs, as for the springfield sniper scope had the plainest of crosses for the sight and perhaps in this argument the post is easier to acquire sighting than the cross).

But today it does seem the Susat sight seems to put some eye strain where a red dot would cut straight to the chase. Also the bottom half of the scope seems rather well blocked by the post though I can see that the middle portion is transparent. Perhaps a different colour for the post might help?

Though any scope is better than no scope espeacially when looking down those open iron sights of assaut trifles. Though I wonder if any red dot sight would make much of a difference on those eastern block AK 47s, since it is so inaccurate, would you get the same effect if you fired with both eyes open on the iron sights?

 
Quote    Reply

flamingknives       8/11/2007 7:48:43 AM
The post, AIUI, contains a tritium light source or prism reflecting the same, so it shows up in low light without the need for batteries. Not sure where eye strain would occur though. Focussing and the like is sorted by the optics.

European preference for a post? Any examples? the only other standard European infantry rifle optic is the G36 sight, which is a horizontal line with a circle in the middle. AIUI, the ACOG has a simplified recticle as well.

Where sniping rifles are employed, the telescopic sights used have crosshairs, often with mildots. Sniping and marksmanship is a different discipline to squad infantry musketry. Infantry, AFAICT, want an easy-to-acquire sight with minimal visual clutter.
 
Quote    Reply

Rasputin       8/11/2007 9:20:10 AM

The post, AIUI, contains a tritium light source or prism reflecting the same, so it shows up in low light without the need for batteries. Not sure where eye strain would occur though. Focussing and the like is sorted by the optics.

The tip of the sight that looks rather small. Though it should be no strain when compared to iron sights, I just find those new laser dots or projected HUD dot sights, easier to acquire put on target than a post. Is the sight able to be focused or like those which are fixed 1.5 X or 2 X magnification?

European preference for a post? Any examples? the only other standard European infantry rifle optic is the G36 sight, which is a horizontal line with a circle in the middle. AIUI, the ACOG has a simplified recticle as well.

Well I will try and research the text, though I suspect it is one of Ian Hoggs books, but it seems to quote examples of German and Russian sights. I don't know of other european manufacturers of optical sights for battle rifles, no other were mentioned.

Could you kindly also inform me as to what type of crosshairs or target sighting was used on the Lee Enfield Sniper rifle scope?? Cross hairs with mil dot or Post?



 
Quote    Reply

Rasputin       8/11/2007 9:27:27 AM
Correct me if I am wrong, but is it true that the British army originally made  some kind of Susat or Suit sight to be mounted on the GPMG, to aid long range MG auto shooting. So that there is an optical sight that can take full auto fire.

And that sight was mounted on the British version of the FN FAL???? Thus a universal sight that can be both used by the riflemen as well as the GPMG gunner?????

I have also heard that no matter how good or bad the past (FALs) or presently issued rifles are, the sights issued are very good, and often those are the only saving grace for the British army rifles.

So hard to acquire, like them or not, I have only heard praise for the British optical sights.

 
Quote    Reply

flamingknives       8/11/2007 9:57:06 AM
Now it's mentioned, the scope-sights for older rifles might well have been post-type.

The No.32 sight used on the No.4 (T) sniping rifle has a post with a horizontal line  ht*p://enfieldrifles.profusehost.net/ri10a.htm
Interestingly, it was apparently originally developed for the Bren gun.

The GPMG uses a C2 sight in the sustained fire role, which is also used on the L16 mortar.

The 0.5" heavy machine gun, in British service, is fitted with a softmount to which a SUSAT is fitted.
 
Quote    Reply

Iano_returns       11/22/2007 6:11:45 PM
The C2 is not a conventional sight as you might think it is, its more of an 'angle measurer'.
 
 
Quote    Reply

bob the brit       11/22/2007 10:49:00 PM
not sure if it's been mentioned here already [sorry i'm lazy] but a bonus with the 'arrow' reticle is that it allows the shooter to focus on the target more whilst not losing focus on the point of the reticle. with crosshairs or norm iron sights, the average shooter can find it difficult to both focus on the exact point they wish to hit, and the crosshair/front pin at the same time. if that makes any sense to anyone...
 
Quote    Reply

Herald1234       11/24/2007 11:14:38 AM

not sure if it's been mentioned here already [sorry i'm lazy] but a bonus with the 'arrow' reticle is that it allows the shooter to focus on the target more whilst not losing focus on the point of the reticle. with crosshairs or norm iron sights, the average shooter can find it difficult to both focus on the exact point they wish to hit, and the crosshair/front pin at the same time. if that makes any sense to anyone...


Phototropic drift........................Yes BtB, it makes perfect sense to me. So a HFE did look at that sight and make a design input, maybe based on that factor? Learn something new every day.

Thanks.

Herald
 
Quote    Reply

bob the brit       11/24/2007 6:11:23 PM




not sure if it's been mentioned here already [sorry i'm lazy] but a bonus with the 'arrow' reticle is that it allows the shooter to focus on the target more whilst not losing focus on the point of the reticle. with crosshairs or norm iron sights, the average shooter can find it difficult to both focus on the exact point they wish to hit, and the crosshair/front pin at the same time. if that makes any sense to anyone...




Phototropic drift........................Yes BtB, it makes perfect sense to me. So a HFE did look at that sight and make a design input, maybe based on that factor? Learn something new every day.

Thanks.

Herald


...i'd imagine there was a method to their madness. It's a simple concept, look down a standard 'notch and pin' iron sight [air-rifle will do] at a five of whatever playing card for example at about 20 feet. Aim for the centre symbol [for example the centre diamond on the card]. now try focusing on that sysmbol whilst also focusing on keeping the pin in the notch on the sight. Tricky... whereas with this method of reticle, it is simple for the shooter to focus on their desired point of impact and where the tip of the pin is located at the same time.
 
Quote    Reply

Herald1234    If I might.   11/24/2007 6:33:29 PM








not sure if it's been mentioned here already [sorry i'm lazy] but a bonus with the 'arrow' reticle is that it allows the shooter to focus on the target more whilst not losing focus on the point of the reticle. with crosshairs or norm iron sights, the average shooter can find it difficult to both focus on the exact point they wish to hit, and the crosshair/front pin at the same time. if that makes any sense to anyone...






Phototropic drift........................Yes BtB, it makes perfect sense to me. So a HFE did look at that sight and make a design input, maybe based on that factor? Learn something new every day.

Thanks.

Herald



...i'd imagine there was a method to their madness. It's a simple concept, look down a standard 'notch and pin' iron sight [air-rifle will do] at a five of whatever playing card for example at about 20 feet. Aim for the centre symbol [for example the centre diamond on the card]. now try focusing on that sysmbol whilst also focusing on keeping the pin in the notch on the sight. Tricky... whereas with this method of reticle, it is simple for the shooter to focus on their desired point of impact and where the tip of the pin is located at the same time.


Rephrasing it slightly, what happens is that your eye is coaxed to travel the "arrow" as if it was a rail and moves from base to point at the object; without you having to use your entire body to line up three floating points on a rifle to make a line. Its  a brilliant workthrough of a point-shoot aid. You would have to unlearn the old fore and rear sight sighting skills you acquired but as a combat sight I can see why HFE it works.

Herald 
 
Quote    Reply

StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2008StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy