Warrior IFV optics question

[Stuart Galbraith]

Just have a question here on the Thales Optronics/Pilkington Raven sight. This is obviously pre BGTI upgrade. ive 3 different books here giving 3 different answers.

According to Janes Armour and Artillery 2003-2004,

'Both the Commander and gunner have a Thales Optronics Raven day/night sight. in the day mode this has magnificatitons of x1 and x8, whilst in the image inteisfication night mode it has magnifications of x2 and x6. The Commanders raven sight has additional traverse'.

This also appears to be partially confirmed  in Janes AFV retrofit systems 1992.

'Both crewmen have identical Raven sights giving magnifications of x1 for observation, and x10 for target engagement. These sights incorporate image intensifed night vision giving dual magnifications of x2 and x6'.

And then, I picked up the 1994 edition of Osprey's book on the warrior which reads,

'Both the commander and gunner have a Pilkington PE Raven Roof mounted sight which is a combined day/night sighting system that comprises three viewing channels. First a fixed focus magnified x8 day channel, second a dual key field of view (x2 and x6) image intensification night channel and third, a unity power day periscope'.

So.. one says it has x1 and x10 for engagement, the other says it has x1 and X8 for engagement, and the third says it has x8 all the time and nothing else! Could anyone settle this please? is it possible the commander and gunners sights were actually slightly different, and one has a daylight magnification that the other sight doesnt have, or   vice versa? Or conceivably, are they all wrong?

 

Whilst im at it, there is the bizarre statement in the Osprey book. 'turret traverse is powered through a full 360 degrees by the commander or gunner; handwheels are provided for emergency traverse. Weapon elevation is manual by either the commander or gunner; the latter has only manual turret traverse'

So, is there manual elevation on both gunner or Commanders position, or does the gunner have just manual traverse only?

 

I find it bizarre that such a well known vehicle is so extremely poorly documented.

 

 

[methos]

42 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

So.. one says it has x1 and x10 for engagement, the other says it has x1 and X8 for engagement, and the third says it has x8 all the time and nothing else! Could anyone settle this please? is it possible the commander and gunners sights were actually slightly different, and one has a daylight magnification that the other sight doesnt have, or   vice versa? Or conceivably, are they all wrong?

The current manufacturer mentions only x8 on his website: https://www.excelitas.com/product/raven-sight

[Stuart Galbraith]

Sure, but as it also has/had x2 and x6 for the Image intensifier channel, that seems somewhat less than complete source also.

Its so very strange, there are seemingly no 2 consistent accounts I can find on this thing. 

[Ssnake]

I see no discrepance between one source describing the optical zooms as "1x" while the other calls it a "unity sight". Two ways to describe the same thing. The "10x vs 8x" is a contradiction, allright; if I had to place a bet, for a 30mm cannon system my money would be on the 8x - suffcient for all engagement ranges, and offers a slightly greater field of view.

[Stuart Galbraith]

But if that is indeed what they are refering to, that would mean there would have to be a selectable mode between X1 and X8?

For my part, I had always assumed  a unity sight was usually independent OF the main sight in AFV's, but thats probably incomplete reading on my part.

[Ssnake]

Sometimes it's a lever to simply remove the magnifying lenses from the optical path.

This is how it's done in the Pizarro and Ulan IFVs. It doesn't have to be a separate sight.

[DogDodger]

18 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

But if that is indeed what they are refering to, that would mean there would have to be a selectable mode between X1 and X8?

For my part, I had always assumed  a unity sight was usually independent OF the main sight in AFV's, but thats probably incomplete reading on my part.

Not necessarily, as SSnake says. For another option, it's decently common (at least for US optics, others can chime in for other countries) to have a unity window as part of a magnified sighting or viewing periscope. "Unity" as I understand it simply refers to the magnification power, being another name for "one." See, e.g., number 5 on the periscope M34 pictured here:

Older WW2-era US periscopes that contained magnified telescopes also had rudimentary crosshairs etched on the unmagnified periscope window for use in emergencies, like this periscope M4 or M6 elbow.

[Wobbly Head]

Ok from memory from fixing them. Both commanders and gunners were the same sight no Traversing on any sight. Three channels using the same elevation mirror. Day x8, night x8 channels on a biocular eyepiece (two eyepieces going into one magnifier) easier on the eyes but gave no depth perception. Also cheaper to make. The X1 unity sight was just a periscope built into the sight body you lifted a flap to see through it located above the eyepieces. 

The day night channels were changed using a leaver on the side which flipped a prism behind the eyepieces. The graticule was projected into both sights and had a dimmer on the front. They use the same bulb.

 The night vision II tube was also the same as the standard II rifle sight at the time.

 

[Stuart Galbraith]

18 minutes ago, Wobbly Head said:

Ok from memory from fixing them. Both commanders and gunners were the same sight no Traversing on any sight. Three channels using the same elevation mirror. Day x8, night x8 channels on a biocular eyepiece (two eyepieces going into one magnifier) easier on the eyes but gave no depth perception. Also cheaper to make. The X1 unity sight was just a periscope built into the sight body you lifted a flap to see through it located above the eyepieces. 

The day night channels were changed using a leaver on the side which flipped a prism behind the eyepieces. The graticule was projected into both sights and had a dimmer on the front. They use the same bulb.

 The night vision II tube was also the same as the standard II rifle sight at the time.

 

Yikes! That presumably cant have been a lot of bottle then!

Can you remember anything about the power traverse? Was there any dead zone width? Was the controller very senstitive, no notching?

Thanks for that answer (and indeed everyone that replied so far).

[Wobbly Head]

 The II tube was pretty good Gen 3 used on the common weapons sight. The A2 version of the CWS used AA (HP7) batteries had a game boy and never once paid for batteries in my army carear. You might be thinking of the old Starlight scopes which were the same tubes as the II sights on the CVRT series. 

 I didn't use the power traverse Infact the first thing you did when you got in the turret was make sure it was off and the safety switches were engaged. So you didn't get caught by the turret monster.

[Stuart Galbraith]

So essentially it was all manual lay via the handwheels, at least as you used it?

[Wobbly Head]

1 hour ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

So essentially it was all manual lay via the handwheels, at least as you used it?

Manual laying for working on the sights. The sights were almost 100lb each the last thing we wanted was the chance somebody would move the turret when we were carrying one of them.

 When boresighting a new sight the power traverse was to course to get the presision needed to set the test and adjustment knobs.

[Ssnake]

When I was briefed on the Warrior, they said the training was to relay the gun after every. single. shot. in order to maintain accuracy. And all with hand cranks.

[Stuart Galbraith]

13 minutes ago, Wobbly Head said:

Manual laying for working on the sights. The sights were almost 100lb each the last thing we wanted was the chance somebody would move the turret when we were carrying one of them.

 When boresighting a new sight the power traverse was to course to get the presision needed to set the test and adjustment knobs.

Ah, you were presumably REME?

 

[Wobbly Head]

2 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Ah, you were presumably REME?

 

Yes instrument tech. The trade no longer exists if you could look through it we had to fix it.

[Stuart Galbraith]

20 minutes ago, Ssnake said:

When I was briefed on the Warrior, they said the training was to relay the gun after every. single. shot. in order to maintain accuracy. And all with hand cranks.

Im not very surprised. There is a very good book called 'Dusty Warrior's' about the PWRR on deployment to Al Amarah in 2004/05. In the workup they did an armed assault on a village, firing the MG on the move, and found looking afterwards, almost all the rounds had missed. No stab, very sad. I wouldnt even want to even think about firing the Rarden on the move.

Perhaps another example of the MOD procuring too narrowly to what the British Army wanted, rather than procuring something that could sell on the international market. A shame, because turret aside, it was actually remarkably reliable, and tough. 

Britains toughest and most heavily armed APC one might argue....

[Stuart Galbraith]

6 minutes ago, Wobbly Head said:

Yes instrument tech. The trade no longer exists if you could look through it we had to fix it.

You work on tank optics, or just the Infantry weapons?

[Wobbly Head]

4 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

You work on tank optics, or just the Infantry weapons?

Both

[GJK]

@Wobbly Head do you know what improvements came when BGTI was fitted?

Best,

Greg.

[Wobbly Head]

37 minutes ago, GJK said:

@Wobbly Head do you know what improvements came when BGTI was fitted?

Best,

Greg.

I was involved in the install of BOWMAN radio systems in a civilian capacity which was integrated into the BGTI. The difference is literally night and day. Raven sight was a simple Image Intensifier with no laser range finder and fixed magnification. 

BGTI was a thermal imager with laser range finder and a variable magnification camera and tied into a GPS mapping system. The Rarden cannon is a very accurate powerful if rather slow firing cannon it really needed a good sighting system. 

The only other time Rarden cannon got a good sights were the Spire sighting system a copy of the Bradley sighting system fitted to the CVRT Scimitars that were sent to Bosnia. Another system I was involved in fitting and it was scoring turret ring hits at 2000m.

[Stuart Galbraith]

Did spire have the laser sight with it? Im utterly unfamilar with it.

[Wobbly Head]

The Spire sight were the sights for the Bradley IFV fitted to the Scimitar. So they had laser range finder, Thermals and a day scope.

They purchased a dozen systems and fitted them on the rotating CVRTs Scimitars rotating in and out of the SFOR Bosnia tours.

  They never fitted them to any other Scimitars due to the MODs likeness to a aquatic avians sphincter muscle.

 

 

[Stuart Galbraith]

Yes, this does sound depressingly like MOD doesnt it?

[GJK]

21 hours ago, Wobbly Head said:

I was involved in the install of BOWMAN radio systems in a civilian capacity which was integrated into the BGTI. The difference is literally night and day. Raven sight was a simple Image Intensifier with no laser range finder and fixed magnification. 

BGTI was a thermal imager with laser range finder and a variable magnification camera and tied into a GPS mapping system. The Rarden cannon is a very accurate powerful if rather slow firing cannon it really needed a good sighting system. 

The only other time Rarden cannon got a good sights were the Spire sighting system a copy of the Bradley sighting system fitted to the CVRT Scimitars that were sent to Bosnia. Another system I was involved in fitting and it was scoring turret ring hits at 2000m.

Thanks Wobbly Head, having spent a bit of time with Warrior I now regret not having paid much attention to the turret systems!

Best,

Greg.