German Tank/Anti-Tank Gun Sights

[Mobius]

I'm attempting to rank German tank and anti-tank gun sights for range estimation and fire control.
Not as much for magnification or picture quality but speed of ranging for first shot accuracy vs. stationary or moving vehicle targets.

This is what I came up with:
(From best to worse)

1. TZF 9-12
2. TZF 5D-F
3. TZF 5-5B
4. TZF 38(t)
5. TZF 4
6. ZF 1a
7. ZF 3x8
8. ZF 20E
9. ZF 20

[Yoozername]

Might help

http://www.panzerworld.com/german-armor-optics

You have some criteria you based that on?

also

http://www.lonesentry.com/manuals/tme30 ... gure9.html

[Mobius]

Thanks,
There is a great page on sights in the encyclopedia of German tanks. It has most of that data.
I have Googled images of many of the sight view. What is surprising is that the PaK, StuK gun sights don't have in-sight range markings. There is an external dial that has it on it. Not so good for quick range-finding. Plus the early war sights didn't ave a good mili-radian system

[Yoozername]

I guess your post makes me think there are certainly many other elements to consider.

The whole process of acquiring and targeting and shooting, etc., should be part of what you are determining. A good FOV (field of view) gets you a head start if you think that might help you actually getting the said target in-sight. And even that is a 'system' of interacting with a crewmember (TC) who more than likely spotted them first, and being able to traverse, etc. Fast traverse and narrow FOV might be a little frustrating in combat... I would think.

In-Sight 'range markings' throws me off. I am sure you must be familiar with the German methods...
http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/Zeiss_Optics.htm

[Mobius]

I guess your post makes me think there are certainly many other elements to consider.

The whole process of acquiring and targeting and shooting, etc., should be part of what you are determining. A good FOV (field of view) gets you a head start if you think that might help you actually getting the said target in-sight. And even that is a 'system' of interacting with a crewmember (TC) who more than likely spotted them first, and being able to traverse, etc. Fast traverse and narrow FOV might be a little frustrating in combat... I would think.

In-Sight 'range markings' throws me off. I am sure you must be familiar with the German methods...
http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/Zeiss_Optics.htm

Yes. But I wasn't aware that those were just for tanks. StuGs and assault guns got a more primitive sight.

[Yoozername]

You saw that on a World of wanks?

[Mobius]

I don't know where it came from. It probably is a re-creation and not an actual sight picture.

[Yoozername]

I believe the ZF 3x8 and its variants, may be the most common of those types. It was used on the Pak 40 and was also a direct sight for the 20mm AA guns etc.

My understanding of how the German sights work are that the triangles are used as precision marks (strich) that are compared to the target's height or length. This is done in the center of the optic initially, and it would be the clearest part of the optic. The range can then be estimated, compared to a commander's binocular estimation, and a firing solution is then dialed in on the scope outer drum. This has the effect of lowering the triangles, one of which is used as a aiming mark. The gun is then elevated so that the aiming mark is brought up in the sight picture and the target is then engaged by firing.

This might be different than a 'strait scope' such as the early sherman sights. Basically the range is estimated primarily through a TC binoculars and a guess by the gunner, and the gun is elevated and the range marks are increasing so that aiming points are lower and away from the center of the optic.

Also, this US scope must be 'head fudged' for the different ammo types. That is, memorized and hardly very good as far as overall gunnery IMO. the Germans had different drums for the ammo types, and this would be a much better system. Basically, the range estimation would be the critical part.

[Yoozername]

I believe that the reticles image (bild) might depend on the version, they seem to be operationally the same. This is the common late war 5X used on Hetzer, StuG and other weapons.

Of note is the rather narrow FOV of these (8 deg.). The gunner in many German AFv did not have a view outside other than the sight. Getting the chassis pointed at the target, and getting the target within the guns traverse, and the sight on the target must have been fun. I can see the advantage of taking enemies on at range and having a 5X sight. Magnification plays into the German scheme of using the 'strich' marks. Having 5X means a enemy AFV at 1000 meters looks like it is at 200 meters. A 2.4X sight means it appears to be 420 meters or so.

[Yoozername]

The German sights can be categorized as the following:

1. Binocular and Monocular, Bino being rare and used on initial Tiger I and Panther D
2. Periscopic. Used on many SPG but not Panzer. Kit included spare periscopic elements BTW.
3. Telescopic. Antitank gun mainly but other also.
4. Articulated. Main use was Panzers and allowed gunner to have a stationary optic while front piece would elevate and depress with gun. Copied by Soviets and used in T34 BTW.

[Mobius]

I wonder how many lenses are contained in each.

[Yoozername]

There are people that collect them just like the ammo guys collect brass, etc.

The Tiger II gun sight was only made in about 800 pieces total quantity I think. It was better protected than most. The panther gunsight hangs from the roof (many others do also), meaning a roof hit by a mortar might mess it up. It is also attached for articulation to the mantlet piece. That can't be good either. The German support units had a van and all the tools and parts to repair these items BTW.

Many people equate a fast turret traverse with magical engagement properties. Most engagements would require an additional hand powered traverse to get the target in the FOV. German TC would call out the last few angular needs and the gunner would call out aquired. The game would then be on. It is my thought that they were so "range conscience" that they could eyeball ranges very well and you would too if your life depended on it. I don't think that stadia lines offset on the optics really helps that much more than the German system. One has to traverse a little to get under the lines and read it and traverse back.

[Mobius]

In one study the US stated that articular sights suffered in optical quality when compared to telescope sights. That probably means a loss of light transmission. They probably have mirrors or some extra lenses compared to a straight line telescope.

I also found a crude way to compare sights. magnification = apparent FOV/true FOV. Which gives the apparent FOV=magnification * true FOV.

[Mobius]

From "The Panther's H.Dv.119/325 Firing Table" thread

The first sight, the TZF 12, was only 2.5X magnification but was a binocular design. The dual magnification, TZF 12a, was both 2.5X and 5X and monocular. These articulated sights were Panther only systems. The Sfl. Z.F.1a was more of a generic periscopic sight used on Stug and Hetzer, etc. and had a fixed 5X magnification. Anecdotal evidence is that they were very good systems. As with most systems, they have good points and bad points.

I suppose my question is "better at what?". I have not read how the large angular lines are used in these gun sights. The 88mm FlaK had a similar sight I believe as far as the sight picture. the Germans developed gunsights that would allow the gunner to estimate range, compare with the TC's estimation (using binoculars), and then dialing in the range and then readjusting the aiming mark (triangle). As far as 'Better at what', the mission of the Panther and jagdpanzers was different.

The telescopic sights, while apparently better protected, are susceptible to shock from hits on the wide Panther mantlet. The articulated front piece is attached to the mantlet and moves with it. The dual magnification gives the gunner excellent awareness compared to a single magnification. The 2.5X had a wider field of view. The Panther gunner, controlling the turret traverse, is then tactically aware and perhaps more so than a jagdpanzer gunner.

I don't know the purpose of that large angle lines either. Maybe it is to estimate distance by comparing a target's size to the small 2 mil triangles. There is no in-sight view range marks in the Sfl ZF 1a so the range would have to be read from an external range drum. (On one version of the 88mm FlaK gun there wasn't one.) And the gunner has to learn the relationship between position in the large angle and the range. (Incidentally several French sights had large angle lines as well. These started from the top of their view instead of the bottom.)

The TZF 12a is perhaps one of the best tank sight in WWII with its in-view range dial and mili-radian triangle marks. Though it is articulated and may use more lenses and mirrors which reduce light transmission a little from a normal telescope sight , but so do all periscope sights. The periscope sight is mounted to the gun cradle thus might be subject to misalignment from recoil shock.

[Yoozername]

The Sfl Z.F. !a on the far right shows the vertical line at the 6 o'clock position. The mil distance from the top of that line to the vertex of the angle appears about 8 mil. One could then put the top of the line at the bottom of a tank target and estimate it's range depending on how much height it takes up between those two points. good for closer targets perhaps, with the smaller triangles better for longer distance.

It would seem that the dual magnification Panther sight had separate lenses for each magnification. That is, the triangles etc. had to be sized differently.