Yes I'm tracking both. However I don't know if your fully aware of this or not but for a 2 or 3 year period up until about two years ago we had a fairly widespread culling of equipment from the OOB's. I'm not throwing stones, but it's worth noting a lot of equipment got entered in the game that never saw the light of day, where entered much too soon, or as recently noted in the case of Italy ARIETE MBT too late. And Italy on this tank is a perfect example of "
never saw the light of day",
Italy only operates the C1 version, no other variant is in service or likely to be by games end 2020 unless Russia does does something really-not smart. Italy has put most of it's faith in the CENTURO (Suppositely it has or soon will operate one with a 120mm-verifying that.) so, If you check that OOB (And I invite anyone to do so.) you'll see at least 6-8 MBT's up for deletion. I think I commented on this in the MBT Thread but, I'm recommending one advanced one with modification to be held in "reserve" should things change so we'll have one ready to go plus for anything beyond 2020 it'll be there for whomever to carry it over which just now gives me an idea you'll have to wait for.
I try to avoid all of this as some know (Don, IMP, Suhiir and more recently GingerTanker for sure.) by heavy use of reliable refs, catch phrases such as "contracts signed", "ready to ship", "expected delivery date(s)", "operational evaluation completed", "approved for military use" and "is/has become/will be operational by" etc.
you just have to get past all "the wiz bang" stuff and read what's in the meat of the article this is one of the big traps that get's people in trouble out here, including myself on occasion. Don and I many years ago came up with an agreement concerning submissions, preferences agreed to...
1) Currently fielded or within 6 months.
2) Out to a year with strong references to support the case for the item with the synopsis to support it, a "defense lawyer" approach is a analogy here.
3) The best I've managed was around three years and we knew a later date change would be needed and that was for India's ARJUN MBT. There was some back and forth there.
This has saved us a lot of rework compared to others we've found out here.
I really hate those "Rabbit Holes" I find myself going down to fix a mistake from years past while working on a related piece of equipment.
I respect those agreed upon wishes and that working relationship and that we can come to a consensus on the issues.
You can get a feel if bored one night into the process we go through in the FASTBOAT Patch page Thread.
See short and concise!?!
But since you were kind enough to read this I won't leave you empty handed so related to the same country and equipment type, here's what I hope to get in instead and it's bigger and badder...
http://www.janes.com/article/50171/f...f-630-vehicles
http://www.armyrecognition.com/idex_...mm_cannon.html
http://www.armyrecognition.com/octob...vehicle_0.html
Well the last bit was shorter and concise!?!
Regards,
Pat