Pondering the strange layout of Burstyn's Motorgeschütz, in which the driver seems to be facing to the rear and possibly required to steer with the help of a periscope or something while travelling backwards, I had a thought: have we got it the wrong way round?
Is the driver actually facing forwards? Was Burstyn's intention that the vehicle should be driven with what is generally considered to be the stern at the front and then, just as with horse drawn artillery, turned 180 degrees when the gun was required? I know it sounds daft, but hardly more daft than reversing everywhere and relying on instructions or a system of mirrors to correct your steering.
__________________
"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.
Well, since you draw it to my attention, yes. Although I'd never heard of the Archer. But I was thinking more of the FT project with the 75mm.http://modelstory.pl/?attachment_id=1144
__________________
"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.
The Patent makes no written mention of the direction of travel or the crew layout.
but it does show it travelling 'forwards' (direction of the gun) over the obstacles
This is the German text: http://i.imgur.com/P6w0zLW.png
for Patent: AT53248 (B) applied for 1st March 1911, Granted 1st January 1912 and Published 25th April 1912, "Device for motor vehicles to cross obstacles."
But in the top down view we get to see half of a layout. Copy and invert that to make a complete top down view we have:
You can see the chap at the back has control over the rear two 'arms' and that each of the two at the front has controls over an 'arm' each as well as responsibility for the main gun. There does not appear to be space for anyone else.
