Well, I saw this:
And then I did this:
The first version of the 1P86-1 reticle that I adapted was for 3x magnification. It turned out a
lot better than I expected it to, but not as good as wanted it to be. Resolution too low for practicality, but not as vaguely detailed for such a low res targa.
I'm kinda crushing on 9x mag. these days, which is 6.6 pixels per milliradian, so I tried that scale, and worked up an example for the SVD-63.
I tested the drops thoroughly, and added drops for 900m and 1000m, 'cause of course I did.
I like how it turned out.
///////////////////<- Obsessed? Ya think?!->\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
Edit: See, this is what I meant about the 3x version, with bonus 1x deficiencies:
There's room for improvement, unquestionably, but my ideas for that are vague, requiring iterative testing, so experiments will have to wait for a
little more motivation. I ordered some in, like, 2012, and it could show up any moment now. Right?
* sigh *
////////////////<- Overthought, but worth it ->\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
I believe this is an improvement:
Because an etched reticle means lines milled into the glass, not raised up from it. Maybe. I imagine there's an etching method when a pattern is drawn with an acid-protective material and the glass around it is processed, making a bas-relief, but would that work for reticles? I don't know.
I redrew the numbers a bit taller, and overhauled the shading method I use. I'm not sure about what it does for the reticle's accuracy, 'cause it makes the pixels above the centered horizontal stand out, possibly confusingly, but it looks really good, and more like shade and shine on the edges of lines cut into glass, lit from beneath. I like the effect, but I worry it won't survive playtesting.
Also, the PSO-1 at 7x mag. with the new shading:
The 6 on the rangefinder doesn't like it, but otherwise...
/////////<- I hate my brain, and it doesn't like me ->\\\\\\\\\
Edit: First this:
Then this:
With expected minor improvements, of course.
I like the heavy lines in the unilluminated reticle, but the subtensions don't really make sense. No logical explanation for the dots that I can come up with at this pre-crash phase of my sleep cycle. But the 10 mrad hashes align on the edges of 2m target at 100m at 15x mag.
The illuminated reticle is okay. I strenuously doubt any of it is functional beyond the center cross and the horizon's windage mrads. If you watch that short, you'll see that this reticle in that film is
so wonky. I had to fix it. At least the left half of the horizon got its missing half mrad back in my targa.
Edit: Did some testing with the illuminated reticle. I had drawn it from a screenshot of the video, mathing up pixel counts, and adapting things here and there, mostly trying to keep the form correct. I've found that at 30x mag., the mrads are a pixel tight 10 mrads from center, and with the elevation set to 200m, the BDC is almost correct.
I mounted this on the L115A1, with the ammo tweaked the way I have it (velocity 936, drag 0.414), on the range I made with 20x20cm targets every 100m out to 1000m. Tests done with 0.004 error, 30 recoil.
The hash above center hits at 100m. The points of impact and points of aim for 300m and 400m are good. 500m to 900m, the POIs are all the dot above the POAs. Surprisingly, the 1000m POI and POA align.
So, I call limited bullshit on this one.
Now I'm wondering if wind is a factor in this game. I hate coming up with simple questions requiring complicated testing to answer. 'Cause there are windholds on the BDC hashes and I can't just let it go at the moment.