Nashorn

[Jeff Duquette]

Thats the one. The picture through the instrument was the photo was I looking for several months ago. I had recalled seeing it on the forum soemwheres...just couldnt remember where. Thanks.

[Andreas]

Jeff, you've got mail.

[Splash]

Well a very extended (and interesting exegesis) on my original post.

just 2 things on the CM modelling.

I guess when the Nashorn was zipped it wasn't firing so the MG's didn't target it -- that's the reason it didn't croak in zipped.

When it did get a kill it was at very close range -- the sherman was buttoned and shelling my 20mm Flak position and the Nash popped over the crest at maybe 75 metres -- I'm just wondering if there is modelling conpensation at close range.

The computer made my purchase with (as I stated) a med. map - small hills - heavily wooded.

As a learner I'm careful to watch what the computer purchases for different terrain. Now admittedly it makes some inopportune choices (flamethrowers when I coulda used mortars kind of thing) I'm assuming the armour and artillery are somewhat conducive to the terrain at hand.

I guess I'm asking why would the computer pick the Nashorn for this map?

[Jeff Duquette]

Sorry Splash that was prolly a bit on the information over load side. It really just reflects overflow from past (and present ) discussions on this thread.

I have never been particularly enthusiastic about the Nashorns performance in CM. Maybe I just haven’t played enough scenarios with it. It always seems like it gets dead after about one shot being fired from its 88. This in and of itself is not sufficiently irritating to make be wanna take the CM disk outside and start playing Frisbee with the dog…but it is sufficently irritating to make me bitch about it here at CM central.

[ 10-06-2001: Message edited by: Jeff Duquette ]

[Redwolf]

Just to get that straight:

There is the EM series of rangefinders, which is just a barrel of some length and then there are the Sf devices, which are the "periscopic" things the artillery used? The Sf are made for range-finding as well (so far I assumed the point is to observe without exposing yourself). Correct?

The title picture of Camberlain/Doyles Encyclopedia of German Tanks in WW2 shows a Panther commander (and the Panther is obviously is real use) using a Sf.

<img src=http://images.amazon.com/images/P/1854095188.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg>

[Andreas]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by redwolf:

Just to get that straight:

There is the EM series of rangefinders, which is just a barrel of some length and then there are the Sf devices, which are the "periscopic" things the artillery used? The Sf are made for range-finding as well (so far I assumed the point is to observe without exposing yourself). Correct?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Uh - dunno. If you have a look at the second picture on the site I linked to, you can see a picture my grandfather took through his Sf14z. I have no clue whether you could do ranging with that. I'll ask him whether it sung and danced when I see him in a few weeks.

[Jeff Duquette]

Redwolf:

The picture you posted is a great shot of a Panther TC employing a Sf14z. I have collected numerous pictures of Tiger, Panther and MkIV crews employing this instrument from the cupola of their Panzers. I had a thread going here about a year ago where I posted all these sorts of things. It generated little interest…not that I’m bitter

The following is probably more than you will ever want to know on the Sf14z. Sf14z is short for Scherenfernrohr 14z. I think Scherenfernrohr loosely translates as “shear telescope” or “scissors telescope”. Germanboy or Marcus could probably give you a more precise translation. I think they were also nicknamed “donkey eared telescopes”. Various incarnations of the Scherenfernrohr 14z had apparently been being employed as range finders by the German Army since WWI.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Telescope Making Journal. Number 11, 1998, pp. 26-

27;

RANGEFINDERS AND STEREOSCOPIC TELESCOPES

In 1893, Ernst Abbe, working for Carl Zeiss, applied for a patent on their new prism binocular, but it was denied because of the earlier Porro prism glasses from several European makers. A revised patent was submitted for a prism binocular with enlarged objective distance, with the increased separation between the objectives being the protected feature. This was approved, and for 15 years no other optician

could make a Porro prism binocular with objectives more widely spaced than the oculars. The rapid development of prism glasses by other quality makers caused the energetic Zeiss publicity works to seize their unique characteristic and proclaim its advantages in advertising. There is a real, if minor, increase in sense of depth that

follows this increase in inter-objective distance, which is probably perceptible at close focus with standard, hand held binoculars, although there is wide variation in individual ability in stereopsis. Zeiss used the term 'plasticity' to describe the enhanced sense

of depth, and it is a very apt term, since nearby objects appear modeled or sculpted. This characteristic was quantified, with 'specific plasticity' being defined as objective distance divided by ocular distance, and 'total plasticity' as magnification times specific

plasticity (higher magnification adds to the effect.) Increased perception of depth does allow the observer to distinguish between objects that might otherwise be of very low contrast, and this advantage was the subject of many studies, papers, advertisements, and brochures around the turn of the century.

Zeiss also made theater glasses with closely spaced objectives for portability, and they were not shy about publicizing the advantages of this configuration. They claimed that in the theater, diminished depth perception is useful because the spectator will see the live actor as part of the painted backdrop. While these concerns are of minimal import today, the effects are real, and were a very important part of the introduction of binoculars to the public.

The Zeiss prism binoculars of 1894 were the first commercially successful, the first mass produced, and the first high quality binoculars. At the same time, Zeiss offered 2 prism binoculars with objectives 12 inches apart (8 power,) and 16 inches apart (10 power.) A hinge between the oculars allows them to fold in half, leading to

the generic term 'Scherenfernrohr' or scissors telescope. The 8 x 20 model was offered from 1894 to 1906, and the 10 x 25 from 1895 to 1908 and through 1918 for military use. They give spectacular views of terrestrial objects, greatly magnifying the perception of depth in a scene and the appearance of modeled relief in an object. Here there is no exaggerating the effect. They were used as rangefinders in both World Wars, by several service branches of most of the participants in the conflict. Hand held instruments were about 6 x 30, with objectives 18 inches apart, and a folding hinge to reduce the length for transport. Tripod mounted instruments could have 50mm objectives, for use at dawn and dusk. These were used by artillery forces to judge distances. The smaller sizes were needed for quick judgments on shell bursts, when a large instrument or more complicated rangefinder could not work quickly enough. These 'battery commander's rangefinders' can occasionally be found at gun shows or military collectors' meetings, and there are a few optical repair shops remaining that can correct their typical out of collimation condition.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>