Jump to content
Free downloads from TNA ×
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

Remembered Today:

Turkish Clinometer for Artillery?


wmfinch

Recommended Posts

Hello All,

Anyone any ideas about this Clinometer please?

With grateful thanks

Wayne Finch340DEA09-1592-4B3B-8F5E-5E6D4F9FE6DC.jpeg.1d12538fc8445fd1071685e0b08e8418.jpeg

CBB996EB-BAC9-4494-81E0-8F2474A75E59.jpeg

33158C6A-F1C0-4134-863E-1C8DE4FE6C74.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no idea what this item is or actually does, but I do believe it could be of Turkish origin based on the style of Arabic script. I did some of the simpler translations which look a little familiar to me.

In the first photo there is a graduated sliding rule which reads from 0 - 6320 metres in Arabic numerals. It is stamped with the word Metre.

The second photo is a closeup of the above showing from 6000 - 6320 metres, with the inscription which reads Metre. I have also seen this stamped on Turkish Mauser rifle sights.

In the third photo we see another sliding rule graduated from 210 - 250 - 300 - 350 in Arabic numerals. I haven't translated that inscription yet.

The larger stamping in the "makers mark" style indicates to me that it is related to the Tophane foundry, which was the major Ottoman arsenal located in Istanbul.  Hope this info helps.

Cheers, SS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At face value, it looks to be a field clinometer that would have been placed above the breech on flats provided to allow the quadrant elevation of the gun to be set for a particular range. It was the sort of sighting device used in the 19th Century. With the introduction of guns with effective recoil systems, more sophisticated sighting system were needed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, shippingsteel said:

The larger stamping in the "makers mark" style indicates to me that it is related to the Tophane foundry, which was the major Ottoman arsenal located in Istanbul.

Agreed

image.jpeg.fceb488a46f974cc0905a4a8aaea2788.jpeg

طوپخانه امیری [see the first line of the History paragraph here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tophane]

Should there be a Tughra somewhere, or would that only appear on the gun itself?

 

 

Edited by michaeldr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, shippingsteel said:

In the first photo there is a graduated sliding rule which reads from 0 - 6320 metres in Arabic numerals. It is stamped with the word Metre.

Just looking at the standard Krupp 75mm field gun of the Ottoman army in WW1, which had an estimated range of 6000 metres. It would appear to be right in the slot for this particular instrument.?

Cheers, SS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This Turkish clinometer would have been used to facilitate indirect fire and was therefore likely to have been used on a larger calibre howitzer, probably around the turn of the 20th Century or the few years preceding it. Smaller calibre field guns operating in direct fire mode did not need to use clinometers to set the range but instead used simpler tangent sights. A possible candidate weapon for the clinometer would be the Krupp 12 cm M1892 howitzer.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, awjdthumper said:

field guns operating in direct fire mode did not need to use clinometers

By WW1 virtually all field guns were configured for dual direct and indirect fire, while all howitzers and mortars have always used indirect fire. It was only anti-tank guns developed after WW1 that were exclusively configured for direct fire. This statement excludes the small coastal fortress guns such as the small Hotchkiss & Nordenfeldt guns that had been developed for minor naval functions then redeployed as land weapons to engage torpedo boats at short ranges and latter redeployed in the early tanks. As the clinometer in question has a dovetail mount, it was fitted to a sight bar and left on the gun during firing, indicating that the gun had a modern recuperator mounting rather than a recoil carriage.

 

This strongly suggests that it was for the 75mm m1903.

 

The 75mm M1903 Krupp QF gun was the basic field gun of the Turkish Army. There were actually a number of different models of this gun as Turkey had lost a lot of artillery in the Balkan Wars and there were several different models purchased to make good the losses. Additionally a quantity of guns made for Brazil  were still in Germany at the outbreak of the war and were ultimately supplied to Turkey. On top of this Romania used a m1903 Krupp of their own specification. Large quantities were captured when Romania entered the war and these were also supplied to Turkey, some with the original sights and some refurbished in Germany with a new sighting system. So all up just this gun used several different prismatic sight systems. Every gun has a surface machined on the upper side of the breach ring to locate a box clinometer. The prismatic sights are by Goertz with the earlier models being low and squat with a dovetail fitting to the sight bar, the latter models being like the common WW1 German sights, upon which the British No 7 was based and fitting into a sight cup. For the latter ones, a clinometer was fixed to the sight bar, in the same method as the German guns. For the earlier ones a clinometer must have been available but I do not know how it was used, whether it is the model in this post and the sights changed out once the gun was brought to the correct elevation or whether a clinometer fitted to the sight bar.

 

Other major Turkish field artillery was all relatively dated in design, being recoil carriage guns. These are all unlikely to have ever been fitted with sight bars and would have used box clinometers placed on the breach ring and removed between shots. Latter in the war, Germany also supplied Turkey several standard models of German Imperial Army field guns and howitzers – these would all have used the standard German sighting systems.

 

1166471768_TU122001PrismaticgunsightforM190475mmfieldgun1.JPG.e8ba80ec2702ff777cd1ae230a28373c.JPG336233463_TU122001PrismaticgunsightforM190475mmfieldgun2.JPG.46a88461ff8c48b60fe55e02c1d6c8e0.JPG

The early model of clinometer sight for the m1903 75mm gun with the dovetail fitting.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Further to above. The complete sight bar assembly for the German c96 n/A 77mm field gun, with the clinometer attached

image.jpeg.22d286b52a63a918b1c24a8e4c407f44.jpeg

 

 

 

image.jpeg.3aaf3e4f50924ae50eb5f61cd38f4ace.jpeg

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A sight bar arc for a Turk m1903 75mm. This site bar has a clinometer (incomplete) attached

Unsure if the dovetail type sight fitted to this bar or whether the dovetail is for the sight cup to take the latter type panoramic sight.

image.jpeg.c6a2bde85b7e5b8e9edf9c0deba98aed.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A dovetailed clinometer arc similar to the original post but not the same.

image.jpeg.d9c82c5700d62f7c9b841a97f1fd3b56.jpeg

image.jpeg.14a07ca19e10e23f9681baa05db6e22f.jpeg

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So after some further research and translation I have succesfully decoded the other graduated scaling seen in Photo 3.

It seems we have a double sided instrument which allows for use in both "old" and "new" units of measurement, in this case of distance or range to the target.

In Photos 1 and 2 we see the sliding scale measures in Metres and is graduated up to 6320 units or 6.3 Km. In Photo 3 the sliding scale measures in the old Ottoman Miles and is graduated in 1/10ths up to 350 units, so 3.5 Ottoman Miles in total.

Now the Ottoman Miles are a relic of the ancient world and are much longer than our old miles. The conversion rate of 1 Ottoman Mile = 1,894 Metres. So this definitely confirms the suspected Turkish origin.!

Cheers, SS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if the markings make it possible to roughly date the clinometer?

This clinometer was clearly designed to facilitate indirect fire which only really came into existence for the first time during the 2nd Boer War (1899-1902). By at least 1903/04, the British, French and Germans had developed sighting systems with built in clinometers to allow the elevation of the gun to be set up for a particular range - they did not need to use a clinometer like the Turkish one mounted above the breech for this purpose. The Krupp 75mm M1903 would almost certainly have used the same sighting approach as the other German field guns of the period even though it was an export model.

In my opinion, it is likely that this Turkish clinometer was used to facilitate indirect fire from an older Turkish artillery piece (field or fortress) in the early part of the 20th century, even possibly, in the early part of WW1. The French had to use a similar clinometer with their obsolete 155 mm Mle 1877 de Bange early in WW1 until a more effective indirect fire sighting system was introduced for the weapon. I'm not an expert on Turkish artillery but I believe they still had about ~72 of the obsolete Krupp 12 cm M1892 howitzers in use at the start of WW1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is an example of the Turk 12cm recoil carriage howitzer. This example is at MacArthur Park Camden NSW, south-west of Sydney. Its not a great photo but there is no sight bar bracket assembly on the gun. Its a very long time since I have been down there but by memory it never had a sight bar and would have used a box clinometer placed on the breach ring.

There is another example at Manila, north of Tamworth NSW - I have no photos of that gun

Regarding the development of prismatic sights - the period 1900-1910 was a period of very rapid development. The models of prismatic sights being supplied by Krupp with their commercial guns from 1902-1904 (Japan, Turkey, Romania and others) were very obsolete by 1908, with most German sights after that date almost identical, the only major differences being how they were locked into the sight cup.

The early prismatic sight issued with the British 18pr was a bizarre affair, being a brass disk and pointer arms, mounted onto a bracket on top of the shield. These had totally disappeared prior to WW1. Here in Australia, a prewar 18pr was being restored and it had the original shield with rivet plugs in the shield were the mounting bracket for the early prismatic sight had been. 

 

 

image.png.9927ded94c1d14268fe6eb805a893c04.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Found a photo of the Manila Gun on the internet. No sight bar off the barrel, must have used a box clinometer

 

edited_graham-wilson_manilla-captured-field-gun_3.jpg?itok=GQIY-dyR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As an ex-infantryman I'm way out of my depth here, (supposed to go to the artillery after basic, but the Finance Ministry ran out of money for that particular course - that at least was the explanation at the time) but these two might (?) illustrate the difference

image.jpeg.1a0e5d78d7209b199eab1ad357b66b34.jpeg image.jpeg.ec27bb824c214d66089467defdac2492.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chasemuseum said:

Found a photo of the Manila Gun on the internet. No sight bar off the barrel, must have used a box clinometer

 

edited_graham-wilson_manilla-captured-field-gun_3.jpg?itok=GQIY-dyR

This gun would have used a cross-bar sight as the British called them to allow the gun to be laid for line. The mounting hole for the rear sight can be seen on the RHS near the back of the breech and the hole for the fore sight can be seen near the trunnion. Of course, this type of sight was only used for direct fire when the target could be seen.

To convert a gun like this for indirect fire before the advent of panoramic telescopes would have required what the British called a lining plane to be used to allow laying for line which was basically a sighting device on a horizontally rotatable table marked in units of angle. It is possible the socket for this type of dial sight can be seen behind the RH trunnion. To set the quadrant elevation of the gun corresponding to the required range would then have required a clinometer like the Turkish one in this thread to be placed on the gun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The longer slider scale looks like a Vernier for setting 10x accuracy, but your photo doesn't show the full length of the scale, so only guessing.

Hope this helps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, michaeldr said:

these two might (?) illustrate the difference

Hi Michael,

Two go photos that do show the difference between guns with the different sighting systems.

Curious as to where these are located and if more photos are available ?

Cheers

RT

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Interested said:

The longer slider scale looks like a Vernier for setting 10x accuracy, but your photo doesn't show the full length of the scale, so only guessing.

Yes, you have no idea how much guessing goes on trying to interpret the Ottoman script, it is basically just a scribble and even worse when it is unclear.!

I think you are correct about the Vernier for fine tuning to 1/10ths. The script does mention the 1/10 as shown in these photos. The full script at the end of the scale and the same script with the 1/10 on the fine tuning screw attachment block.

While I think the script indicates part of a "Mile" I would like to see the whole length of the scale and get the OP to lock it and read both sides results to check if the conversion factor checks out.

I may be second guessing a tad but something about the conversion rate doesn't add up. I am even know wondering about Nautical Miles and if the Ottomans even used them.? Perhaps it came off a heavy Naval gun or Sea Fortress artillery gun.?

Cheers, SS

IMG_20220809_081653.jpg.96f7366889a1fc45f3d01f83b4593526.jpgIMG_20220809_081752.jpg.6cc2ca059b60908c592860295e4b3039.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Naval artillery is not my thing, but I do not think that clinometers are very useful on a ship as they are too unstable a platform. I thought that the navy tended to measure elevation angles from the horizon.

 

Certainly coastal fortress artillery is a possibility. The Turks had a variety of coastal forts in various areas with a tremendous array of different guns. My understanding is tghat these were manned by Army troops rather than Naval personnel, in a similar manner to British coastal forts

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Chasemuseum said:

Two go photos that do show the difference between guns with the different sighting systems. Curious as to where these are located and if more photos are available ?

RT,

One is from the collection of Alamy (as indicated by their watermark) and simply came up, amongst others,  in response to a picture search 
The Krupp 75mm of 1913, is a crop from one seen on this thread
https://landships.activeboard.com/t51281329/75mm-krupp-export-guns/?sort=newestFirst&page=1#comment-51787575RT
and should properly be credited to “Nuyt of the�Overvalwagen forum”

regards
Michael

edit: that link above may not be satisfactory - this link is for the image referred to https://landships.activeboard.com/download.spark?id=1225549&aBID=63528  The post refers to the gun being quote " a surviving 75mm Krupp gun in Brazil at�Forte de Copacabana in Rio de Janeiro which has a build date of 1913, it's serial #27 (attached)"

 

Edited by michaeldr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The right hand side scaling is a bit of a problem, which we may need to revisit if we can get some more photos from the OP.

The inscription reads to me as "Milim" (see comparison pic from Ottoman keyboard) Now that could indicate a Mile, their word for that was "Mil" ... or alternatively it stands for Millimetre which at face value should read as "Milim" but that would be far too small a scale I would have thought. So I am very confused here.! Need more info ...

Cheers, SS

IMG_20220809_081653.jpg.fdc16224f55450569c732976004aa675.jpgIMG_20220810_080807.jpg.b664f2415b9ec17ce1b94e58e0fede51.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In many artillery sighting systems, the elevation indicator would be marked in both units of angle and units of range. So on a British artillery piece, the markings would be in degrees and metres.

I would have thought it unlikely the Turkish clinometer would be marked on either side in two different units of range and it is more likely to have units of angle on one side. However, there were quite a few different ways for the military to specify angle. The British used degrees but other nations used MILS either milli-rads or the more modern NATO MIls. As far as I can see, the range scale on the clinometer correspond to a max of about 18 degs which would correspond to about 320 MILS. Might be worth considering this when looking at the scales.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, now we're getting down to it.! And that's exactly the kind of background information I was looking for, so thank you. :thumbsup:

I was wondering about Mils but as a non-Artillery person I really have very little idea of what should be present. So I need all the help I can get ... the Osmanli script is quite hard enough without any additional mysteries.! :D

PS. The scale on that side reads up to 350 units, so I think MILS it is.

Cheers, SS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting that the French called the Mils form of angular measurement "Milliemes" which is very close to the Ottoman inscription of "Milim" on the clinometer.

Makes me wonder if it came off a French made Schneider M1907 75mm Canone which the Ottomans used during the war, also with a range of around 6000 metres.

Cheers, SS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...