The Tiger fible, and German sights explained

Skybird · 11-23-08, 06:08 AM

Prowling the web for latest additions to the tanksim forum, I came over this prey and took it:

the tiger fible:
http://tiger1.info/fibel/

German gunnery sights, aiming and range estimation explained:
http://pedg.yuku.com/topic/1728/t/Ra...ht-optics.html

Lieste · 11-23-08, 12:14 PM

The description of the light round 'requiring' a 5 degree difference in aiming sounds completely bogus to me though...

It would seem more likely as a component of the boresighting procedure than for firing the gun. Of course it may be that this represents say 1500m or 2000m for the HVAP, rather than the nominal 1300m for the AP rounds.

The idea that HVAP could be accurately fired with +5 degrees elevation is just nonsense though...

I can't add anything from the german, as this is a language I have little knowledge of.

Lieste · 11-23-08, 05:25 PM

Purely speculation, but based on the idea of 'calibration' I'd hazard the mark at 1300m is used thus:

The tank is levelled, and the gun aimed at a panel or another Tiger 'through the bore'. The sight is adjusted so that the aim point remains on the target and the range reads zero. When the range is increased to 1300m, the sight aimpoints should move down the panel/Tiger by 5 degrees, which could be a second mark or e.g the ground at the track at a known (measured) range. The linkages are adjusted until this is true, and then firmly locked, giving correct adjustment for 0 and 1300m, and thus for most combat ranges.

It is possible that a zeroing round would be fired to confirm the boresight, but this is not always required, especially if the crew is trained to fire using Burst On Target or similar techniques.

Skybird · 11-23-08, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lieste

Purely speculation, but based on the idea of 'calibration' I'd hazard the mark at 1300m is used thus:

The tank is levelled, and the gun aimed at a panel or another Tiger 'through the bore'. The sight is adjusted so that the aim point remains on the target and the range reads zero. When the range is increased to 1300m, the sight aimpoints should move down the panel/Tiger by 5 degrees, which could be a second mark or e.g the ground at the track at a known (measured) range. The linkages are adjusted until this is true, and then firmly locked, giving correct adjustment for 0 and 1300m, and thus for most combat ranges.

It is possible that a zeroing round would be fired to confirm the boresight, but this is not always required, especially if the crew is trained to fire using Burst On Target or similar techniques.

Isn't there an animated graphic in one of the linked postings, that shows how the sight moves down when adjusting distance?

the greater the distance, the more the guntube must get elavated, the more the "crosshair" in sights get lowered, relatively - to bring them up on the target, the sight and tube must be raised.

try to use appropriate ammunition that has a flat travelling arc - it's easier to hit with it, and the tolerance for range estimation errors is greater.

Lieste · 11-23-08, 06:10 PM

Yes I know how the sight graticule moves with the input of range. Rotation of the outer range ring anti-clockwise moves the target graticule down in the sight field. This is similar to the movement of the graticule in the Leopard 2A5 in SB, but not as 'direct'.

However this doesn't include the use of the marker for the 1300m for 'calibration'
For some reason I can't view animated gifs anymore, but mostly this isn't missed much.

I can't see how a 5 degree angle can be appropriate for the difference in sight angle for any two rounds... at the muzzle there is no appreciable difference for any reasonable combination of velocity or mass. The differences only become apparent at longer ranges.

Again, note the near total lack of difference in superelevation required for Slgsr95 and Slpprj m/95 within say 200m in SB. At longer ranges, the difference in round type becomes critical, but the 13 mark cannot be the 'zero range marker' for any ammunition, as is suggested in the thread linked.

Skybird · 11-23-08, 06:44 PM

The weapons back then had not the penetration power of ammunition today, in SBP you eventually hit and kill the enemy at 4000m, in WWII I think trying to hit at 2000m was a waste of ammo, so ranges for effective fire were smaller, lets say 1500m and below (just my guess, a historian may prove me wrong), I also refer to that Tiger fible's graphics that do not even include anything beyond 2000m.) Like a SABOT in SBP at ranges below 1500 or 1800 (or battlesight) travel so flat an arch that they always hit when centering your sight on the target, I can imagine that in WWII, tanks shooting at least no high travelling ammunition also just centred sights on anything below lets say 800m, or 1000, or 1300.

We need an expert here to clear that question, I'm just speculating.

Lieste · 11-23-08, 07:16 PM

IMO only:

Slsgr95 is a reasonable stand-in for the slower rounds fired by the Tiger at 744 m/s v0

M830/DM12 is similar in terms of ballistics to the AP rounds fired from the Panther and Tiger II at 1140 m/s v0

Of course terminal effects are much higher due to the larger charge weight of the 120mm HE, or the advanced HEAT liner of the faster rounds, and there may be minor differences due to drag/sectional density, but these should give a feel for what differences you should expect to see at extreme ends of the late WW2 german tank guns.

Skybird · 11-23-08, 07:30 PM

I think i just wait for my copy and then simply blow everything up if it wears the wrong colour.

Dowly · 02-19-09, 07:39 PM

Thanks for the Fible! Having now REALLY started to like them Panzers due to WWIIOL, I'm eager to read anything I can find about them.

11-23-08, 06:08 AM	#1
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 40,486 Downloads: 9 Uploads: 0	The Tiger fible, and German sights explained Prowling the web for latest additions to the tanksim forum, I came over this prey and took it: the tiger fible: http://tiger1.info/fibel/ German gunnery sights, aiming and range estimation explained: http://pedg.yuku.com/topic/1728/t/Ra...ht-optics.html __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

11-23-08, 12:14 PM	#2
Lieste Soundman Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 142 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	The description of the light round 'requiring' a 5 degree difference in aiming sounds completely bogus to me though... It would seem more likely as a component of the boresighting procedure than for firing the gun. Of course it may be that this represents say 1500m or 2000m for the HVAP, rather than the nominal 1300m for the AP rounds. The idea that HVAP could be accurately fired with +5 degrees elevation is just nonsense though... I can't add anything from the german, as this is a language I have little knowledge of. Last edited by Lieste; 11-23-08 at 12:19 PM.

11-23-08, 06:44 PM	#6
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 40,486 Downloads: 9 Uploads: 0	The weapons back then had not the penetration power of ammunition today, in SBP you eventually hit and kill the enemy at 4000m, in WWII I think trying to hit at 2000m was a waste of ammo, so ranges for effective fire were smaller, lets say 1500m and below (just my guess, a historian may prove me wrong), I also refer to that Tiger fible's graphics that do not even include anything beyond 2000m.) Like a SABOT in SBP at ranges below 1500 or 1800 (or battlesight) travel so flat an arch that they always hit when centering your sight on the target, I can imagine that in WWII, tanks shooting at least no high travelling ammunition also just centred sights on anything below lets say 800m, or 1000, or 1300. We need an expert here to clear that question, I'm just speculating. __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert. Last edited by Skybird; 11-23-08 at 06:47 PM.

11-23-08, 07:30 PM	#8
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 40,486 Downloads: 9 Uploads: 0	I think i just wait for my copy and then simply blow everything up if it wears the wrong colour. __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

11-23-08, 05:25 PM	#3
Lieste Soundman Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 142 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	Purely speculation, but based on the idea of 'calibration' I'd hazard the mark at 1300m is used thus: The tank is levelled, and the gun aimed at a panel or another Tiger 'through the bore'. The sight is adjusted so that the aim point remains on the target and the range reads zero. When the range is increased to 1300m, the sight aimpoints should move down the panel/Tiger by 5 degrees, which could be a second mark or e.g the ground at the track at a known (measured) range. The linkages are adjusted until this is true, and then firmly locked, giving correct adjustment for 0 and 1300m, and thus for most combat ranges. It is possible that a zeroing round would be fired to confirm the boresight, but this is not always required, especially if the crew is trained to fire using Burst On Target or similar techniques.

11-23-08, 06:10 PM	#5
Lieste Soundman Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 142 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	Yes I know how the sight graticule moves with the input of range. Rotation of the outer range ring anti-clockwise moves the target graticule down in the sight field. This is similar to the movement of the graticule in the Leopard 2A5 in SB, but not as 'direct'. However this doesn't include the use of the marker for the 1300m for 'calibration' For some reason I can't view animated gifs anymore, but mostly this isn't missed much. I can't see how a 5 degree angle can be appropriate for the difference in sight angle for any two rounds... at the muzzle there is no appreciable difference for any reasonable combination of velocity or mass. The differences only become apparent at longer ranges. Again, note the near total lack of difference in superelevation required for Slgsr95 and Slpprj m/95 within say 200m in SB. At longer ranges, the difference in round type becomes critical, but the 13 mark cannot be the 'zero range marker' for any ammunition, as is suggested in the thread linked.

11-23-08, 07:16 PM	#7
Lieste Soundman Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 142 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	IMO only: Slsgr95 is a reasonable stand-in for the slower rounds fired by the Tiger at 744 m/s v0 M830/DM12 is similar in terms of ballistics to the AP rounds fired from the Panther and Tiger II at 1140 m/s v0 Of course terminal effects are much higher due to the larger charge weight of the 120mm HE, or the advanced HEAT liner of the faster rounds, and there may be minor differences due to drag/sectional density, but these should give a feel for what differences you should expect to see at extreme ends of the late WW2 german tank guns.

02-19-09, 07:39 PM	#9
Dowly Lucky Jack Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Finland Posts: 25,005 Downloads: 32 Uploads: 0	Thanks for the Fible! Having now REALLY started to like them Panzers due to WWIIOL, I'm eager to read anything I can find about them.