Tiger driver's vision port in detail

[_waldbiene_ 14,632]

By looking through dozens of Tiger photos in the last days I found an interesting detail about the Tiger driver's vision port, 

the external armor shield could be lowered or raised from inside with a hand wheel.

 

It seems logical that the driver would lower the external armor shield in combat and raise it when driving through "friendly" terrain.

 

Have a look... ;)

 

external armor shield in raised position

 

 

external armor shield in lowered position

 

 

[spoiler]

[/spoiler]

 

 

View from inside

 

 

 

 

source: http://www.armortek.co.uk/Forum3b/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=3928&start=15 (and various other sites)

 

[_waldbiene_ 14,632]

Ingame it seems that the whole armored frame and the moveable armor shield are a paper-thin weakspot, and imho that shouldn't be the case.

 

 

So either the armored frame and the moveable armor shield protecting the driver's vision port are modelled incorrectly ingame, 

or the Tiger just  faces opponents which were build to defeat Tigers and should penetrate that area easily anyway...

 

However, in my opinion the armored frame + the moveable armor shield should make that area harder to penetrate than the surrounding flat armor,

since the  armored frame + the moveable armor shield are mounted on top of the hull armor, increasing the effective armor thickness in that area.

 

So in other words, that area shouldn't be a weakspot, it should be a "strongspot"... :P

 

 

Btw, Panzer III and IV should have these moveable external armor shields too! :P

Edited May 20, 2014 by Trommelfeuer

[TheBattleMaster8 451]

That's awesome man!

[Aerobane 4,140]

Cool! how thick was the armor plate?

[_waldbiene_ 14,632]

Cool! how thick was the armor plate?

 

Still searching for that detail, thick enough be called armor I guess... :P

[mixerria 798]

Very good detailed view on the driver's vision port.

 

Hopefully Gaijin accepts that it is indeed no weakspot.

[_waldbiene_ 14,632]

Found a goldmine!  :Ds 

 

Tiger ausf. E : Driver's vision port

 

This photo (of the Vimoutiers Tiger) shows the external layout of the visor.

The driver peered through a slit whose size he could adjust by moving two armour shields.

The upper and lower shields were geared to move simultaneously, preserving the center of the slit.

At left and right there were fixed steel covers. A guard bar was bolted into the glacis plate to protect the bottom joint.

 

 

Looking from above, we can see that the side armour blocks provide machined channels to guide the movable shields.

The bar on the glacis plate is keyed into a channel as well as being bolted. Its bolts have tapered flat heads, minimising the chance of damage from impacts.

 

 

With the visor components removed, this is the external appearance of the port (on the Bovington vehicle during restoration).

In this particular hull the armour was drilled with two holes for the episcope, above the visor, but they were plugged when installation of the device was cancelled.

A standard German vision block was located behind the central opening. I don't know the purpose of the two smallest holes; they were blocked by the upper shield in all positions.

 

 

This is one of the side covers (with its original primer and ivory paint).

The long tab extends through a hole and into the tank. The cover is also keyed into a recess in the armour, 10mm deep.

 

 

Inide the tank, the end of the tab was locked solidly in place by hammering a U-shaped piece of metal into it.

The U was longer than the tab, presumably so that something could be inserted to provide leverage for hammering it out again.

 

 

 The movable shields were raised and lowered by cams, two each, on axles that were turned from inside the tank.

I have no images of the cams.

At the top and bottom, long channels were machined into the front plate, 5mm deep and 30mm wide, along the full width of the shields.

This ensured that the upper and lower edges of the moving shields were not in contact with the front plate; if they had been, tiny steel splinters from impacts could have become caught in them and prevented their motion.

 

All of the components described above were solid steel blocks.

There was no external mechanism except for the rotating cams, which fit into holes on the back of the shields.

Waterproof sealing apparently consisted of grease on the backs of the side armour blocks, seals in the bearings of the cams, and seals on and around the vision block inside the wall.

 

 

 

 

source:  http://tiger1.info/EN/Drivers-vision-port.html

 

Still no exact thickness of the armor shields, but this stuff looks pretty solid to me.  ;)s

 

Solid Steel blocks integrated into the frontal armor like that (see above) should increase the effective armor in that area....

 

http://tiger1.info/EN/Welded-hull-plates.html

Edited May 20, 2014 by Trommelfeuer

[Wenin 2,654]

Still no exact thickness of the armor shields, but this stuff looks pretty solid to me.  ;)s

Indeed. This should be one of the strongest points of the frontal armour I guess.

[Riki81 245]

From what I could gather both the drivers hatch and the machinegun port were design to at least have the same frontal thickness as the rest of the armour, but I don't have data on the actual thickness of the armour in those places.

[Waroch 2,008]

Interesting. So it's a direct vision port, I've always thought it was an episcope.

[mixerria 798]

From what I could gather both the drivers hatch and the machinegun port were design to at least have the same frontal thickness as the rest of the armour, but I don't have data on the actual thickness of the armour in those places.

A cross section for the machinegun port of the tiger:

As one can see, the armor of the port (greyed out a bit) is just as strong as the other frontal armor, if not even stronger in some points. The ball holding the machine gun is also made of armor plate steel, so it isn't a weak  point either. The only weak point would be the hole in the ball  which is reserved for the machine gun - although this weak spot is even smaller than the slit in the driver's vision port.

 

Edit: To get more information or images on that topic, search for "Kugelblende" and a number indicating the armor thickness (that can be 30, 50 and 100, + maybe more), so for example I found this picture using "Kugelblende 100"

Edited May 20, 2014 by mixerria

[SuperDeluxe 493]

Very interesting thread and posts.

[_waldbiene_ 14,632]

About the moveable armor shields to protect the driver's vision port on Panzerkampfwagen IVs:

 

 Initially, the vision opening was protected with a simple hinged flap, but on the Ausf.B through D it was replaced by a two-piece sliding armored visor outside, the whole thing called a 'Fahrersehklappe', or driver's flap. These were opened from inside via handles on either side of the unit. The full name for the visor included the armor thickness it was installed in, such as the 'Fahrersehklappe 30'. In the Ausf.E and later, the vision opening and visor was redesigned again and consisted of a single housing bolted to the driver's front plate protected by a pivoting armored visor, and called a 'Fahrersehklappe 50', as it was used in armor that was then 50mm thick. Glass vision blocks were made from a number of layers of glass held in a Bakelite frame, and they had a slight greenish cast. The blocks were always held in black hinged frames on the inside of the vision openings just in case a stray bullet or piece of shrapnel managed to penetrate the thin vision slit in the armored flap. When operating in non-combat areas, the driver could quickly open the armor flap and remove the glass block to allow direct viewing and even enjoy a little fresh air. 

 

source: http://panzerfaust.ca/AFV%20interiors/pz4a.html

Edited May 20, 2014 by Trommelfeuer

[_waldbiene_ 14,632]

Okay, I found several references about Fahrersehklappe 30, 50 and 80.

 

Several sources mention that the Fahrersehklappe 80 was used on the Tiger.

 

The same Fahrersehklappe was used on the early Brummbärs.

 

 

 

Cool! how thick was the armor plate?

 

80mm imho.

 

...in front of the frontal armor. 

Edited May 20, 2014 by Trommelfeuer

[Blackart 4,984]

Nice! Didn't know this!

[IsaakRiv94 5,260]

Interesting read,Have you seen Saving Private Ryan? Cpt.Miller shoots through the drivers hatch of the Tiger!!! Such an epic movie Fail! :lol:

[IsaakRiv94 5,260]

Also there was a armored plate between the Driver and the Radio Operator/Machine gunner

[S1U663R 471]

i think its 70 to 80mm of plating, but its angled about 10 degrees i think

[MikaJougasaki 329]

so when the Driver's viewport is closed, how does he drive?

 

Does the Anime Girls und Panzer telling the truth (In order for the Driver to drive into the direction the commander points, the commander kicks the shoulder of the driver?)

[Carla_J_Luksic 1,260]

so when the Driver's viewport is closed, how does he drive?

 

Does the Anime Girls und Panzer telling the truth (In order for the Driver to drive into the direction the commander points, the commander kicks the shoulder of the driver?)

They have periscope that is attached to the hatch where the driver enters from.

It's is able to traverse a bit as well so the driver isn't just locked to watching the front.

 

 

This is the other end of the periscope that is attached to the driver's hatch on the Tiger I.

[Riki81 245]

Does the Anime Girls und Panzer telling the truth (In order for the Driver to drive into the direction the commander points, the commander kicks the shoulder of the driver?)

Yes and no, this was done on some very early tanks that weren't outfitted with an intercom system and where the commander sat directly behind and above the driver such the FT-17 and many of its derivatives.

Later when tanks evolved and intercom systems started becoming a standard equipment for every tank the order were more "gently" transmitted via this system.
Also even today in combat situation the driver will relay on the commander to direct its movement, since most often the large amount of battlefield obscurant such as smoke or mud kicked up by the explosion will render the driver almost blind when button up. Edited May 21, 2014 by Riki81

[MikaJougasaki 329]

Yes and no, this was done on some very early tanks that weren't outfitted with an intercom system and where the commander sat directly behind and above the driver such the FT-17 and many of its derivatives.

Later when tanks evolved and intercom systems started becoming a standard equipment for every tank the order were more "gently" transmitted via this system.
Also even today in combat situation the driver will relay on the commander to direct its movement, since most often the large amount of battlefield obscurant such as smoke or mud kicked up by the explosion will render the driver almost blind when button up.

 

Oh, so that's how it is...

 

I find it interesting to know because of this vid

 

[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ynaptcHCsg[/media]

 

at 0.55 the Panther Commander was transmitting while kicking the driver and I find it funny...

[Nerd1000 1,105]

They have periscope that is attached to the hatch where the driver enters from.

It's is able to traverse a bit as well so the driver isn't just locked to watching the front.

 

 

This is the other end of the periscope that is attached to the driver's hatch on the Tiger I.

what does the top look like?

[flying_brick 104]

Interesting read,Have you seen Saving Private Ryan? Cpt.Miller shoots through the drivers hatch of the Tiger!!! Such an epic movie Fail! :lol:

 

You were not watching closely. Cpt. Miller is wounded and doesn't really give a xxxx** anymore so he just shoots his side-arm at the Tiger in defiance. You can actually see the first two shots glancing off the frontal armor of the tank. The Tiger explosion is synchronised with Cpt. Miller shooting for the dramatic effect, when in fact the tank had been destroyed by an air bomb dropped from the allied planes that arrive on scene just in time in a classical "Cavalry charge to save the day" moment. 

 

Soaked in Hollywood drama ? Undoubtedly, but no movie fail.

 

 

On topic:

 

Wouldn't it be possible for a shell that hit square on that vision visor to send metal fragments into the tank's interior simply by traversing the narrow unprotected corridor between the armored panels ?

Edited May 21, 2014 by flying_brick

[WildBlueYonder 3,072]

You were not watching closely. Cpt. Miller is wounded and doesn't really give a xxxx** anymore so he just shoots his side-arm at the Tiger in defiance. You can actually see the first two shots glancing off the frontal armor of the tank. The Tiger explosion is synchronised with Cpt. Miller shooting for the dramatic effect, when in fact the tank had been destroyed by an air bomb dropped from the allied planes that arrive on scene just in time in a classical "Cavalry charge to save the day" moment. 

 

Soaked in Hollywood drama ? Undoubtedly, but no movie fail.

 

 

On topic:

 

Wouldn't it be possible for a shell that hit square on that vision visor to send metal fragments into the tank's interior simply by traversing the narrow unprotected corridor between the armored panels ?

Well I don't think the diameter would be small enough to let a 76mm projectile get through. :P Especially when such panels are closed.