|
John, the problem is that recoil is not "... the form of force applied to the breechface which is part of the slide". Recoil is a force along the barrel because that is the direction the bullet is moving. The gun does not recoil because there is a "push" on the breechface, it recoils because the bullet is moving and there is an equal and opposite force in the other direction. No matter how much pressure is exerted on the breech face, if the bullet doesn't move, there is no recoil and no movement of the gun or the slide.
If the barrel is blocked so the bullet cannot move, the gun will not recoil and the slide won't move.
As to how much the gun moves in recoil while the bullet is still in the barrel, that depends on bullet velocity, bullet mass, gun mass, powder mass, and maybe other factors. If the gun will move very little, the maker may not feel a need to adjust the sights to compensate. The M1911 may not be a good example because of the high recoil due to bullet mass, but it does show a case of the barrel pointing down. (The barrel is not pointed down to compensate for recoil - the barrel is that way because the design dictates it. The sights compensate for that part of the recoil that takes place before the bullet leaves the barrel.)
But muzzle flip is not caused by the barrel or slide being stopped by the frame, and if it were it would have no effect on the bullet which is long gone by the time the slide stops.
I confess your drawings are puzzling, so there is some other factor involved. If we agree that the revolver is sighted to compensate for recoil while the bullet is in the barrel and we agree that that recoil causes the muzzle to rise, then those diagrams would show that the muzzle moves down in recoil, which I seriously doubt.
|