Just finishing what I started yesterday in the transfer of "raw data" from the "patch thread" to the home threads. Q&A between Don and myself along with the pictures are again, as a reminder in the "Patch Thread".
SP & SPAA...
A1.
ADD: NORWAY/ARCHER/JAN 2012/Per SWEDISH UNIT 416/
This is a joint venture between the two countries. First operational units not due for delivery until OCT. 2011 again allowing for small delays and training w/JAN 2012. It should be noted as in the Post below; these are manufactured and sold with a matching ammo carrier as shown in the pictures of the post. Can maybe this be addressed at a later time within the game?
Don't know what the technical issues are to do this.
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...142/#more-5142
Does the M 151 RO MG system need to be added? See "ARCHER SYSTEM" Para with pic.
http://www.defpro.com/news/details/9306/
Covers joint deal w/delivery date.
http://www.defpro.com/news/details/8490/
Announces prototype is ready. See related article links at bottom.
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/archerhowitzer/
http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product2819.html
See links at bottom of article.
C1.
CHANGE: SWEDEN/ARCHER/Fielded date of JAN 2012 vice
JAN 2010/
See notes and refs for A1 above.
Posts: Page 1; #5 & #6 and Page 2; #16.
C2.
CHANGE: FINLAND/AMV AMOS/UNITS 335 & 348/Fielded dates to JAN 2013 vice Jan 2008./ The below source though not complete does start to mention contract issues. The Jan 2008 date was about the time the Swedes were having their legal issues with PATRIA as mentioned above in the APC section for the AMV. Also it's my understanding that the AMOS and NEMO systems are from the start capable of direct fire support out of the box,
wouldn't it make sense to delete FINNISH UNIT 335 based on that and ensure that the SWEDISH AMV AMOS is a copy of FINNISH UNIT 348? Note dates are only 1yr. apart.
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...-Turret-06692/
Note it says "initial order" for the AMOS.
http://www.defpro.com/news/details/20563/
Specifically mentions that amendments were made to the original 2003 contract.
http://www.army-technology.com/news/news105201.html
Again as above.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/propo...e_news_48.html
Again as above. I'm convinced that issues with the contract existed and I'm willing to bet it had to do with PATRIAs legal issues in Sweden as part of the cause in the delay as well. If you go to the equipment side of a couple of the above sites they support what's in the OOB however those obviously have not been updated to reflect the news side of these sites from this past
Dec. of 2010 when PATRIA released the press notice.
A2.
ADD: UAE (GULF STATES an issue for later.) & SYRIA/PANTSYR-S1/JAN 2007 & JAN 2009 respectively./As per RUSSIAN UNIT 414./
These are among the six countries mentioned in the refs to have received these SPAA units, but are the only ones I can find firm dates for. The other countries are India sometime around mid 2007 - 2008, Algeria in ~2008 and Jordon & Libya ~2010 late -2011 late. I will find what I can but this will be for next year.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/newsf...ms_russia.html
About Algeria and Libya.
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/pantsyr/
Please don't mix up contract dates with delivery dates. Note country and expected users mentioned.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/russi...ification.html
See country user list bottom.
http://defense-update.com/products/p/pantsir.htm
Mentions India in the last line. Will make contact with BROADSWORD site to see if I can't get some independent confirmation on this.
Post: Page 1; #4 & #8.
M1.
MOD: RUSSIA/PANTSYR-S1/UNIT 414/Name as shown vice
S1 PANTSYR/Fielded date from JAN 2008 to JAN 2010./
This is a highly capable SPAA unit that Russia exported before they made it operational for their Air Force. Per the post below they are using the more advanced SA-22 discussed. Name change based on refs. and the headache I got trying to verify status in the game, the last is the funny part!?!
http://www.armyrecognition.com/newsf...greyhound.html
Russian operational induction in 2010.
M2.
MOD: USMC/LAV-AD BLAZER/UNIT 54/Change end date to JUN 2004 vice DEC 2001/Modify TI/GSR to 45 and EW to 5 as Unit 50 currently shows and possible 25mm ammo load maybe increased?/ Both units shared the
same BLAZER turret. What really hurt this unit was its low production rate with only 17 total units made. Spares (electronic components) were already very expensive and made more so by the limited numbers. By permission I work with retired USMC GySGT. C. Vanderaa who was a gunner in the test unit evaluating the LAV-AD and he informed me there was one circuit board they had that cost just over 100K, ONE CARD. But he loved them just as any who served with them or were supported by them as they were used for fire support during the spring and summer of 2003 during OIF. Check the blogs for yourself. The 25mm is the same as used by the USMC Harriers and AC-130U SPOOKY w/APDU rounds as well I understand.
UPDATE 01/20/2011: Relieved the "Gunny" and he commented the following
1) BLAZER turret underwent only minor changes.
2) Explained "Vision" to him in game terms, he noted the systems FC and Vision were very sensitive and far reaching because one of the parameters in the design had to be the very fast and accurate response to "pop up" helos at close in and extended ranges. It was simply a matter of who shoots first wins. So ECM, FC & TI/GSR were very advanced for the time.
3) APDU were the preferred rounds carried on board to meet APC etc. threat, and he specifically mentioned to have the ability to take down the HINDS quickly if encountered and to take out fortified positions and anyone defending them which was very adept in during OIF. He got to see them in action in OIF and they were glad to have them. Apparently according to him they exceeded expectations locally in the ground support role. Ammo is an issue to be addressed based on this and below.
http://www.marines.mil/news/messages...es03top55.aspx
Note RMKS/1.C. the 4th LAV (AD) Platoon was the HQ Platoon. This message is dated on 241500Z NOV 2003, almost two months into FY04; this is why I chose JUN 2004 vice APR 2004(Mid point for FY04.).
The latest date possible would be SEP 2004 as
OCT 2004 would start FY 2005.
http://www.angelfire.com/tx6/lav_ad/index.html
Capt. Whit Houston’s site, the last CO to command the LAV-AD Company when they cased their colors.
http://www.angelfire.com/fl/jasonm/
Sgt. Jason Millett’s site, he served with Capt. Whit Houston during his tour as CO prior to, and during OIF until the unit cased its colors. You'll need a little patience to download his video but for those of you that served they'll see those kids weren't much different then when we did our time, enough said there. Towards the end are pictures of the 25mm rounds I mentioned above, if not APDU, they are certainly a modified AP round of some sort, I'll check with the "Gunny". Also a great song by "Three Doors Down" it sets the tone for the video and situation and reminds me of my own long deployments away from family but still surrounded by "family" under the waves.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...ems/gau-12.htm
To support the above and APDU rounds, though on the HARRIER, I understand this was standard for the LAV-AD for the same purpose against air and light armored targets. Might this affect the current ammo penetration value given for the unit?
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...v-ad-specs.htm
Note ammo load (out) is this an issue for the game unit?
http://www.kitsune.addr.com/Rifts/Ri...ge/GAW_LAV.htm
From some game site (UKN) but the info on the technical side (Non game.) is correct. Might be of some value for you developers as well.
http://www.generaldynamics.com/
No reference to the LAV-AD off the current site in the
Land Systems section.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EM82Vuq3PdM
LAV-AD combat night action during OIF note comment section. Play it loud and in full screen and thank God you’re not on the receiving end! Short about 1 mike. Also answers the wheel spin effect in some pictures, that was brought up in the MRAP thread I believe, in the second comment called "stroboscopic effect”, who says we can't learn something new once in awhile?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XooFmPUt6aA
General Dynamics Aerospace video on the LAV-AD BLAZER in action. Short about 1.5 mikes.
Added new pics because the one shown in the game is the export version with the MINSTREL System:
Pic:
D1.
DELETE: USMC/LAV-AD BLAZER/UNIT 50/
The LAV-AD BLAZER was taken out of service as the official USMC document will show above in M2 among other refs as well. This version I trust shows it with the STRINGER BLK II missile which had its funding stripped and was cancelled in 2002, it never was fielded. LAV-AD was eventually replaced by the HUMVEE AVENGER platform.
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/blazer/ Supports info above in M2 as well.
End of Part 2.
Pat
Regards,
Pat