Guest Andrew Hedges Posted December 3, 2000 Share Posted December 3, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jeff Duquette: For anyone still remotely interested in this topic. I suspect Michael Green in “Tiger Tanks” has gotten off track some how. He refers to the TZR1 as having a 55 inch length, and six degree FOV and refers to it as an optical rangefinder. 55inches equals 4.5833 feet…and….4.5833 feet equals 1.4 meters. TSF1 length is 1.4 meters and has a FOV of 6 degrees. Therefore Green's reference to the TZF1 should be TSF1. I know this may all seem like minutia (and it probably is in the grand scheme of things). <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Do you mean the reference to the TZF 1 should be to the TSR 1? That may be right, although if there really were a TZF 1, it might be four feet long; the Panther's TZF 12 looks to be about 4 feet long. But, regardless, you're right about it not being a rangefinder, whatever it is. Also, it's helpful to keep in mind (as Green may not have) that TZR stands for Turmzielfernrohr (i.e., turret targeting telescope); I assume that TSR stands for something like Turmsehrohr). WRT rangefinders and StuGs: it occurs to me that rangefinders were commonly used, even in WWI, by artillery units, and that StuGs, due to the constant military infighting that made the 3d Reich so charming, were actually part of the artillery branch and thus wore different uniforms and had a different chain of command. But I wonder if these relatively sophisticated rangefinders were commonly issued to StuG units, and made their way to certain tank units after they had been used by StuGs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Duquette Posted December 3, 2000 Share Posted December 3, 2000 Andrew Hedges said: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Do you mean the reference to the TZF 1 should be to the TSR 1? That may be right, although if there really were a TZF 1, it might be four feet long; the Panther's TZF 12 looks to be about 4 feet long. But, regardless, you're right about it not being a rangefinder, whatever it is.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yes this is what I am implying. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Also, it's helpful to keep in mind (as Green may not have) that TZR stands for Turmzielfernrohr (i.e., turret targeting telescope); I assume that TSR stands for something like Turmsehrohr).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yes again. It is difficult to find references to the TZF1, but since it has the standard nomenclature for a monocular main-gun sight, I suspect that it was perhaps a pre-war gunsight used in 1930’ish ersatz armoured cars or the like. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>WRT rangefinders and StuGs: it occurs to me that rangefinders were commonly used, even in WWI, by artillery units, and that StuGs, due to the constant military infighting that made the 3d Reich so charming, were actually part of the artillery branch and thus wore different uniforms and had a different chain of command. But I wonder if these relatively sophisticated rangefinders were commonly issued to StuG units, and made their way to certain tank units after they had been used by StuGs.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> That probably has a great deal of merit. I have found at least one photo of a Panther TC using this type of instrument (couple pages back in this thread). Numerous German Tiger Aces after all started out in STUG III’s. It was probably an unauthorized practice on the part of these old stug tankers to obtain the SF09 or SF14 scissors (or “donkey ear”) range finders. An SF range finder would no doubt have been handy in preparing relatively detailed range cards and for engaging targets from ambush positions at long range, or when firing HE at extended ranges. However, the ergonomics of employing such an instrument, or an EM type range finder during a tank battle seem far-fetched at best. I would tend to believe that German TC’s relied on their rather infamous binoculars for initial range estimation during say movement to contact type engagments or when attacking. Upon further digging it is apparent that most WWII German Military issued Bino’s were equipped with stadia lines…so range estimation was possible via a quick mil relationship. The gunner would also be able to adjust the TC initial range estimation according to his own estimation via stadia triangle thingies in his TZF gunsight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Germanboy Posted January 2, 2001 Share Posted January 2, 2001 I saw this and I thought of you This is a picture of FFE taken through the scissors rangefinder used by German counter-battery observers. I found it when visiting my grandfather before Christmas. This picture shows my grandfather's radio guy having a peek. The OP was built into the roof of a house. This one shows that the rangefinders and OP duty was carried out while on the move as well (retreat/advance), at least that is my interpretation, because otherwise there would be no reason to expose the instrument. Just to give the great unwashed (like me, but without a grandfather who was in a Bemeßbatallion) an impression of what you get to see through rangefinders, and what the Scherenfernrohr looked like close up. ------------------ Andreas Der Kessel Home of „Die Sturmgruppe“; Scenario Design Group for Combat Mission. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Duquette Posted January 2, 2001 Share Posted January 2, 2001 Why tank you Germanboy. You’re a scholar and a gentlemen Could you ask your Grandpa if he has any direct knowledge of the use of Sf14z or other coincidence type range finders by Panzer Crews. Not Stug crews, but honest to god MkIV, MkV, and Mk VI crews. Thanks. I had thought the scissors scopes were kind of coincidence type range finder in which the images from the two different sides of the scissors were brought together via a adjusting a knob along the base of the instrument. Simply read the range off the knob once you had completed the image adjustment. The first photo almost looks as if range was being determined via stadia lines and a mil relationship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Germanboy Posted January 2, 2001 Share Posted January 2, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jeff Duquette: Why tank you Germanboy. You’re a scholar and a gentlemen Could you ask your Grandpa if he has any direct knowledge of the use of Sf14z or other coincidence type range finders by Panzer Crews. Not Stug crews, but honest to god MkIV, MkV, and Mk VI crews. Thanks.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> As for the first bit, I doubt both of the assertions, and I am sure my friends would too, I am just lucky that my grandfather has finally started talking about it, after 55 years of silence. I will gladly ask him next time I see him, but don't have a lot of hope. Heeresgruppe Nord did not have many tanks AFAIK (although they received the first Tigers in 1942 around Mga) and he was mostly in the line around Leningrad. Unfortunately the two Tiger pictures he has do not seem to show the Sfz. Check on page two of my site: http://www.geocities.com/a_biermann/opi/granddad.htm ------------------ Andreas Der Kessel Home of „Die Sturmgruppe“; Scenario Design Group for Combat Mission. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Duquette Posted January 2, 2001 Share Posted January 2, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I am just lucky that my grandfather has finally started talking about it, after 55 years of silence.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> It is unfortunate that we all grow old eventually. The implication is of course a great deal of first hand knowledge of the war will be lost within our lifetime. We will be left sorting through history books in order to try and understand the war. These old vets should be interviewed regarding their experiences during the war, and their insights archived for future historians. Posterity. Unfortunately many Vets are pretty reluctant to discuss their wartime experiences. My father and his brothers served in WWII and Korea (Dad spent 2 years in a Chinese POW camp). Only in past few years have my brothers and I been able to pry some of his tales of war out of him. He, like his brothers and many of his crones, don't ware their combat experiences on their coat sleeve. Presumably your Grandpa was an artillery FO. It would be interesting to sit down and interview him about the nitty-gritty of German Army forward observation tasks during the war. The mundane which he perhaps took for granted, but would give the unenlightened like ourselves a better "feel" for how things were done back then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StellarRat Posted January 2, 2001 Share Posted January 2, 2001 Why is everyone so worried about this in the first place? I have never fired at anything over 500m in CM! The battlefields just aren't big enough to get that kind of a shot. Maybe in CM2 the opportunity for long shots will increase, but I just don't think it's an issue here. When I was in ROTC (in 1978) the commonly held belief was that most engagements would be under 1000m in Europe with average being 500m. There's just too much cover and terrain in most places to make this an issue. The Russian tank rangefinders in the 70's were just target sizers. You looked through the sight and if the target was a certain size you could guess the distance well enough to fire. Tank guns are so high velocity that the shells travel flat for a long way (easily out to a thousand meters.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Duquette Posted January 3, 2001 Share Posted January 3, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Why is everyone so worried about this in the first place?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I don't think its so much a worry as it is an interesting topic to bat about. At least for me. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I have never fired at anything over 500m in CM! The battlefields just aren't big enough to get that kind of a shot. Maybe in CM2 the opportunity for long shots will increase, but I just don't think it's an issue here. When I was in ROTC (in 1978) the commonly held belief was that most engagements would be under 1000m in Europe with average being 500m. There's just too much cover and terrain in most places to make this an issue<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yup. See my posts about 6 pages back on this thread. Check out the Zaloga table I posted for T34 casulties relative to range. I've said this before so what the heck I will say it again. Range training for Tiger and Panther crews vs staionary targets was between 1200 to 2000 meters. US ARMY gunnery training Table VIII is for ranges of about 1200 to 2200 meters. US ARMY WWII tank crews trained on stationary and moving targets at ranges of between 300 to 3000 meters. US ARMY doctrine for tank combat during a potential ground war in Europe between the Korean War and the time the Berlin wall came tumbling was an emphasis on long range accuracy. Attrite those big Soviet tank formations at range. So the Table VIII max range is certainly based on some sort of anticipated combat ranges. Even North African tank combat was occurring at typical ranges of less than 2000 meters. However this was somewhat an effect of maximum weapon range and optical limitations rather than terrain obscuration (the odd Wadi aside). I recall reading tales of 4000 meter engagements by M1A1's in Desert Storm. I suspect at that range Iraqis T-62's and T-72's crews never had a clue as to what hit them. It is also interesting to note the tales of German Panther and Tiger crews knocking off Shermans at 2500 to 3000 meters. The question in my mind is some what tied into typical terrain on the Soviet Steppes (the odd Balka aside). I haven't been there myself but I understand it's relatively flat. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>The Russian tank rangefinders in the 70's were just target sizers. You looked through the sight and if the target was a certain size you could guess the distance well enough to fire. Tank guns are so high velocity that the shells travel flat for a long way (easily out to a thousand meters.)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Stadia lines. Similar to GAS sights for the M1A1 or the primary sight in the old M48A5. A 6400 mil scale for 360 degrees, one mil equals about one meter length\height at a distance of 1000 meters. Compare target height to stadia scales in the gun sight…read the range from the scale that best fits your target height. It's based on the assumption that most MBT's have an average height. Probably in Soviet equipment circa 1970 stadia lines would have assumed the height of an M60A1 as the benchmark for range estimation. I posted something like this for the 90mm recoilless rifle several pages back on this thread. When using this technique you run into problems when the vehicle is hull down or moving at speed either obliquely or head onto your position. High speed oblique movement is exceptionally difficult for lead and range estimation. [This message has been edited by Jeff Duquette (edited 01-02-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conall Posted January 6, 2001 Share Posted January 6, 2001 This is a slightly gratuitous bump, mainly because I though this thread was relevant to Rexford's recent musings. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software: But how much more difficult when all things are considdered? I mean, a sniper's scope on a Springfield or Kar98k has a much more limited field of vision than tank scopes, right? Yet they can hit smaller targets at great distances (1000m with a rifle is probably like 2000-3000m with a tank gun) with one shot in the hands of a very skilled gunner. Steve [This message has been edited by Big Time Software (edited 11-22-2000).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Anyway Steve back to your point - I meant to respond to this but forgot. You're endulging in a wicked bit of sophistry here I'm sure you know perfectly well that most snipers/competative marksmen use binos first to identify the location of the target. In addition most snipers work in teams of two, so that one scans with low power, wide FOV binos & having spotted a target his partner shoots, using a rifle equipped with a high power narrow FOV scope - actually not a bad analogy for the relationship between a tank commander & the gunner. Hope you had a good Christmas & all my best wishes to the CM team for the New Year. Best regards, Conall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted January 7, 2001 Share Posted January 7, 2001 Good Post Connall I'm ALWAYS impressed with anyone that can use the word "sophistry" correctly in a sentence. This is still sort of releveant to what Rexford is posting about. -tom w Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted June 19, 2001 Share Posted June 19, 2001 for those who missed the "Mother of ALL Optics Threads" the first time around. -tom w Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PzKpfw 1 Posted June 19, 2001 Share Posted June 19, 2001 Heh, i bet some were wishing this thread had stayed buried ........ Regards, John Waters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSpkr Posted June 19, 2001 Share Posted June 19, 2001 Bumped just because I like seeing a 567 post thread on page one! PENG! now has something for which to work! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Duquette Posted June 19, 2001 Share Posted June 19, 2001 MaMa-Mia!!! did we really blab on for 24 pages! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dittohead Posted June 19, 2001 Share Posted June 19, 2001 Next thing you know somebody will think that the 88L71 lacks punch :eek: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PzKpfw 1 Posted June 19, 2001 Share Posted June 19, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Dittohead: Next thing you know somebody will think that the 88L71 lacks punch :eek:<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> ROFLMAOPMP Regards, John Waters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Duquette Posted June 19, 2001 Share Posted June 19, 2001 600 isnt to far away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PJungnitsch Posted June 19, 2001 Share Posted June 19, 2001 What an interesting thread that was. I wonder how much information on the subject Steve has found between then and now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offtaskagain Posted June 29, 2001 Share Posted June 29, 2001 Bump to bring this monster back to the top. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarmo Posted June 29, 2001 Share Posted June 29, 2001 How far did the original Peng thread go before imploding? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andreas Posted June 29, 2001 Share Posted June 29, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jarmo: How far did the original Peng thread go before imploding? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Over 3,000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted June 29, 2001 Share Posted June 29, 2001 too the TOP! Just for Fun anyone playing this game, or more recently new to the forum or new to the game really SHOULD read this thread as it is FULL of very interesting and diverse opinions and it even contains some FACTS and historically accurate info, (in some places!!) -tom w Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arzenal Posted June 29, 2001 Share Posted June 29, 2001 Holy sh!t. You grognards sure can get into the nitty gritty details huh? Damn, I have a hell of a time just hitting anything, let alone worrying about this stuff. hehehe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offtaskagain Posted June 29, 2001 Share Posted June 29, 2001 Got to keep it off page 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PJungnitsch Posted July 3, 2001 Share Posted July 3, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jeff Duquette: Could you ask your Grandpa if he has any direct knowledge of the use of Sf14z or other coincidence type range finders by Panzer Crews. Not Stug crews, but honest to god MkIV, MkV, and Mk VI crews. Thanks.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> How about the Jagdpanther? Just ran across this at an AFV interiors article on the Jagdpanther, and um, it seemed like the right thread... "The commander has immediate access to two openings over his head, one double-door hatch for entering and exiting the vehicle, and a smaller door for mounting his periscope, which was directly in front of his hatch and could be rotated 360 degrees. The periscope mount contained openings and mounts for both a normal tank periscope and the commander's stereoscopic range finder. The hatch shape you see at the top of this photo is this periscope mount which is located at the very front of the roof. The stereoscopic range finder base clamps to the black bar you see hanging down and can be elevated on the bar to extend up through a small opening in the roof mount. You will often see a similar long vertical bar in other vehicles using the stereoscopic range finder, such as the Elefant and Jagdtiger. The commander's viewing periscope is the typical removable German type that clamps up into the mount behind the range finder with two wing nuts, one on either side of the frame mount. The combination of these two instruments allowed the commander to search and locate targets with his periscope and then range them for the gunner in advance." This photo shows the arrangement, with the kidney shaped hatch for the rangefinder in front of the armoured cover of the periscope: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts