New Russian OOB (or SPR OOB)

[KraMax]

Welcome All.

(As we have agreed with DRG - we create a new subject here at a forum for our discussion OOB.)

SPR team (Steel Panther Russia) - represents to your attention changed by us OOB.
Our command has done huge job on information search of characteristics of our technics and structure of infantry divisions.
We have changed almost all: speed of units, power of the weapon, arms structure, etc.
We have cleaned the nonexistent or duplicating weapon, have created truthful formations.

We offer developers of game and developers MODs to use our OOB for our armies.

We do not exclude existence of some discrepancies in ours OOB though we and have tried that errors in him were not.

Our team is ready to answer any your questions which at you can arise after our viewing OOB.

Our OOB: http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf

Which all photos are not present in our OOB - we will give in the near future.
icons units which are not present in our OOB - we suggest to use all from PlasmaKrab MOD - from its permission, certainly.

p.s. sorry for my bad English.

[Epoletov_SPR]

+ Attachment "SPR OOB" in this forum.


Corrected "SPR OOB" -- 18.12.2007.

[Warhero]

Looks good in generally;). Especially infantry units. Are you going to make more OOBs (USA/GB for example)?

[MarkSheppard]

Question -- have you considered splitting the Russian ORBAT into two things?

Perhaps 1946-1970 in the present russian OBAT slot; with 1970-2020 in RED, to get around the 255~ weapon limitation?

[PlasmaKrab]

On which basis would you split the Russian OOB? In addition to the fact that an awful lot of units and weapon carry on for ages, I can't see a meaningful date where you could set the breaking point. 1990-91 or some post-CFE year earlier could be doable, but there would still be the duplicate problem.
Looking at it another way, could it maybe be split along geographical/organizational lines as with OOBs 12 and 13?
Maybe separate domestic and expeditionary forces, like the GSFG troops, naval forces and VDV in their own OOB, from the 50s to 1990?
I'm pretty sure that in Russian terms it doesn't make much sense, so personally, I'd advise shelving the whole splitting idea as bound to end in tears.

Regardless, do you guys at SPR have enough data for a revised Ukrainian OOB as well? And what about a separate "wixed" OOB for the Central Asia Republics?

[KraMax]

Warhero
--------------------------
Thanks for a good estimation of our OOB.
On American, English and other armies - at us not so it is a lot of data. I think to each person easier to find the information on the army on the native language.

[KraMax]

MarkSheppard
----------------------------
We considered this possibility. But here on us depends nothing, good will of developers DRG and Mobhack here is necessary.
As you have for certain noticed at us now there is no problem with shortage slots under the weapon... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif
At us now a shortage problem slots under units. Because of this problem we had to reduce set of units which we would like to add in game, and also we could not realise to the full exact states sturcture of our infantry and special forces.

[KraMax]

PlasmaKrab
---------------------------------
VDV, special forces and other - all is components of our army. We cannot divide them on different OOB's as it is made with USArmy and USMC.
Probably to divide our country as you have offered on years, for example 1990-91. But in an ideal case, it would be good, if developers could make under units more slots - for example 2000 slots...

Also we have a lot of information on army of Ukraine, but under this information it is necessary to work still.
On the countries of the Central Asia at us not so a lot of given, but in need of them it is possible to try to find.

[KraMax]

I bring to your attention some photos for our OOB.

www.pecypc.kz/kramax/lbms.zip (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/lbms.zip)

These are the photos prepared for game. Numbers in names of LBM-files correspond to numbers of units in our OOB.

www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picts.zip (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picts.zip)

These are original photos. There can be someone will make LBM-files better than I.
The size of a file picts.zip - approximately 10 Mb.

[KraMax]

Iam offer use next icons (made - PlasmaKrab) in new patch for Russian units:

Mi-24:
http://www.box.net/shared/185ljkoqez

perfect icons GAZ-66 (2S12 Sani etc.):
http://www.box.net/shared/b834d50qk8

S-300/S-400 SAMs:
http://www.box.net/shared/al4exdtlqk

Uragan MRLS:
http://www.box.net/shared/bzjnmlqb6u

S-75 (SA-2 NATO) SAM:
http://www.box.net/shared/gija2nb8eu

[KraMax]

We have found some errors and discrepancies in our OOB:

1. Unit 393 - S-300PT - change type unit = Area SAM.
2. Unit 409 - ZSU-23-4M5 - change smoke discharges=1.
3. Units 280 and 281 2S5 - Giatsint - change armour steel top=0
4. Unit 252 - MT-LB - change smoke discharges = 1
5. Unit 203 - DPM - change Fire Control=7
6. Unit 197 - BRM-2 - delete. There is no exact information on it.
7. Weapon 014 - 5.45 RPK SAW - change name = 5.45mm RPK-74
8. Weapon 124 - 40mm GP-25 GL - change range = 9

We have changed our OOB. To download it it is possible in the first message of this subject of a forum or from this address:

www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf)

[KraMax]

foto unit 084 - Chiorny Oriol:

www.pecypc.kz/kramax/chiorny_Oriol.bmp (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/chiorny_Oriol.bmp)

[KraMax]

Welcome All.

I wish to tell - the basic changes which we have made in our OOB.

1. Tanks: we systematised and have divided a control system of fire into generations. Also we have considered separate upgrades of tanks.
2. Very seriously we have changed almost all dates of our arms.
3. We have changed almost all the speed long our units.
4. We have reconsidered accuracy and range of all our arms according to game formulas.
5. We have renamed some our arms and units.
6. We diversified infantry parts of our army.
7. We have cleaned from OOB the nonexistent weapon and units.
8. We have more precisely made ours formations on found us data.
9. Planes and helicopters: we have changed structure of arms of planes and helicopters to realistic combinations. Also have changed speed and a control system of fire - on generations of helicopters and planes.
10. Artillery: we have changed range and accuracy of our artillery, and also quantity of an ammunition.

We wished to make our infantry states more exact, but we did not have no place for units http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif
Also we had to clean some our units which are in our army.

We are ready to discuss and answer any your question on our OOB.

p.s. sorry for my bad English.

[Smersh]

This sounds very interesting I'm going to give this a try. I have always wanted a better infantry OBB.

What was the reasoning behind changing speed of units? I don't want it to become unbalanced.

Edit: Having looked at the changes I'm very impressed by the new infantry formations. and I also liked the splitting of tanks into Tank vs MBT formations.

[KraMax]

Smersh
--------------------
Thanks for your opinion on our OOB.

We corrected speed of units according to game rules:

MOVEMENT - SPEED OF UNITS

Fighter-bomber and level bomber Aircraft Speed: 1 pt of Speed for every 100 km/h (round up past 50)

Helicopter speed: 1/3 of actual maximum speed in km/h

Spotter Plane/UAV speed is equal to their normal air speed as calculated for fighter-bombers and bombers. The higher the number the wider the circle the Spotter Plane will fly.

Ground Speed equation is: max km/h speed divided by 3 = SPEED in hexes.

AA guns 25mm or less have 1 movement point. Larger weapons have 0.

AAMGs have a move of 2.

Certain types of terrain are are likely to cause breakdowns to vehicles entering them. This is based on distance/speed travelled (faster is worse), movement class (2WD is worse than track) and experience and vehicle weight.

[Marcello]

"Planes and helicopters: we have changed structure of arms of planes and helicopters to realistic combinations."

Speaking of which is there some online source listing typical payloads for soviet planes?
Sources typically list what they can carry in theory
but not what is usually done in practice.
Specifically what sort of weapons loads would be most common for the SU-17/20/22 and the MIG-23BN?

[KraMax]

Marcello - thanks for attention to our OOB.

I will give to you links on information sources in which it is in detail told about typical arms of planes on each model. Unfortunately links only in Russian, but you can take advantage of the translator.

Usually about typical arms of these planes it is written in the end of the text.
And the full list of every possible arms is after specifications in the end of page.

Here link on a site of the translator: http://www.online-translator.com/default.asp? lang=en
In it you can translate even sites entirely with preservation of formatting of the text.

If you have difficulties or you do not have time for employment by translate. I can make in detail to you normal translate of typical arms of these planes.

Su-17
http://www.airwar.ru/enc/fighter/su17.html
http://www.airwar.ru/enc/fighter/su17_1.html
http://www.airwar.ru/enc/fighter/su17m.html
http://www.airwar.ru/enc/fighter/su17m2.html
http://www.airwar.ru/enc/fighter/su17m3.html

Su-20 export
http://www.airwar.ru/enc/fighter/su20.html

Su-22 export
http://www.airwar.ru/enc/fighter/su22.html

Mig-23BN
http://www.airwar.ru/enc/fighter/mig23bn.html

On these pages all is written. From the moment of creation of the plane till the moment of its recycling. It is described as in what year it is made, by whom it is made, what arms, what equipment were established, etc.

If you have problems with translate - write here about it and I will work over text translation on arms of these planes.
Why you were interested by these planes?

[KraMax]

Su-17 typical arms:

Fighting loading to 4000 kg is suspended by a lump on 6 hardpoints: 2 body and 4 fly. On Su-17M3 the quantity hardpoints is increased on 2. Su-17M4 has already 10 hardpoints: 4 body and 6 fly. Fighting loading is raised to 4250 kg. Thus 2 central hardpoints are intended only for a suspension bracket Ur of a class "air-air" R-60.

The first serial Su-17 did not bear the operated weapon of a class "air-surface". On the subsequent updatings this lack has been eliminated, and on 2 internal hardpoints UR (Manual Missile) or KAB of various types are suspended. Su-17M first took Kh-23M and anti-radar Kh-28. Later the nomenclature has been expanded by possibility of suspension bracket Kh-25 and Kh-29L. Su-17M2 also bore all aforementioned systems. The given updating of the first in family Su-17 has received UR R-60 on arms. Su-17M4 are capable to bear the most various scale of operated arms: KAB-500l bombs; corrected rockets S-25L; UR of types Kh-25ML/MR, Kh-27, Kh-29L/T; anti-radar UR Kh-25MP, Kh-27, Kh-58.

All updatings undertake in blocks NURS of types S-5, S-8 or S-13, and also single NURS S-24 and S-25. Among other types of pendant arms are registered aerial bombs of calibres from 100 to 500 kg; cluster bombs RBK-250 and RBK-500, gun containers KMGU; incendiary tanks. Under SChK 2 1156-l or 830-l PTB also are equipped.

Su-17 And Su-17M were equipped bombing sight PBK-2 and shooting ASP-5ND-7. On Su-17M2 instead of the last has been established more perfect ASP-17.

The equipment of management the "Delta" placed in the pendant container was applied to prompting UR Kh-23M. For prompting Kh-25ML and Kh-29L the laser station "Projector" also placed in the pendant container is used. On Su-17M2, besides the given station, the laser range finder-tseleukazatel “Fon-1400” is established. On Su-17M3 instead of it sight ASP-17, the indicator of direct visibility, station of the prevention of radar-tracking radiation “Sirena-3”, etc. The onboard radar-tracking equipment is established more perfect “Klen-54”. Also are established to shoot traps and dipoles KDS-23 and ASo-2V. Some planes for the control of results of bombing have chamber AFA-39.

[KraMax]

At Su-20/22 the arms stood about same, and the equipment was worse, than at the Soviet planes.

[KraMax]

Mig-23BN Differed from Mig-23B only a design and systems of an aiming and tracking stations.

Arms:
23-mm of down GSh-23L (200 cartridges).
Fighting loading - 3000 kg.
The rocket arms include four blocks of NURS UB-32A with 32 rockets S-5 (51 mm) or four blocks B-8M (20 NURS S-8, 80 mm). Under a wing can be suspended two UR Kh-23, operated on a beam by means of station of prompting Delta-ng (it is mounted over the left motionless part of a wing). Rockets of small range R-3S of a class are applied To self-defence air - air with TGS.
Can take aboard to 18 bombs in calibre 50 - 100 kg, 8 - calibre 250 kg or 6 - calibre 500 kg. The suspension bracket of bombing cartridges of RBK-250, concrete penetrative ammunition BetAB-250 and BetAB-500, armour-piercing bombs, tanks with napalm is possible. Bombs of small calibre take places on many locks holders MDBZ-U6-68.
The suspension bracket under a wing of two gun containers UPK-23-250 from 23-mm gun GSh-23 (250 cartridges) is supposed.

[KraMax]

Sorry for my bad English.
If to you something is not clear - ask me and I will try to explain to you it more precisely.

[Suhiir]

I, for one, am quite interested in what you're doing.
But . . .


KraMax said:
We have changed almost all: ... power of the weapon,...



This has me rather concerned.
I know from my work on my new USMC OOB that while many of the weapons could use a tweak or two any comprehensive modifications can cause problems as the new values may no longer be compatible with the ones in every other OOB.

[Marcello]

"Why you were interested by these planes?"

I am reworking the iraqi OOB and I am checking planes weapons loads. For the early planes like
MIG-15bis/MIG-17F/MIG-19S etc it is relatively easy: they have 2-4 hardpoints which can carry a very limited selection of bombs/rockets. For some others I found some typical weapons loads (for example four FAB-250 for some MIG-21 variants).
Later things get more difficult: let's make an example of my problem.
The Su-7BMK is listed to have six hardpoints, each of which in theory can carry several types of weapons (ranging from FAB-250 to S-24 rockets).
In practice however four of those hardpoints are always used for fuel tanks. So the typical payload would be limited to something like two FAB-500 or two UB-16 rocket pods.
But more capable planes like the SU-20/22 or the MIG-23BN
can carry more and different types of weapons.
Would a SU-17M3/SU-22M typically carry two rockets pods + two RBK-500 + two FAB-250 rather than two RBK-250 + four FAB-250?
What did the soviet air force arm them with usually?
I wanted to know a few typical configurations for these planes and the MIG-23BN. I will see what I can get with the automatic trsnalation.

[KraMax]

Suhiir
-------------------------
Thanks for the shown interest to our OOB.

Certainly we have not changed all power of the weapon. We have changed only that weapon which power has been specified wrongly. For an example:

weapon 015 RPG-2 - we have established capacity HEAT 20
weapon 019 RPG-7V - we have established capacity HEAT 50 - since it fairly.
weapon 082 4x30mm guns - we have changed 2 guns to 4 guns since this weapon cannot separately shoot and shoots on the purpose in a complex.
Etc.
Also we have worked over accuracy of our weapon according to the game formula.
Also we have worked dates of creation of the weapon and weapon receipt in armies.

At changes of these data we put before ourselves aim to make fair OOB.

We do not think that our changes will break balance of game...
Though it is final, if developers of game accept our changes, we will search for our arms in others OOBs here again at a forum to suggest to change values.

[KraMax]

Marcello
----------------------
Whence at you such data on SU-7BMK?
Su-7BMK - It is made on the basis of Su-7BKL. Su-7BKL - the quantity of fuel is increased, the design is changed, equipment EW etc is added.
Su-7BMK - Had 8 hardpoints. Su-7BMK - differed from Su-7BKL older equipment. The truth is written that Egyptians without the permission - modernised Su-7BMK and have increased quantity hardpoints to 8 pieces. Then the USSR and made them with 8 hardpoints = 3300 kg.
Usually on all series Su-7 - 2 fuel tanks were established only. About 4 fuel tanks I have found nothing.

[KraMax]

Marcello
----------------------
Planes Su-17M3.

Su-17M3 Is improved Su-17M2. Other equipment, is more than fuel.
It is written that it can to bear on itself(himself) 8 aviation bombs, everyone on 500 kg.
Also it is written that since 1981 rockets Kh-27PS, Kh-25MP, Kh-58U were typical arms of many regiments of the USSR. But always for a fighting problem planes armed with those arms which were necessary for problem performance. I am for example confident that during war in Afghanistan - these planes on armed with it rockets about which I has written, they armed with bombs, NURS etc.

[Marcello]

"Whence at you such data on SU-7BMK?"

A piece here and there on the internet.

"Usually on all series Su-7 - 2 fuel tanks were established only. About 4 fuel tanks I have found nothing."

I have rechecked my notes. What I found is that
fuel tanks could be carried on the two under fuselage pylons and starting from the SU-7BM even on the two inner underwing pylons. But you are correct, four fuel tanks was a "ferry" configuration and usually was not done in practice.

"Su-7BMK - Had 8 hardpoints. Su-7BMK - differed from Su-7BKL older equipment. The truth is written that Egyptians without the permission - modernised Su-7BMK and have increased quantity hardpoints to 8 pieces. Then the USSR and made them with 8 hardpoints = 3300 kg."

When was this carried out?

[KraMax]

First deliveries Su-7BMK were in the middle of 1966. They participated in war with Israel, the truth not successfully - from 64 planes 27 has been destroyed on the earth in the first day of war on Jule, 5th, 1967.
After that the USSR has put many these planes for Egypt (it is not specified how much precisely). With assistance of the West German firm, the Egyptian planes have been modernised and on them have established in addition 2 hardpoints. Exact date it is not informed, but it is possible to assume what is it has occurred in the end of 1967 or in the beginning to the middle of 1968 since in 1969 of the USSR also built planes with the same quantity hardpoints.

[KraMax]

more new photos for Russian units:

Naval Inf:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a1.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a1.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a2.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a2.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a3.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a3.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a4.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a4.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a5.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a5.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a6.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a6.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a7.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a7.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a8.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a8.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a9.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a9.jpg)

Naval Inf too:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/m01.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/m01.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/m02.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/m02.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/m03.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/m03.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/m04.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/m04.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/m05.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/m05.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/m06.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/m06.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/m07.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/m07.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/m08.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/m08.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/m09.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/m09.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/m10.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/m10.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/m11.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/m11.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/m12.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/m12.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/m13.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/m13.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/m14.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/m14.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/m15.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/m15.jpg)

Vasilek AT:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/vasilek.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/vasilek.jpg)

Perfect foto T-64b:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/t_64b.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/t_64b.jpg)

Sprut-SD:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/sprut-sd.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/sprut-sd.jpg)

Naval Osa SAM:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/osa_naval.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/osa_naval.jpg)

Naval Nona-SVK:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/nona-svk_naval.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/nona-svk_naval.jpg)

ATGM Konkurs in moto:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/konkurs-moto.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/konkurs-moto.jpg)

Ka-50:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/ka50.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/ka50.jpg)

Naval Grad MRLS:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/grad_naval.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/grad_naval.jpg)

Buratino (24 guns):
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/buratino_a.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/buratino_a.jpg)

BTR-80:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/btr-80.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/btr-80.jpg)

BMPT:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/bmpt.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/bmpt.jpg)

Thanks for attention.

[KraMax]

ATGM Konkurs-Moto:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/9.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/9.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/konk.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/konk.jpg)

BTR-ZD Skrezhet:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a_1181.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a_1181.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a_1182.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a_1182.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a_1183.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a_1183.jpg)

ZU-23:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a_1185.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a_1185.jpg)

VDV attack:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a_1192.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a_1192.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a_1239.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a_1239.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a_2025.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a_2025.jpg)

PKM MG:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a_1217.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a_1217.jpg)

Pecheneg MG:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a_1236.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a_1236.jpg)

AGS-17:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/ags17.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/ags17.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/ags17_02.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/ags17_02.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/ags17_06.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/ags17_06.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/ags17_07.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/ags17_07.jpg)

122mm Artillery (D30 ???):
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/art.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/art.jpg)

Giatsint-B:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/giacint-b_001.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/giacint-b_001.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/giacint-b_003.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/giacint-b_003.jpg)

MSTA-B:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/msta-b_001.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/msta-b_001.jpg)

Naval Inf:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/naval.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/naval.jpg)

NSV HMG:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/nsv.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/nsv.jpg)

HY Sniper:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/sniper.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/sniper.jpg)

T-80:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/t80.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/t80.jpg)

Tank transport:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/tank_transport.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/tank_transport.jpg)

Tigr utility car:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/tiger.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/tiger.jpg)

Spetsnaz:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a_45.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a_45.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a_219.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a_219.jpg)

Radio:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a_41.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/a_41.jpg)

[Marcello]

Another question on the SU-17/SU-20 series. I have seen diagrams showing that pylons capable of carrying three
FAB-100 could be installed on the hardpoints. Was the same possible with pylons carrying two FAB-250? Or only one of these 250kg weapons could be carried on each hardpoint?

[KraMax]

In article on this page
http://www.airwar.ru/history/locwar/afgan/su17/su17.html
It is written that on planes Su-17 6 locks holders for bombs i.e. on 1 hardpoint=6 bombs of calibre from 50-100 kg could to be established. But also it is written that in the conditions of strong heat and a hilly terrain by these planes they were not applied since these planes bore 2 more fuel tanks on 800 litres.
Unfortunately about 250 kg of a bomb and this plane Su-17 I have not found exact data, but it is possible to assume the following: there were 4 locks holders of bombs for 50-250 kg of bombs and 2 locks holders for 500 kg of bombs. Judging by load-carrying capacity Su-17 it would be possible assume that it could to bear 4 or more 250 kg of a bomb.

Drawing Su-17:
http://www.airwar.ru/other/draw2/su17_z.zip

I have answered your question? Or to look still for the given?

[PlasmaKrab]

KraMax, thanks for all teh pics, I guess I can use some of them?
I'll try to get you my innumerable Russian/Soviet lbms some time, but I'm excessively busy these days. Turning the pics you posted to lbms in planned as well, but the same applies there.

[KraMax]

Certainly you can use any pictures and photos.
PlasmaKrab - I very much respect the work made you http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

[KraMax]

We have found one more error.
Unit 548 - Scout Team - change date avalable from on 102 (2002 year) to 120 (2020 year)
We have changed our OOB-file. To download it it is possible from the first page of this theme or from here: www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf)

[KraMax]

more photos and pictures for units:

Artillery - 2S3M, 2S5, 2S7:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/2c3m_2s5_2s7.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/2c3m_2s5_2s7.JPG)

Tunguska:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/2s6m-tunguska-m.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/2s6m-tunguska-m.JPG)

ASU-57:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/asu-57.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/asu-57.JPG)

ASU-85:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/asu-85.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/asu-85.JPG)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/asu-85_2.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/asu-85_2.JPG)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/asu-85_3.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/asu-85_3.JPG)

BMD-1:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/bmd-1.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/bmd-1.JPG)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/bmd-1_2.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/bmd-1_2.JPG)

BMD-2:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/bmd-2.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/bmd-2.JPG)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/bmd-2_2.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/bmd-2_2.JPG)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/bmd-2_3.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/bmd-2_3.JPG)

BMD-3:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/bmd-3.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/bmd-3.JPG)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/bmd-3_2.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/bmd-3_2.JPG)

BTR-50P:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/btr-50p.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/btr-50p.JPG)

BTR-50PK Finish army:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/btr-50pk_finish_army.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/btr-50pk_finish_army.JPG)

BTR-50PK Soviet Mech Inf:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/btr-50pk_ussr_mech_inf.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/btr-50pk_ussr_mech_inf.JPG)

BTR-60P, BTR-70, BTR-80:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/btr-60p_btr-70_btr-80.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/btr-60p_btr-70_btr-80.JPG)

BTR-80 with AntiHEAT armour:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/btr-80_with_armour1.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/btr-80_with_armour1.JPG)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/btr-80_with_armour2.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/btr-80_with_armour2.JPG)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/btr-80_with_armour3.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/btr-80_with_armour3.JPG)

BTR-D:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/btr-d.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/btr-d.JPG)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/btr-d_2.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/btr-d_2.JPG)

BTR-RD "Robot":
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/btr-rd-robot.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/btr-rd-robot.JPG)

MT-LB, ASU-57, ASU-85, 2S1:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/mtlb_acu-57_asu_85_2s1.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/mtlb_acu-57_asu_85_2s1.JPG)

NONA-S:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/nona-s.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/nona-s.JPG)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/nona-s_2.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/nona-s_2.JPG)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/nona-s_3.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/nona-s_3.JPG)

PT-2000 (Soviet PT-76 amphibian tank) Indonesian army:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/pt-2000_indonesia_army.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/pt-2000_indonesia_army.JPG)

PT-76, PT-76B:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/pt-76.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/pt-76.JPG)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/pt-76_modernized_1981.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/pt-76_modernized_1981.JPG)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/pt-76_naval_inf.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/pt-76_naval_inf.JPG)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/pt-76b_naval_inf.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/pt-76b_naval_inf.JPG)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/pt-76b_naval_inf_2.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/pt-76b_naval_inf_2.JPG)

PT-76B Polish army:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/pt-76b_polish_army.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/pt-76b_polish_army.JPG)

SU-122-54:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/su-122-54.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/su-122-54.JPG)

Artillery Sviristelka:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/sviristelka.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/sviristelka.JPG)

T-44:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-44.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-44.JPG)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-44_2.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-44_2.JPG)

T-54 series:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-54-1.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-54-1.JPG)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-54-2.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-54-2.JPG)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-54-3.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-54-3.JPG)

T-54 modernisation:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-54a.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-54a.JPG)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-54a_2.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-54a_2.JPG)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-54b.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-54b.JPG)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-54b_2.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-54b_2.JPG)

T-64:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-64a.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-64a.JPG)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-64a_2.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-64a_2.JPG)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-64b.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-64b.JPG)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-64b1.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-64b1.JPG)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-64b1_2.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-64b1_2.JPG)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-64bv.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-64bv.JPG)

T-72:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-72.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-72.JPG)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-72b.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-72b.JPG)

T-80:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-80bv.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-80bv.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-80bv_2.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-80bv_2.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-80u.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-80u.JPG)

T-90:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-90.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/t-90.JPG)

ZSU-23 (Anti-Air) or Shilka:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/zsu-23-4m.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/zsu-23-4m.JPG)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/zsu-23-4V.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/zsu-23-4V.JPG)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/zsu-23-4V1.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/zsu-23-4V1.JPG)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/zsu-23-4V1_2.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/zsu-23-4V1_2.JPG)

ZSU-57-2:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/zsu-57-2.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/zsu-57-2.JPG)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/zsu-57-2_2.JPG (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/2/zsu-57-2_2.JPG)

thanks for attention

[KraMax]

We have changed our OOB:

New unit:
unit 197 - Tu-2S - Level Bomber with 4x500kg bomb

Have corrected errors:
unit 279 - 2S4 Tulpan - Top Armour=0
formation 720 - Level Bobmers - available from 1946

To download it it is possible from the first page of this theme or from here: www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf)

[KraMax]

Happy New Year!!! All!!! Hurahhh...

[KraMax]

New photos:

Air OP Hello
Ka-137
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/3/ka-137.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/3/ka-137.jpg)

Mig-17
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/3/mig-17.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/3/mig-17.jpg)

Mig-17 vs F-4
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/3/mig-17_vs_f-4.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/3/mig-17_vs_f-4.jpg)

Mig-21
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/3/MiG-21SMT_2.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/3/MiG-21SMT_2.jpg)

Mig-23ML
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/3/mig-23ml.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/3/mig-23ml.jpg)

Mig-23MLD
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/3/mig-23mld.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/3/mig-23mld.jpg)

Mig-23MLD Syria
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/3/mig-23mld_syria.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/3/mig-23mld_syria.jpg)

Su-17M3
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/3/su-17m3.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/3/su-17m3.jpg)

Su-17M3/M4
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/3/su-17m3_m4.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/3/su-17m3_m4.jpg)

Su-17M4
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/3/su-17m4.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/3/su-17m4.jpg)

Su-25
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/3/su-25.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/3/su-25.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/3/su-25_2.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/3/su-25_2.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/3/su-25_3.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/3/su-25_3.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/3/su-25_4.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/3/su-25_4.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/3/su-25ub.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/3/su-25ub.jpg)

Perfect foto SU-34:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/3/su-34.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/3/su-34.jpg)

[KraMax]

We have changed our OOB:

New unit:
Unit 452 - Mi-24P - without ATGM weapon, USSR have here in Afgan war.

Have corrected errors:
unit 001 - T-34/76 - shells = HE 75, AP 21, Sabot 4

To download it it is possible from the first page of this theme or from here: www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf)

[KraMax]

We have changed our OOB:

New weapon:
weapon 240 - GSh-23L - cannon for hello (class 5)

New unit:
Unit 453 - Mi-24P - without ATGM weapon + weapon 240, USSR have here in Afgan war.

Have corrected errors:
unit 002 - T-34/85 - shells = HE 36, AP 14, Sabot 5
unit 003 - T-34/85 - shells = HE 30, AP 14, Sabot 5, HEAT 6; change vision=20; last year 1981.
unit 054 and 055 - T-72 - change shells quantity = 39.

Remove unit:
unit 023 - T-55AM1 - export variant

===============
To download it it is possible from the first page of this theme or from here: www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf)

[KraMax]

We have specified data on systems 2S25 Sprut-SD and have changed our OOB

Remove units:
091, 092, 094 - 2S25 Sprut-SD

Change units:
093 and 095 - 2S25 Sprut-SD - from 2007 until 2020

Change formation:
063, 064, 065 - available until 1985
037, 038, 039 - available from 2007

================================================== ========
To download it it is possible from the first page of this theme or from here: www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf)

[Marcello]

A couple of questions. What did the T-55A have in terms of fire control more than the baseline T-55?
What's the warhead size of the missile used by the Tunguska, the one here in the West call SA-19 Grison?
Thanks for any info.

[KraMax]

Marcello
------------------
for tank T-55:

"Since 1960 the changes raising it technical characteristics have been entered into a tank design. Them concerned a duplicating hydropneumatic drive of management of a 19-disk main friction clutch, installation of the prismatic device at the tipper-of and air-liquid system of clearing of viewing devices of the mechanic-driver."

machine translate
----------
Tank T-55A slightly differed from tank T-55.

[KraMax]

Marcello
----------------
for Tunguska:

Warhead size missle for Tunguska - from 76mm to 152mm. WH=76mm - in the description it is spoken that in a rocket the special explosive and amazing elements (shrapnel new type) are applied - for couples of it it was possible to reduce considerably weight missle.

source Russian: http://pvo.guns.ru/tunguska/tunguska_02.htm#2

If it is interesting to you to read all source - I can help to translate it into English.

[Marcello]

KraMax said:
Marcello
------------------
for tank T-55:

"Since 1960 the changes raising it technical characteristics have been entered into a tank design. Them concerned a duplicating hydropneumatic drive of management of a 19-disk main friction clutch, installation of the prismatic device at the tipper-of and air-liquid system of clearing of viewing devices of the mechanic-driver."

machine translate
----------
Tank T-55A slightly differed from tank T-55.



What I meant to ask was this: in your OOB unit 15 has a FC
value of 5, while units 16/17/18 and so on have a FC value of 7.
Even in the cold war mod there is a similar jump from 5 to 8 between T-55s. I am assuming that the T-55 got some FC improvement (maybe not necessarily part of the T-55A package but around that time anyway), but what exactly?

[KraMax]

Marcello
--------------
Tank T-55 batch production has begun in 1958, but in 1960 this tank modernise and continue to let out under the same name - T-55. In 1963 start to let out new tank T-55A.
T-55 (1960) differed from T-55 (1958) here than:

"Since 1960 the changes raising it technical characteristics have been entered into a tank design. Them concerned a duplicating hydropneumatic drive of management of a 19-disk main friction clutch, installation of the prismatic device at the tipper-of and air-liquid system of clearing of viewing devices of the mechanic-driver."

I.e. for change Fire Control in game on this tank have established for the tipper-of of a gun of the tank - the new device of an aiming.

Sorry for my bad English. If you have not understood me - write about it to me and I will try to translate to another the text.

source (Russian):
http://armoured.vif2.ru/t-55.htm
http://armor.kiev.ua/Tanks/Modern/T55/index.php
http://www.militaryparitet.com/nomen/russia/bron/tanki/data/ic_nomenrussiabrontanki/9/

[Marcello]

"I.e. for change Fire Control in game on this tank have established for the tipper-of of a gun of the tank - the new device of an aiming"

The translation of this was not very succesful but the important part is that the fire control got some improvements and that is what I wanted to know.
Now I noticed another thing: the T-62 has a
RF value of 8. To my knowledge however the T-62 retained stadiametric rangefinding. Was it really better than the
T-55 and if so how? Better quality ? Additional features?
Again thanks for any info.

[KraMax]

Tank T-55 had a sight - TSh2B-32P.
At tank T-62 have a new - modernized a sight - TSh2B-41

Here that write in sources:

"On T-62 have applied the improved sights and prompting devices, for example, telescopic sight TSh-2B-41 allowed tankmen to conduct exact fire on a distance to 4 thousand in m. we Will remind, that, according to foreign military experts, for fights on the European battlefield would be enough and 2,5 3 thousand in m. commander turrets have built in a binocular periscope rotating roof with fivefold increase in the afternoon and quadruple - at night. For the tipper-of also have entered two similar devices with range of action of the Watch facility of 800 m. for the mechanic-driver and charging have left same, as by the previous tank."

source (Russian):
http://armor.kiev.ua/Tanks/Modern/T62/T62_1.html

other source:
http://www.btvt.narod.ru/uchebka/tshb32p.htm
http://www.btvt.narod.ru/4/t62.htm
http://btvt.narod.ru/4/t62weapon.htm
http://armoured.vif2.ru/t-62.htm

Sorry for my bad English.

[KraMax]

We have found one more error.

change units:
unit 104 - T-10M - available from 1959 until 1993; Range Finder=10; Vision=20; MG weapons change - weapon 2=14.5mm KPV TMG, weapon 3=14.5mm KPV AAMG.

change formantion:
008 and 009 - Haavy tanks formations - available until 1993

To download it it is possible from the first page of this theme or from here: www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf)

[Marcello]

Now some organizational question. I see that rifle companies (formation n 627 and so on) in your OOB have an heavy machine gun platoon attached to them. Was it actually done?
And in general what kind of support was available? From what I read from the tables six 82/120mm mortars were available at the battalion support company but what others weapons were there? How many recoiless? AAMgs? Were 60mm mortars used?
I am asking this because I am reworking the afghan OOB and from what I have read so far it followed soviet patterns.
Yet they require several changes, as I imagine the DRA troops were not usually carrying around SA-7s and such, for obvious reasons.
Thanks in advance for any info.

[KraMax]

Hello Marcello.

In the Russian or Soviet army in general there are no such divisions (Rifle Inf). We do not have the pedestrian infantry. We have mech rifle inf. But in game should be provided - also infantry without armour APC. At us this infantry - the usual mechanised infantry, without APC. As it is supposed that in such structure the infantry usually defends - that we have for a change put them 12.7mm machine guns. In the present states of the mechanised infantry - at all of us it is precisely specified in ours OOB.
In Afghanistan at us usually were at war Air Assault, Mech Inf, it is less Naval Inf.
At all of us armies are made very precisely (including support platoons - 82\120mm mortars, MG, AGS etc.) - except Rifle Inf - these armies at us are made on a basis Mech Inf.
Also it is exact at us years of change of organizational regular structure of armies are made.

[Marcello]

So basically if I understand correctly that heavy MG platoon is a sort of compensation for the absence of the BTR/BMP, rather than a standard formation.

[KraMax]

Hello Marcello.

No. You have misunderstood me. I spoke about that that - Rifle Inf = Mech Inf winthout BTR/BMP. As such variant of structure of divisions is possible only in defend basically in support to these divisions gave heavy mg.
Mech Inf with BTR/BMP - we have completely made a standard platoon of support in our OOB.

Best regards

sorry for my bad English

[KraMax]

We have found one more error.

change units:
unit 099 - IS-2M - weapon 4 - remove.
unit 518 - ASU-85 - weapon 3 - add 12.7mm DShK AAMG, change Radio=91.

change formantion:
formation 009 - Haavy tank Pl - unit 3 - remove.

To download it it is possible from the first page of this theme or from here: www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf)

[DRG]

KraMax said:

change formantion:
formation 009 - Heavy tank Pl - unit 3 - remove.




If a Heavy tank platoon is only two tanks that makes your heavy tank company only 5 tanks.

Only five tanks in a Heavy Tank company ? Not much of a company----- more like a platoon.

Don

[Companion]

I remember using 5 tank Heavy Tank Co. in my SPWAW soviet 1941 campaign...

[DRG]

Companion said:
I remember using 5 tank Heavy Tank Co. in my SPWAW soviet 1941 campaign...



Let me know if you find a better source....OK ?

I'm interested in any actual proof there were five tanks in a Heavy tank company before or after WW2. The info I have says 7 and 10.

Don

[KraMax]

Hello Don.

I have found it in descriptions fighting application of tanks IS's.

"In February, 1944 regiments of the break completed with tanks KV's available as a part of Red Army, have been translated on new states. Has simultaneously begun formation of the new parts equipped with cars IS, which steels to be called as heavy tank regiments. Thus it even at formation appropriated the name" Guards ". On staff in new regiments 375 persons of the staff, four tank company IS's (21 tank), company submachine gunners, company technical maintenance, the antiaircraft battery, sappers, economic platoons and a regimental medical aid station were."

http://www.armour.kiev.ua/Tanks/WWII/IS2/is2_3.html

and wiki:
http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki / % D0%98%D0%A1-2

[DRG]

Well, I can tell you one thing for certain....that automated translator makes a real mess of things. The best I can come up with from that is in 1944 a regiment of IS tanks was four companies totalling 21 tanks. Which, if this is true, would be five per company with one tank reserved for the regimental commander. Under wartime conditions I can see the need for company formations that could be expanded but it is difficult to believe than anyone would seriously call five tanks a "company" when it's a platoon everywhere else !

Maybe that's what is said.....and maybe that's for 1944, not post war and not applicable before 1944 IF that is truly the case.

As well, that first link doesn't work and the second doesn't go anywhere useful to the discussion.

What else do you have ?

Don

[KraMax]

In all these sources it is spoken about that that in tank to a regiment was 21 tank - 1 tank for the commander of a regiment.

Guards heavy tank regiment of break.

http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki / % D0%9E%D1%82%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BB%D1%8C%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0 %B9 _ % D0%B3%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%B9%D1%81%D0 %BA%D0%B8%D0%B9 _ % D1%82%D1%8F%D0%B6%D1%91%D0%BB%D1%8B%D0%B9 _ % D1%82%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2%D1%8B%D0%B9 _ % D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%BA
http://mk-armour.narod.ru/1998/01/04.htm
http://mk-armour.narod.ru/1998/No3.htm
http://mk-armour.narod.ru/1998/03/03.htm

Here the small transfer describing structure and a principle of creation of such divisions:

Trial variant of creation of such divisions
"To the operation beginning« Uranium »it has been generated a little OGvTTP, armed with heavy tanks KV-1s. On staff of the end of 1942 the regiment had 4 company on 5 linear tanks and 1 car of the commander of the regiment, all tanks of a regiment were equipped with radio stations. Number of a regiment made 214 persons, from them 105 it was necessary on crews of heavy tanks. The others were in structure of a staff of a regiment, repair company, administrative, supplying and medical services. For supply, and communications the regiment could have investigations some not armour vehicles - lorries, jeeps and motorcycles. Fighting application has shown sharply increased abilities OGvTTP in comparison with tank cases of the beginning of 1942 on break of defence of the opponent."

And still:

"Besides, perfection of German anti-tank artillery has led to that the reservation of the Soviet tanks has already ceased to be sufficient. Arriving in 1942 in the increasing quantities regarding Wermakht 75-mm anti-tank gun Pak 40 had no problems in defeat T-60 and T-34 from any distance and represented more than essential threat for KV-1, whose booking could protect the car only on certain distances and course corners. Therefore the management of Red Army had been made very important two conclusions - for break well and beforehand become stronger opponent it is necessary to apply the divisions equipped same (in order to avoid problems with supply) and well armour heavy tanks. For successful overcoming of defence of the enemy the massed application of tanks, but with their as much as possible flexible management and their close interaction with infantry and artillery is necessary. The decision was accepted, that to most full answering these conditions base unit is the heavy tank regiment number in 21 car. As these divisions should crack originally defence of the enemy with all following consequences in the form of losses, etc. For increase of fighting spirit of staff have decided to appropriate at once to separate tank regiments at formation an honorary title Guards with all following from it privileges. "

Here it is not clear in what precisely to year these states in 1942 or 1944 have been created. Probably about 1944 it is spoken as about a year of creation of "Guards" tank regiments with tanks IS...

p.s. sorry for my Bad English and my bad machine translator.

[DRG]

OK. Please tell me what does this prove about post war formations ? I can see in 1944 this formation was created to utilize the new IS tanks better----- so granted----- There does appear to be a case for 5 tank companies but only in early 1944 and so far, only during the war.

Don

[KraMax]

The matter is that during war and after war there were regiments of heavy tanks and a brigade of heavy tanks. All of them Guards. Probably in brigades of heavy tanks there was other organizational-regular structure. I yet have not found these data. I will search further http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

[KraMax]

It is possible to make as follows: to leave an old variant of 7 tanks in company and new 5 tanks in company... I Think that both these have the right of a variant to existence.

[DRG]

OK but that does sound like a guess for those formations but I understand, sometimes we have to guess too. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

On an unrelated matter can you site the source you used to give the 107mm B-11 RCL in your OOB a range of 30 ? We don't use maximum ranges for those weapons. If we did the US M40 would get considerably more than it has now. I know that sometimes finding info on weapons is difficult because not every source uses the same terminology ( or the standard they use varies from source to source ) but we aim to use "Practical" or "effective" range for things like the B-11 and I haven't found anything that indicates the B-11 had a 1500m "Practical" or "effective" range but if you do I'm interested in reading about it.

The info I have on the B-11 is..

Range (m):
Max Effective: 450
Max Aimed Range: 1,400 (est)

a second source gives this information

BK-883 - HEAT. Projectile 7.51 kg. Complete round 12.5 kg. Warhead 1.06 kg
of RDX/Aluminium. GK-2 PIBD fuze. Range: 450 m (effective) 1,400 m (max).
Penetration 381 mm. Muzzle velocity


or 9 for max effective and 28 for max aimed range and a penetration of 38 when translated to game terms

in contrast the US M40 shows

Range (m):
Maximum Effective: 1,350
Maximum Range: 2,745


or 27 and 55 hex range.

This explains the 27 range in the game for the US M40 though I have seen other figures that give it "around 1100m m using HEAT and HEP-T" so that would be 22 but 22 and 27 are at least close. The difference between the 9 range we give the B-11 ( 450m ) and the 30 you give ( 1500 m ) isn't so close so I'm curious where that came from ? Perhaps someone used the Max range in error?

Don

[KraMax]

Hello Don.

I have found here this source:

http://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/crewwpns.htm

And with surprise has found out that data published here - erroneous or inexact.

The explanation idle time - at me is the passport (or the instruction) to gun RCL B-10 and to gun RCL B-11. In them I subtracted that the shell flies with speed of 400 metres per second / and as all of us know at HEAT shells penetration does not change with distance increase. Then it turns out that on the source of the information specified by me - a shell let out of gun B-10 or B-11 - will fall to the earth in 1 second? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Here the links to the table of shooting for gun B-10:

www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b-10/212324.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b-10/212324.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b-10/212326.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b-10/212326.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b-10/212327.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b-10/212327.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b-10/212328.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b-10/212328.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b-10/212329.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b-10/212329.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b-10/212330.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b-10/212330.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b-10/212331.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b-10/212331.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b-10/212332.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b-10/212332.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b-10/212333.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b-10/212333.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b-10/212334.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b-10/212334.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b-10/212335.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b-10/212335.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b-10/212336.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b-10/212336.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b-10/212337.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b-10/212337.jpg)

As we see aim range of shooting of 1430 metres. This distance a shell flies by for 5.3 seconds. Range of a direct shot - 390 metres. What is the direct shot is when the cross in a gun sight should be induced precisely at the tank (or the car) and for this purpose it is not necessary to enter amendments into a sight. But then it turns out if we take range of a direct shot then in game it is necessary to reduce this range at all tanks for a basis.

Aim range of shooting HEAT a shell - is specified in the table in a file 212333.jpg
Aim range of shooting HE a shell - is specified in the table in a file 212335.jpg

The item with. If I am interesting I can translate into English names of columns of tables.

Sorry for my bad English.

Best regards

[DRG]

Let's keep it short and simple. It makes it easier to translate

Ths source you quoted at the start agrees with all other data I have for that weapon. The effective range for the B-11 is 450 metres and the penetration is 380mm and effective range is the range we've used, or tried to use whenever possible, for all RCL's in the game.

Are you saying all the info on the B-11 available in English is wrong ?

Don

[KraMax]

I have shown you the table of shooting for a gun which stood out in army in hands crew this gun. What can be even more demonstrative than the instruction?
I speak about that that as you have told earlier, that probably there is some misunderstanding of the given information or difficulty of translate. I speak that it is impossible for instructions of range of shooting of guns B-10, B-11 and SPG-9 to use - data of range of a direct shot. These guns have a sight - with which help they can shoot on the distances specified by me.

[KraMax]

There was time when all English-speaking editions a rocket 9A4172 Vikhr - named a rocket 9M120. It was an error. And now many editions about it have written. But this modern weapon and it is interesting to people. And here RCL guns of manufacture of the USSR of 1954 - very few people now interest. I have only resulted the real table of shooting on which tipper-of of a gun could destroy the tank.

[DRG]

Showing me scans of a manual I can just barely read isn't very helpful, is it ?

The wrong name of ATGM and the range and penetration of a recoilless rifle have little in common. As you noted, the RCL has been around for years. It's difficult to believe that the known effective range for that weapon could be that far out given that to GET an " effective range " would require field testing and since the B11 has been around for 50+ years some testing must have been done to get that "effective " range

Yes?

Now, Andy and I have discussed this weapon in the past and questioned it's low range but every piece of info we can dig up ( and read ! ) gives the same results. The maximum AIMED range we have matches your info almost exactly. Where we diverge is in the effective range and as I said, that's the range we have been using for those weapons not the maximum range you can actually point and fire it.

Those scans, if I understood correctly what I could read, shows that weapon had a max range or 1430 m for the HEAT round. "which tipper-of a gun ( gun aimer ) could destroy the tank."

OK, lets assume for a minute that 1430m is correct and all the other info about "effective" range of 450m is wrong... even if we do accept that is the maximum range for that weapon that number translates to 28 hexes in game terms not 30.

Consider also..... maybe nobody could actually hit anything with it reliably beyond 450 metres despite what the manual says you should be able to do. EVERY army is guilty of that .

Also, you have 30 for a penetration for HEAT.... all the numbers we have shows 38. Where did 30 penetration come from ?

Don

[KraMax]

Unfortunately in technical characteristics in the instruction to B-11 there is no information about penetration.

Here link on technical characteristics B-11:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b10b11/804957.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b10b11/804957.jpg)

Here:
The second line - 450 metres - range of a direct shot
The fourth line - initial speed of flight HEAT of a shell - 400 metres per second

Kind of sight B-11:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b10b11/889919.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b10b11/889919.jpg)

HEAT a shot to gun B-11:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b10b11/899538.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b10b11/899538.jpg)

PHOTOS (pictures) B-10 and B-11

B-10;
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b10b11/270.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b10b11/270.jpg)

B-11:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b10b11/271.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b10b11/271.jpg)

========================================

Even our data here have an error - HEAT penetration shell B-11 should be even less 290mm:

http://www.militaryparitet.com/nomen/russia/arty/barty/protivotank/data/ic_nomenrussiaartybartyprotivotank/3/

The third line of the table.

[DRG]

KraMax said:Here:
The second line - 450 metres - range of a direct shot
The fourth line - initial speed of flight HEAT of a shell - 400 metres per second





And there's that 450m number again. It does keep popping up over and over. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif




KraMax said:
Even our data here have an error - HEAT penetration shell B-11 should be even less 290mm:




There will always be conflicting information even from the best source. Why assume that since this website gives a 29cm penetration for that weapon that it's correct and the previous info you had was wrong ? As I have said, western sources give that weapon a much higher penetration. Why ? I really don't know. I can only use the info I have and when there is conflict go with whatever I feel is more likely. To do the type of research to make ( almost ) everyone happy with these OOB's would require a staff the size of Janes !

This is why OOB work , no matter how well researched, will never be completely free of "controversy" even with 50 year old weapons systems. It's why any of us can only guess at the numbers we use in the OOB's for modern weapons and who knows, maybe 50 years from now someone might actually figure out what the correct numbers should be. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Don

[KraMax]

Don
-------------
One question:
I have convinced you on range of aim shooting?

[KraMax]

We have found more error.

change units:
units 129,130,131,132,133,219,748, - Armour Steel: HF=4, HS=3, HR=2, TF=4, TS=3, TR=2, Top=1; Armour HEAT: All=0.
unit 134,749 - Armour Steel: HF=4, HS=3, HR=2, TF=9, TS=7, TR=5, Top=2; Armour HEAT: TF=12, TS=10, TR=8, Top=2.

new formantion:
formation 067,066 - Haavy tank Pl3/Co7.

To download it it is possible from the first page of this theme or from here: www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf)

[DRG]

KraMax said:
Don
-------------
One question:
I have convinced you on range of aim shooting?



No. Not really. Your last post really proved my point.

There is a difference between the range a weapon can be used and it's effective range. Everything points to an effective range of 450 metres for that RCL. Even your last source gave 450 metres. I told you at the start if we used the max aimed range then all RCL's would take a huge leap in range but that ignores the numbers we have on "effective" range and that 450m number you quoted from the manual in the last post matches almost exactly the numbers I gave at the start

Range (m):
Max Effective: 450
Max Aimed Range: 1,400 (est)


and yours..

"Here:
The second line - 450 metres - range of a direct shot "

Now.... MAYBE that means it's effective range over open sights is 450 m and MAYBE the 1400m number is the maximum range it can be fired when a sighting device is used but that's a lot of "maybe's" isn't it ?

Don

[KraMax]

I consider that you are wrong.
I have given you the table of shooting for the given guns, I have given you even appearance of this sight in which for B-11 it is possible to see a scale of adjustment of range for shooting on these distances: www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b10b11/899538.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/b10b11/899538.jpg)
What for then these tables in general were necessary - there is this gun shoots only on 450 metres? For appearance? 450 metres are a range of a direct shot and it in any way an effective shot are different concepts. At HEAT shells does not decrease penetration with increase in range of shooting. Tanks of those years shoot approximately also the-tipper-of corrects range in a sight.

[DRG]

KraMax said:
I consider that you are wrong.





Go right ahead and consider that I am wrong. You won't be the first. It doesn't make you correct though anymore than it makes me wrong.

I'm tempted to continue this discussion until you understand my position on this but I suspect it's futile so I'm done with this for now. I have repeatedly told you that the maximum shooting range is NOT the same as the effective range which is what we use in the game and my sources and your source BOTH come back with the same 450m number. It matters NOT in the least what the sights are set for. There are military rifles from the early part of the 20th century with rear sights calibrated up to 2000 metres and beyond. The French Lebel M.1886/93 had sights calibrated to 2400m ! Does that make it the EFFECTIVE range for that rifle using iron sights? I don't think so.

I admit the 450m range seems short but so what ? We set out to use the reported effective range for recoilless rifles whenever we could and 450m was the range that came up over and over and over for the B-11 as it's effective AT range. Find me something better than the range printed on the sight for that and I will admit you made your point but so far you have not done that. I've said this already, just because the thing can shoot that far or has sights set up for that distance doesn't mean anybody could hit anything at that range and source after source after source says that effective range for a B11 was 450m.

Don

[Suhiir]

Let me try it this way.

The AK-47 has a maximum range of 2,653m according to one source I found.
However its maximum EFFECTIVE range is 3-400m.

As DRG has said, the maximum range of a weapon has very little to do with it's maximum effective range.

This has also been an ongoing "issue" with my USMC OOB rebuild.
According to the US Army official manual the max effective range of the M16A1 was 460m. In practice however they considered it to be about 300m.
Meanwhile the USMC continued to require each and every Marine to fire (and pass) a qualification course that required them to hit a man-size target at 500m.

So who's "right" ?
The book?
The Army standard practice?
The USMC standard practice?

[KraMax]

Hello Don.

Well that you recognise that an effective range for these guns too small, even against M40 RCL. I am assured that at M40 RCL - a real effective range almost same as well as at B-11.
How much I understand, game itself does small chance of destroy unit if unit is very far from a gun, also it is influenced by experience crew. Limiting range of our gun - you actually put us in is unreal long odds with armour units.

[DRG]

We used the effective range for these guns based on the information we could gather from a number of sources. It's NOT a matter of "Limiting range of our gun" when I'm using numbers supplied from various different sources and the Russian gun come up short in comparison. I didn't write the data we used, I just used the data that we had found. The data I have seen lately and in the past for the M40 gives it an EFFECTIVE range between 1100m and 1350m but I have also seen it as high as 2750m (maximum effective) and we don't use that number.... do we? So who was it that "assured" you the M40 equalled the B11 ?

I don't make up these numbers. They come from various sources and if I found source after source after source that said the B11 could fire 1400m effectively I would change it but I don't. What I find is source after source after source ( including one YOU provided ) saying 450m was it's effective range.

It has NOTHING to do with "Limiting" the Russian gun. WE still give it 38cm penetration because all the sources I find give it that value. Does anyone get on your case about "limiting" the B11 penetration to 30?

Andy and I discussed this earlier. He felt they were too low but all the research comes back to the original numbers being correct.

Don

[KraMax]

You have not understood me a little.
Let's assume that at 450 metres - B-11 100 % will be destroyed by the tank, from 600 metres - 80 % will be destroyed by the tank, from 1000 metres - 50 % will be destroyed by the tank, from 1300 metres - 10 % will be destroyed by the tank. All it not the present data, I have resulted these figures as an example. Approximately also it is possible to write and about M40 RCL.
Here is how you personally estimate effective range of shell B-11 in 450 metres when at this shell initial speed is equal 400 metres per second?
I am almost assured that data on the majority of English-speaking sites - are simply copied each other - therefore from them almost identical data.
There is an aim range of shooting at these guns... Certainly from a distance of 450 metres to get to the tank is easier than from a distance of 1000 metres. But to instructions it is written that 450 metres are range of a direct shot, instead of an effective shot. What is the direct shot? Is a shot on the tank through a sight needlessly to use a scale of amendments to a sight. It is not effective fire. HEAT the ammunition is not lost the penetration with increase in range of shooting, means about reduction of efficiency we can speak only as about accuracy reduction, instead of range of shooting. So? But as far as I know accuracy of shooting other indicators - parametre of the weapon define in game accuracy, fire control, range finder and exp. crew. So? Then and here range?

[Krok]

http://www.arld1.com/images/gifs/scopedemo13.gif--
On mine all problem in distinction of terms.
Shot, at which the trajectory does not rise above a line of an aiming above height of the target on all extent, has the name - a shot on <font color="green">point blank range </font>. Within the limits of <font color="green">point blank range </font>, during the intense moments of fight, shooting can be conducted without rearrangement of a sight.
In russian this range refers to "dalnost pryamogo vystrela"
or if translate it is literally -"range of direct shot"
So we have <font color="green">point blank range </font>for a B11 gun - 450 meters at initial speed of grenade 400m/s and weight of proectile near 7,5kg for 2m height target.
I think for m40a 106mm rcl at initial speed of grenade 500m/s <font color="green">point blank range </font> is near 600-800m .
For 106mm RCL m40a i saw some different definitions of range of fire :
1300-1500 m - effective range on the motionless targets, 1000-1100 m - effective range on the moving targets,
500-700 metres " best fighting range ",
about 2500-2700 metres with the modern aim equipment including a ballistic computer and new proectiles with high penetration.
IMHO 450metres for B11 RCL it " best fighting range ".

Alex (Krok)

[KraMax]

We have change units.

change units:
unit 003 - radio 93
unit 006 - radio 93
unit 007 - radio 93
unit 013 - radio 73
unit 014 - radio 93
unit 051 - radio 93
unit 052 - radio 93
unit 053 - radio 93
unit 125 - radio 92
unit 132 - radio 92
unit 133 - radio 92
unit 253 - radio 92
unit 254 - radio 92
unit 262 - radio 72
unit 268 - radio 63
unit 454 - radio 93
unit 497 - radio 73
unit 498 - radio 73
unit 600 - radio 62
unit 602 - radio 62
unit 749 - radio 92

To download it it is possible from here: www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf)

[KraMax]

I have forgotten to write about other changes:

change units:
units 394, 395, 396, 397 - change unit class Area SAM (16)

[KraMax]

We have change units.

change units:
units 041-065, 067-090 - change unit class from 135 (Main Battle Tank) to class 059 (MBT). Have changed class units to that-that, the computer at purchase of armies in mission to disembarkation to coast (beach) - does not buy for units class 135 (Main Battle Tank) the barge.

To download it it is possible from here: www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf)

[DRG]

does not buy for units class 135 (Main Battle Tank) the barge.



That will be fixed for the patch.

Don

[KraMax]

We have change units.

Remove units:
unit 770 - Rifle Inf Squad

To download it it is possible from here: www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf)

[KraMax]

New PICKLIST for our OOB USSR/Russia:

To download it it is possible from here:

www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/P0110000.Dat (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/P0110000.Dat)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/P0110001.dat (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/P0110001.dat)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/P0110002.dat (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/P0110002.dat)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/P0110003.dat (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/P0110003.dat)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/P0110004.dat (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/P0110004.dat)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/P0110005.dat (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/P0110005.dat)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/P0110006.dat (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/P0110006.dat)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/P0110007.dat (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/P0110007.dat)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/P0110008.dat (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/P0110008.dat)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/P0110009.dat (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/P0110009.dat)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/P0110010.dat (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/P0110010.dat)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/p0110020.dat (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/p0110020.dat)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/p0110021.dat (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/p0110021.dat)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/p0110022.dat (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/p0110022.dat)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/p0110023.dat (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/p0110023.dat)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/p0110024.dat (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/p0110024.dat)

www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/PK011000.dat (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/PK011000.dat)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/PK011001.dat (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/PK011001.dat)

www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/PK201100.dat (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/picklist/PK201100.dat)

[Warhero]

^Do I have to d/l all those picklists just for Russian oob??? Why?

[KraMax]

We have made PICKLIST for our OOB which we offer developers of game and developers OOBs to take for a basis in the workings out.
If you do not use our OOB - then you do not need to download these files.
These files are necessary that AI could buy correctly armies for game with you.

[Warhero]

I thought that WinMBT has only 1 picklist/nation/oob... So, if play as Russian (I mean with your oob), I must d/l all of picklists above, ok? Are they meant to describe different eras (50's, 60's, 70's, 80's etc. timelines)?

[Mobhack]

KraMax said:
We have made PICKLIST for our OOB which we offer developers of game and developers OOBs to take for a basis in the workings out.
If you do not use our OOB - then you do not need to download these files.
These files are necessary that AI could buy correctly armies for game with you.



I do hope that in your end user support documentation (on your website or as part of the download?), you have shown the end users how to back up and restore the default AI pick list, for whenever they need to revert to the default OOB. Also, how to handle what happens on a game patch update (which will assume the default AI pick list file set, if changes are needed).

As AI pick list editing is not a supported game functionality - it is for hackers only - any support for issues arising with your mod is all up to you.

Any end users who have applied your new pick files, without taking a backup of the requisite default files - their game is likely now toast, should they ever have a need to restore the default OOB (e.g to play the stock scenarios or campaigns)

Cheers
Andy

[KraMax]

Warhero said:
I thought that WinMBT has only 1 picklist/nation/oob... So, if play as Russian (I mean with your oob), I must d/l all of picklists above, ok? Are they meant to describe different eras (50's, 60's, 70's, 80's etc. timelines)?



Yes.

[KraMax]

Mobhack
-------------------
For our OOB I have established to myself on the computer one more copy of game.
Certainly, if people do not wish to establish to themselves in the computer one more copy of game they need to save preliminary old files that then they could be restored.

We do our OOB with a view of to show true in organizational structure of our armies, in technical characteristics of our technics, etc. We do not consider our OOB as MOD for game WinSPMBT. Therefore we do not supply our OOB with the documentation, etc. As we already wrote in the first post of this subject, we call you - developers and of other founders and designers MOD for your game - to pay attention to our OOB and to use it as a base variant for game.

I already a lot of time tried to discuss with visitors of this forum our OOB. On any our changes at us is links and proofs of our correctness. In our OOB we already discussed some details with the developer - DRG and other visitors and designers of this forum.

[DRG]

You may not consider your "OOB as MOD for game WinSPMBT" but WE DO. If you modify the game data outside of an offical release IT'S A MOD.

IT THAT FULLY UNDERSTOOD?
You and your "mod" of this OOB are guests here. Please try and remember that.

I have explained to you that your reorganization of the OOB's units, formations and weapons will cause every scenario to fail that uses the Russian OOB in any way and for experienced players who use your OOB this is not a problem as we have built mechanisms into the game that allow players the ability to re-install the default game OOB's and / or any custom OOB's but picklists are entirely different and it is YOUR responsibility to ensure that everyone using your OOB's and picklists understands that.

<font color="red"> This is a warning to anyone using this OOB and these new picklists or ANY third party OOB's or picklists </font>

First and formost. Neither Andy nor I nor Shrapnel games officially supports this . If anyone runs into trouble using these modified OOB's ond/or picklists, or ANY modification of the game OOB's or picklists, that does not come directly from us, the game designers, you are on your own.

If you install this modified Russian OOB into your game EVERY scenario pre-existing in the game that uses the Russian OOB IN ANY WAY, will fail to play properly.

If you install these modified picklists and then decide to stick with the original game OOB's you MUST re-install the original picklists issued with the game for the AI to pick Russian forces correctly. This applies to this OOB or any other modification of the game OOB's or picklists that may exist for download on this or any other forum

It would be a very good idea for anyone issuing modified picklist to include the original ones in a subfolder so players can switch back and forth without having to track down every file they need.

Don

[Mobhack]

Also, any persons who want to apply any future official patches to the game and not get things messed up, need to remember to restore the game that they are about to patch to the official AI pick list standard before applying the patch update.

Any AI pick list changes may only be a partial file-set update. This would likely cause "interesting" side effects, should you have third party AI picks in place, so restore the AI picks to standard before any patch is applied.

Also - any backup AI pick set for that OOB, whether taken by yourself, or in a zip provided by the third party, may well now be invalid since new files were issued inside the patch. This issue is up to the third-party AI pick list supplier to resolve, not us.

There should be no problems with third party modified OOBS which have no AI pick list changes and respect the original formation dates and types. The OOB swapper can be used for these just fine as described in the Game Guide to restore the official OOB before you play any stock scenarios, for example.

Cheers
Andy

[KraMax]

DRG said:
You may not consider your "OOB as MOD for game WinSPMBT" but WE DO. If you modify the game data outside of an offical release IT'S A MOD.

IT THAT FULLY UNDERSTOOD?
You and your "mod" of this OOB are guests here. Please try and remember that.

I have explained to you that your reorganization of the OOB's units, formations and weapons will cause every scenario to fail that uses the Russian OOB in any way and for experienced players who use your OOB this is not a problem as we have built mechanisms into the game that allow players the ability to re-install the default game OOB's and / or any custom OOB's but picklists are entirely different and it is YOUR responsibility to ensure that everyone using your OOB's and picklists understands that.

<font color="red"> This is a warning to anyone using this OOB and these new picklists or ANY third party OOB's or picklists </font>

First and formost. Neither Andy nor I nor Shrapnel games officially supports this . If anyone runs into trouble using these modified OOB's ond/or picklists, or ANY modification of the game OOB's or picklists, that does not come directly from us, the game designers, you are on your own.

If you install this modified Russian OOB into your game EVERY scenario pre-existing in the game that uses the Russian OOB IN ANY WAY, will fail to play properly.

If you install these modified picklists and then decide to stick with the original game OOB's you MUST re-install the original picklists issued with the game for the AI to pick Russian forces correctly. This applies to this OOB or any other modification of the game OOB's or picklists that may exist for download on this or any other forum

It would be a very good idea for anyone issuing modified picklist to include the original ones in a subfolder so players can switch back and forth without having to track down every file they need.

Don



I all it understand.
Thanx.

[Weasel]

This OOB sounds very interesting but I am a bit concerned if it will totally mess up the game or if it is totally balanced. Just reading the posts on the B11 makes it sound like RR are going to be shooting down range 4000m! Since a HEAT round doesn't loose penetration over distance that would be a hell of a thing, who needs tanks?

Can the OOB be used without the pick lists if you never play against the AI?

Which version of the OOB is correct, the one on page 1? I noticed you made numerous changes so I want to make sure I check out the updated version.

[KraMax]

I welcome you Weasel.

Last version of our OOB it is possible to download here:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf)

You can not download Picklist files if you are not going to play against the computer (USSR/Russia).

Best regards.

[KraMax]

Weasel said:
This OOB sounds very interesting but I am a bit concerned if it will totally mess up the game or if it is totally balanced. Just reading the posts on the B11 makes it sound like RR are going to be shooting down range 4000m! Since a HEAT round doesn't loose penetration over distance that would be a hell of a thing, who needs tanks?

Can the OOB be used without the pick lists if you never play against the AI?

Which version of the OOB is correct, the one on page 1? I noticed you made numerous changes so I want to make sure I check out the updated version.



No. B11 cannot shoot HEAT shells on a distance of 4000 metres. Load our OOB and you will see that there costs normal - a real distance.
We created our OOB - that it has shown real arms and structures of our armies. We have tried to make so that we OOB has not destroyed the majority of scenarios for this game. Scenarios are strongly connected with slots the weapon - and we have tried not to change a weapon site (by council DRG), but we had to clean all nonexistent weapon or shells (for example RPG-1). Also we have cleaned weapon duplicates. We have specified the exact given receipts of arms in our armies (when we had data about the beginning a batch production - we used these data). I ask to pay your attention that we not only improved our arms, but also worsened it is since we did it only because of real data. On all our changes in game at us is link and data (unfortunately basically in Russian). We also asked developers to include in game new icons our military technics, drawn PlasmaKrab, have given new photos of units.
Work on our OOB is not finished yet - now we search for the errors and discrepancies. We have spent set of tests with our OOB - and we can tell that it does not break balance of game.
As soon as at us will be more time - we will necessarily tell more about our changes, but many of these changes are obvious also you can see them if will download and will try our OOB.

Sorry for my bad English.

[DRG]

You do love to bring up the RPG-1 don't you ?

I have seen reports that Russia kept captured stocks of Panzerfausts available after the end of WW2 until the RPG-2 started to be produced. I personally did not add the "RPG-1 " to the Russian OOB but there IS info available about it. Russian troops were well known for using captured Panzerfausts during the war and it's not the least bit of a stretch to imagine they may have been kept around after the war as there were no other Infantry AT weapons of it's kind available.

If you Google "RPG-1" "Panzerfaust". you will find quite a number of hits

and you will find at --- http://www.battlefield.ru/cgi-bin/ikonboard.cgi?act=Print;f=2;t=6 quotes as .....



For example Zaloga, in his book "The Red Army of the Great Patriotic War 1941-5" (Osprey) says:
Quote

The Red Army captured large stocks of Panzerfaust on their advance west, and also began manufacturing a copy as the RPG-1



and it was on the strength of information like this that the "RPG-1" was added.

But here's an alternate opinion on the matter from the same message board



I know an American author who is researching this topic for an upcoming work. So far he has found no primary historical evidence that the RPG-1 was a Panzerfaust copy (of any model), nor any evidence that the Red Army manufactured the Panzerfaust under any name.

He believes that the Panzerfausts carried by Soviet soldiers in pictures are from captured stocks (the U.S. 82nd Airborne Division was also known to carry numbers of captured Panzerfausts). Furthermore he believes that the RPG-1 was wholly a Soviet design. It may have benefited from the study of captured Panzerfaust 150 and 250, but it was not a copy.



Here's a further quote on that line of thinking from http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-149364162.html



The Soviets were quick to grasp the potential of a simple, light, easily fired grenade launcher, and by 1944 were working on what was to become the RPG-1, whose 70mm rocket could defeat 150mm of RHA at an effective range of 75 meters, two and a half times that of the Panzerfaust. Due to difficulties with the fuse mechanism and the propellant charge in extreme seasonal climates, however, the RPG-1 was never produced in quantity, and once these issues were resolved the product improvements were applied to the RPG-2 (Figure 2), which entered Soviet service in 1949. The operation of the RPG-2 was easy for soldiers to learn, and its penetration of 200mm RHA and its effective range of 150 meters--twice that of the RPG-1--were significant improvements over its predecessor's performance. With its HEAT warhead and solid-propellant fuel, this was the first antitank weapon to be encountered in large numbers by U.S. forces during the Vietnam War.



"never produced in quantity" is quite a bit different than " nonexistent weapon or shells (for example RPG-1)"

Is it ?


So we have

A/ your idea that no RPG-1 ever existed
B/ the idea that the RPG-1 was simply the Panzerfaust renamed "RPG-1" and used because of the huge number of captured weapons available
C/ the idea that the RPG-1 was a wholly a Soviet design based on a study of captured panzerfausts but wasn't produced in quantity.

Given those choices we decided to go with options B (and/or C )as there was more evidence something called an "RPG-1" existed than not.

OK ? That's why there is an "RPG-1" in our OOB. If you don't like it, you can take it out as you have done but it's a little tiresome to have this repeatedly used and an example of why your OOB is so much more "accurate" because you don't include it.


Don

[KraMax]

There are no certificates that RPG-1 existed. RPG-1 was the experimental sample - works on its creation have ended in 1947-48 when was already ready RPG-2 which had more the best characteristics.
Also you will not find that any documentary proof that the Red Army used AFTER war - German panzerfaust or panzersrek.
Trophy panzerfaust and panzersrek - were transferred - to assault-engineering-sapernym parts of Red Army - during war 1944-45 and were used by them for carrying out of assault operations - for example, for destruction of well strengthened fire points of the opponent, storm of Berlin, etc.
AFTER war all trophy weapon was - is handed over on warehouses, the further destiny of this weapon to trace difficult.
I searched in Google - "RPG-1 grenade", "RPG-1", "Panzerfaust" - I have not found any information on that that RPG-1 there was on arms of Red Army, besides that this experimental weapon which was never produced in lots. Also I have not found the information on that that panzerfaust - were used by Red Army AFTER war.

p.s. I have resulted RPG-1 for an example, I can result for an example still the weapon from present OOB of which was not and was not present in USSR/Russia.

p.s.2. sorry for my bad English

[politruk]

Greetings!

Drg, really, we haven't got any info about RPG-1 at Soviet forces. For example, I saw only articles describes that RPG-1 were only at experimental, small consignment (as many, many weapons which we can't see at our game).

[KraMax]

http://diversant.h1.ru/guns/granatomet/rpg1.html

machine translator:

In 1944 on Research range mortars arms of the Main artillery management have begun works on creation manual anti-tank grenade-launcher a complex as a part of grenade cup discharge LPG-44 and cumulative grenade PG-70 (the head of works - the leading designer of range G.P.Lominsky).

70-mm HEAT the cumulative grenade was charged with gun grenade cup discharge parts. For a throwing charge of a grenade the smoky gun gunpowder placed in a tube pomegranates was used. Grenade stabilisation in flight was carried out by means of the rigid stabilizer.

The grenade cup discharge represented jet system of reusable application. It had a smooth trunk in length of calibre of 1000 mm of 30 mm. On a trunk the cock of type and an aim lath fastened the with great dispatch-trigger mechanism (front sights on a grenade cup discharge were not. Since the aiming was made through a cut of a sight and on the top edge of a grenade). On a grenade cup discharge trunk wooden thermoprotective overlays fastened.

In 1944-45 have been conducted range of test of the grenade cup discharge which has received after that the official name "Manual anti-tank grenade cup discharge RPG-1", and a grenade - PG-1. Preparation of a batch production and manufacturing of experimental batches of grenade cup discharges and grenades have begun. Carrying out of large-scale tests and complex acceptance was planned for arms. However the considerable time spent for completion of shots to a grenade cup discharge (it has been connected with unsatisfactory action of a grenade because of imperfection of its detonator, and lacks of a powder charge on stability of burning at various temperatures in the summer and in the winter), became the reason of an obsolescence of a complex. Works on RPG-1 proceeded till 1948, but to finish it it was not possible, and on arms it has not been accepted.

[DRG]

It never ceases to amaze me the length people will go to argue useless trivialities. We are discussing a weapon than may or may not have been used or may or may not have been captured German war booty and since no real combat occurred where we could read historical references we'll never really know for sure. We DO know there was SOMETHING named "RPG-1" and it MAY have referred to a native Russian weapon or it MAY have referred to capture German weapons or it MAY actually refer to both. ....or neither

Some years ago a Russian presented us with info on a variety of Russian WW2 SP guns we didn't have in the game. These were rare types but because they "existed" we were asked to include them for "historical accuracy" so we did and spent some time researching and creating unit icons to match . Two years later ANOTHER Russian comes along and tells us we MUST remove all those units as they were experimental or never made it beyond a small handful of units.

So we are damned if we do and damned if we don't. Keeping Russians happy seems to be a no win situation in regards to what ever we do with the Russian OOB so perhaps it's just as well you have created your own OOB. I have NO idea who included the "RPG-1" and although the "historical record" is more than just a little vague I suspect there are people on both sides of this issue ( trivial though it is ) I will consider it's removal when I get to the end of all the other work I have to do on this and the WW2 game

Don

[DRG]

KraMax said:&lt;snip&gt;We have tried to make so that we OOB has not destroyed the majority of scenarios for this game. Scenarios are strongly connected with slots the weapon - and we have tried not to change a weapon site (by council DRG&lt;snip&gt;




Scenarios do not just refer to weapons data but also the units themselves and this MOD of the Russian OOB makes a complete mess of any scenario in the game that uses the Russian OOB in any way. The almost complete reorganization of the units means what is supposed to be a Mi-24 in a scenario now shows up as an IMR-3 or a BRDM-2 in a scenario has morphed into a PTS-M. I could list dozens , possibly hundreds, of units affected like this but I've got better things to do right now.

The bottom line is this OOB will destroy any scenario in the game that use the Russian OOB. We have already had one "bug" report from someone who couldn't figure out why the Russian scenarios in the game suddenly were a mess so anyone contemplating using this OOB should not be lulled into the false belief that this will not make a total mess out of the existing scenarios because it will. This is why we include " default" OOB's in the game.

Unfortunately we have no way to remind people they are not using the official OOB set when they try to play a scenario.

Don

[politruk]

Ok, DRG, what is your OWN opinion - are such experimental weapons needed in game or not??

You are Master of the WinMBT http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif And I think you have got concepcion of game's design - or we (players) will see experimental weapons (and units) at the game (especially at 'historical' years) or not?

And don't concentrate attention on nationality please.
We can be Russians, or Italians or Dutch... But we does our work to help you to do this game more realistic.

[Warhero]

I have followed this topic a long time and came to think this:could (Don? Andy?) make "sticked" topic into main forum about to warn players to restore original stuff before adding any modded OOBs/icons/etc.? Like "read this before d/l any modified files" or something?

Sorry if it's already exist. I just had not seen anything like this yet;)...

[DRG]

It really depends on the weapon and it's use. We have taken a number of units in both games that are questionable and put them into the Misc section of the OOB's as "prototypes". These are usually tanks and are put there for any number of reasons. I recently put the T-84 Yatagan from the Turk OOB into a Prototype unit class as it looks unlikely to be adopted but it's not certain it won't be. When it was added it seemed like a good possibility it would be purchased.

The "Black Eagle" in South Korean OOB is now also in a "prototype" formation in misc as well. When it was added it also seem possible it would be introduced but now that the K2 has been announced it seems unlikely but not so unlikely to remove it altogether. The Russian OOB for WW2, as I have mentioned previously has nine vehicles in an "experimental" formation now and four in "Prototype" class that had been in the OOB's because someone had insisted we include them to make things "more historically accurate" we removed them later for the same reason !

The "RPG-1" was added because a LOT of information we could find at the time hinted at it's existence but gave conflicting info if it was a Russian devise or a renamed German Panzerfaust but it did seem that SOMETHING had existed that was named "RPG-1" and at the time we really....and I mean REALLY had NO idea anyone would complain about it being there since it gave the Russians an infantry anti tank device to use up to the introduction of the RPG-2.

The bottom line here is at the time we had more info that said something existed than not so it was put in. It was one unit and one weapons slot so what harm could it do and since the PRG-2 was named "RPG-2" that was no doubt because there was a "RPG-1"....... Yes? As the info above indicates. It DID make it through the development stage and to "large-scale tests " and as far as "and complex acceptance was planned for arms " so it WAS accepted and HAD there been a conflict there is little doubt it would have been used but in the end the problems were too much and it appears all efforts were concentrated on the RPG-2. Your sources say it was never issued. That's fine. We did not have access to that source and in the end, it's just one source that conflicts others . Am I to assume then that you believe that only Russian Language sources are to be deemed correct for Russian weapons ?? Russian sources cannot be wrong?

The internet ( and printed books ) are not immune to error and neither are acclaimed "experts" I can easily find a half dozen sources that give conflicting information about the Carl Gustav and that weapon wasn't developed in secret under Stalin's rule.

However, it would appear that given all the evidence ( conflicting though it is ) that this weapon was unlikely to have been issued to front line units except maybe to test and that it's remove may be justified but in my case ( unlike third party Modders ) I can't just rip it out without considering the effect it's removal might have on any scenario that uses it so EVERY scenario needs to be checked for dates this unit might be used and then if a scenario is found with this unit it would need to corrected and rebuilt and then the picklists would need to be checked and altered because that would leave the Russian AI without an infantry AT unit for it's infantry AT formation from 1/46 - 12/48. That's another issue few consider when they make OOB "corrections" in third party OOB's

IF I have time I will consider this but I'm already putting in 10-12 hour days on these patches and I still have a number of other issues that need considering but it's "removal" is now on the list for consideration

Don

[DRG]

Warhero said:
I have followed this topic a long time and came to think this:could (Don? Andy?) make "sticked" topic into main forum about to warn players to restore original stuff before adding any modded OOBs/icons/etc.? Like "read this before d/l any modified files" or something?

Sorry if it's already exist. I just had not seen anything like this yet;)...



It's certainly worth considering. We have posted an error reporting procedure but few pay any attention to it anymore though for awhile it was being followed. Sometimes adding more info means less people will read it. The sheer number of posts on this forum must be daunting to anyone new to the game and logging on for the first time.

Don

[Weasel]

KraMax said:
I welcome you Weasel.

Last version of our OOB it is possible to download here:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf)

You can not download Picklist files if you are not going to play against the computer (USSR/Russia).

Best regards.



That link gives me this:




&amp;#1048;|©&amp;#1041;MMTT&amp;#1096;&amp;#1096

etc. etc. etc, etc, etc


EDITED ---One line would have been sufficient you make your point

[thatguy96]

Just do right click, save as. Its the actual file, not an archive.

[KraMax]

Weasel said:


That link gives me this:




&amp;#1048;|©&amp;#1041;MMTT&amp;#1096;&amp;#1096

etc. etc. etc, etc, etc


EDITED ---One line would have been sufficient you make your point



new link for archive:
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.zip (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.zip)

[KraMax]

DRG said:

KraMax said:&lt;snip&gt;We have tried to make so that we OOB has not destroyed the majority of scenarios for this game. Scenarios are strongly connected with slots the weapon - and we have tried not to change a weapon site (by council DRG&lt;snip&gt;




Scenarios do not just refer to weapons data but also the units themselves and this MOD of the Russian OOB makes a complete mess of any scenario in the game that uses the Russian OOB in any way. The almost complete reorganization of the units means what is supposed to be a Mi-24 in a scenario now shows up as an IMR-3 or a BRDM-2 in a scenario has morphed into a PTS-M. I could list dozens , possibly hundreds, of units affected like this but I've got better things to do right now.

The bottom line is this OOB will destroy any scenario in the game that use the Russian OOB. We have already had one "bug" report from someone who couldn't figure out why the Russian scenarios in the game suddenly were a mess so anyone contemplating using this OOB should not be lulled into the false belief that this will not make a total mess out of the existing scenarios because it will. This is why we include " default" OOB's in the game.

Unfortunately we have no way to remind people they are not using the official OOB set when they try to play a scenario.

Don



We will change our OOB and we will place our units as in original OOB.
Also we will change all our formations and picklists.

Dear DRG, we looked Russian picklists in game, and we think that it has become outdated. In him there are no many our armies, in him some our special armies or our military technics are not specified. Over it too it can be necessary to work? We would be ready to help with it.

[KraMax]

DRG said:

We did not have access to that source and in the end, it's just one source that conflicts others . Am I to assume then that you believe that only Russian Language sources are to be deemed correct for Russian weapons ?? Russian sources cannot be wrong?

Don



DRG, we do not think that one source of data can be better than another. Also we do not think that Russian sources NECESSARILY better or more precisely English-speaking sources. But we think that the information on Russian weapon is easier and faster and more precisely it is possible to find in Russian sources.
We also use the special literature, sites on the Internet, etc., we try to process as much as possible information on the weapon and armies.
In game, in our OOB, it is a lot of discrepancies and we wish to help to make real OOB our armies. What in it bad? Certainly these changes can lead to changes in game scenarios, but we also think that accuracy more important and we are assured that it is necessary to make once global changes in OOB. We also understand that you do not wish to do global changes OOB which can lead to changes in scenarios. Therefore we wish to show to you as we should look OOB. Certainly to decide personally - to accept to you changes or not.

We hope for your understanding.

Best regards.

p.s. sorry for my bad English

[narwan]

KraMax said:
AFTER war all trophy weapon was - is handed over on warehouses, the further destiny of this weapon to trace difficult.




Assuming that is what happened with the panzerfausts, did you stop to think about the role of these warehouses and depots? The standard one is to store equipment not needed in PEACE time. The game assumes there will be a war on, that's the whole point of the game. So it would be logical that weapons being held in storage would be used. And since no equivalent existed in the soviet armory until the RPG2 showed up, I'd say it is very likely that if the soviet union were to get involved in war during this period (which is what the game would model) these 'panzerfausts' would show up too.



KraMax said:
I searched in Google - "RPG-1 grenade", "RPG-1", "Panzerfaust" - I have not found any information on that that RPG-1 there was on arms of Red Army, besides that this experimental weapon which was never produced in lots. Also I have not found the information on that that panzerfaust - were used by Red Army AFTER war.




The same really applies here; if war broke out there a good chance the RPG1 would be rushed through production even if it didn't perform perfectly yet. Militairy history, especially ww2, is full of such examples. I'll name just the Panther and the T34, they turned out rather well after a short while...

So including something like the RPG1 in the game seems sensible and logical to me.

[KraMax]

narwan
---------------------
Panzerfaust - was not the regular weapon of the Soviet army, it was the trophy weapon which fighters of red army used in WW2.
RPG-1 - Not only has not been started in a batch production, it has been underfulfilled to a level of production i.e. it is the experimental weapon.

[Marek_Tucan]

KraMax said:
narwan
---------------------
Panzerfaust - was not the regular weapon of the Soviet army, it was the trophy weapon which fighters of red army used in WW2.




but for sure captured PzF stockpiles were kept in wartime reserves? Heck, last Thompsons from Lend-Lease tanks were in reserve till 1997! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

[KraMax]

You want that tanks or machine guns on Lend-Lease have been presented at us in OOB? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

I am assured that in OOB it is necessary to use the real weapon which was in armies or the weapon which was at war in wars.
I for example did not hear that in the Afghani war - the Soviet army used panzerfaust http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

[narwan]

KraMax said:
narwan
---------------------
Panzerfaust - was not the regular weapon of the Soviet army, it was the trophy weapon which fighters of red army used in WW2.
RPG-1 - Not only has not been started in a batch production, it has been underfulfilled to a level of production i.e. it is the experimental weapon.



Yes I know and if the soviet union had gone to war in that period these would have been used by it's troops.
Your argument that they didn't use them historically is moot since there was no actual major war the soviet union was involved in in that period and the game assumes that there is!

The same applies to many other OB's. The dutch OB for the 80's is full of stuff that was not part of the active armed forces but which was still kept in some warehouse. By your reasoning this equipment would not have been used (for reserve forces or to replace combat losses) had the warsawpact and NATO gone to war in the 80's.
I can assure you it would have, just like the captured panzerfausts and experimental RPG1's would have been used by the soviets in the late 40's if the soviet union and the western allies had gone to war then.
The game models not just what's on the active inventory of armies in specific historical period's but also what has been stockpiled and mothballed and COULD have been used had war broken out.

[DRG]

Remco, I do appreciate your input here. You've been around long enough to know that there is no way, no matter what we do, could we possibly keep everyone happy .

There's just too many ways of looking at these issues. I'm reminded of " In service" debates that have occurred in the past where someone digs up info that some weapons or vehicle was "introduced" at a certain date but no one really knows for certain if that was the date the first one rolled off the assembly line or was delivered to the depot or was delivered to the troops for familiarization or the first date it actually entered front line service. Little details like that are rarely available so it's a judgment call for introduction dates. A vehicle could be given to troops for the first time in October for example but unless it's a minor modification of an existing unit there is little chance it would enter full operational service right away and that is why so many in service dates are January and probably if the issue was really dug into most of those January in service dates are wrong but really.....so what ? It a game not a historical record and really how many "historical records" do NOT have someone saying they are wrong ? The same is true for weapons taken out of front line service. A lot of assumptions need to be made , were they sent immediately to the wreaking yard ? Were they warehoused and if so, how long and if they were warehoused what other use could they have but to be used as they were intended "just in case" a conflict arose. As you astutely noted........ the entire POINT of this game is to simulate combat that in most cases never occurred. Does this mean we should include every weapon that was tested but not developed ?? NO !!--- but occasionally things like this crop up where including them helps game play and therefore becomes a "design decision" by us.... the game designers.

We are criticised when we are too flexible and allow a certain amount of ' What if" and criticised when we aren't . That was my entire point of mentioning the "experimental " SP guns in the WW2 Russian OOB.

The "RPG-1 issue is really rather amusing under the circumstances. Someone, long in the past, dug up info that something called an "RPG-1" that may or may not have existed in the late 1940's and maybe it was a native Russian device or MAYBE it referred to captured panzerfaust stocks and MAYBE the "truth" was a little of both but it seemed like something WAS in existence and since this gave the Russian OOB an infantry AT device from the beginning of 1946 until a bit past the introduction of the RPG-2. It's seemed a fair compromise even though the info on it was sketchy but we did need something to fill the gap on the OOB and that served the purpose. Nobody... and I mean NOBODY at the time would have ever imagined the amount of time that would be wasted years later debating this issue. And this "issue" goes much deeper and is a bigger PITA than is obvious here. In the Russian MBT OOB this is one weapon slot and ONE unit to deal with if we do deal with it ( "RPG-1"s also exist in the MBT Polish and Czech OOB's and is a separate PITA to deal with ) the biggest problem is the WW2 Russian OOB where 10 units currently use an "RPG-1" and it's looking like they are going to find themselves carrying " something else" if I decide to pull the weapon out.

The entire issue is developing into a very a big headache over what is really a very trivial "error" . It's all so MUCH easer to deal with when all you have to do is change an OOB and not consider the impact those changes make on other parts of the game.

However, in some cases simple problems can cause big headaches and problems that appear less simple can turn out to have simple fixes and in this case the "fix" is somewhere in between and should keep almost everyone happy

Don

[KraMax]

The USSR have anti-tank granades RPG-43 and RPG-6. After war all RPG-43 were not used in army and have been transferred to use in friendly allied armies. After war in the Soviet army granades RPG-6 were used.
I think after WW2 - panzerfaust also have been transferred to use to the allied countries USSR. There are no data confirming, that in armies were used after WW2 panzerfaust or RPG-1. In any lists of anti-tank tools of the USSR consisting on arms - is not present RPG-1 or panzerfaust.

[KraMax]

narwan said:

KraMax said:
narwan
---------------------
Panzerfaust - was not the regular weapon of the Soviet army, it was the trophy weapon which fighters of red army used in WW2.
RPG-1 - Not only has not been started in a batch production, it has been underfulfilled to a level of production i.e. it is the experimental weapon.



Yes I know and if the soviet union had gone to war in that period these would have been used by it's troops.
Your argument that they didn't use them historically is moot since there was no actual major war the soviet union was involved in in that period and the game assumes that there is!

The same applies to many other OB's. The dutch OB for the 80's is full of stuff that was not part of the active armed forces but which was still kept in some warehouse. By your reasoning this equipment would not have been used (for reserve forces or to replace combat losses) had the warsawpact and NATO gone to war in the 80's.
I can assure you it would have, just like the captured panzerfausts and experimental RPG1's would have been used by the soviets in the late 40's if the soviet union and the western allies had gone to war then.
The game models not just what's on the active inventory of armies in specific historical period's but also what has been stockpiled and mothballed and COULD have been used had war broken out.



I have understood you.
Whether means it, what if we were at war in 80th years with the western countries, we would have trophy TI, the ATGM-western manufacture, western tanks, etc.? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

[KraMax]

We have change units.

change units:
units 169-171, 203 - change available from 2011.

To download it it is possible from here: www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf)

or

www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.zip (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.zip)

[DRG]

KraMax


I'm having difficulty finding information that the 120mm Nona gun is issued with cluster munitions

The best I can find is something like this ......."capable of firing Rocket Assisted Projectiles (RAPs), 120mm HE-fragmentation, illuminating, smoke and incendiary mortar bombs including those designed for NATO's 120mm mortars."


......and none of those mentioned are cluster munitions.

If you could provide me with a source for this information I need it would be appreciated

Don

[Marek_Tucan]

HRW submunitons report (A GLOBAL OVERVIEW OF
EXPLOSIVE SUBMUNITIONS, 2002, don't have link but have PDF in my archive, may send it) lists a 120mm cluster shell with 35 DPICM for Russian Federation, however it might be pretty faulty or listing just experimental and never fielded warheads lumped together with real ones.

[DRG]

OK, Thanks. I have that document now and I am digging deeper



Don

[cbreedon]

DRG said:
The bottom line is this OOB will destroy any scenario in the game that use the Russian OOB. We have already had one "bug" report from someone who couldn't figure out why the Russian scenarios in the game suddenly were a mess so anyone contemplating using this OOB should not be lulled into the false belief that this will not make a total mess out of the existing scenarios because it will. Don



This was me... I have been playing this game since the 1990's and should have know what I had done without posting a query about it. I guess I had downloaded and installed this mod and had completely forgotten that I had done it. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/stupid.gif I do like the mod though.

[KraMax]

Dear DRG.

The big working out of set of an ammunition was made in the USSR in the mid 80th. For Nona - there is a set of shells, here their list:
Shells:
3VOF110
3VOF111
3VO34 - cluster munition + HEAT-fighting elements
3VO32 - cluster munition + HEAT-fighting elements
3VOF54
3VOF54-1
3VOF55
3VOF55-1
3VBK14
3OF49
3VOF49
3VOF51
3OF50
3BK19

Mines:
3VOF79
53-VOF-843B
3VOF68
3VOF53
3VOF69
3VOF57
3V34
3VS24
53-VD-843
3VD17
3VD16

+Any western shells 120mm

The information is received from the open sources, here one of them:
http://www.russarms.com/land/rva/tech-artl-2c9-nona-s-base.asp

Here there is a discussion of these systems (these are sites of a military-air landing):
http://desantura.ru/forums/index.php? showtopic=3244&amp;st=80
http://desantura.ru/forums/lofiversion/index.php/t2352-100.html

And here, the ORDER of the PRESIDENT of the RUSSIAN FEDERATION FROM MAY, 28TH, 1998 N 190-RP ABOUT PARTICIPATION of the RUSSIAN ORGANIZATIONS In the INTERNATIONAL EXHIBITION of ARMS And the MILITARY TECHNICS "EUROSATORY ' 98":
http://infopravo.by.ru/fed1998/ch06/akt20362.shtm
Here it is written about these shells.

Best regards.

[KraMax]

We have change units.

change units:
units 473, 474 - change available until 2020.
units 436, 437 - change radio code 82 and 92

formation:
606-609 - change available from 2011

To download it it is possible from here: www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf)

or

www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.zip (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.zip)

[KraMax]

cbreedon said:

DRG said:
The bottom line is this OOB will destroy any scenario in the game that use the Russian OOB. We have already had one "bug" report from someone who couldn't figure out why the Russian scenarios in the game suddenly were a mess so anyone contemplating using this OOB should not be lulled into the false belief that this will not make a total mess out of the existing scenarios because it will. Don



This was me... I have been playing this game since the 1990's and should have know what I had done without posting a query about it. I guess I had downloaded and installed this mod and had completely forgotten that I had done it. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/stupid.gif I do like the mod though.



Thanks for kind words.

[DRG]

KraMax said:
Dear DRG.

The big working out of set of an ammunition was made in the USSR in the mid 80th. For Nona - there is a set of shells, here their list:

&lt;snip&gt;

Best regards.




Thank you.

Don

[DRG]

KraMax said:
The information is received from the open sources, here one of them:
http://www.russarms.com/land/rva/tech-artl-2c9-nona-s-base.asp




From that it would appear the "minimum range of shooting" is 450 metres ??

Don

[KraMax]

DRG said:

KraMax said:
The information is received from the open sources, here one of them:
http://www.russarms.com/land/rva/tech-artl-2c9-nona-s-base.asp




From that it would appear the "minimum range of shooting" is 450 metres ??

Don



Yes. You right.

[KraMax]

Site of factory of the manufacturer of these systems:
(English)
http://www.artillery-mz.com/en/products/02/01/

Little bit out-of-date site. They probably are not engaged in it http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

[DRG]

Maxim

Here's a little research project for you. I only get half way with the English and Russian sources I have.

The G-11 Glider was added to the MBT Icon files in the past with the intention of adding it to the Russian OOB. The evidence I have is that aircraft was produced in two batches. The first batch early in the war then the second batch started again in 1944 and remained in production until 1948. ( NOTE: this may be a translation error where "in production until 1948" was mis-translated from an original document that really meant it was..."in service until 1948" but that's just one guess.)

OK good so far. It appears there should be G-11 gliders in the MBT Russian OOB ( which is why I added the Icon in the first place... ) however. I can find NOTHING to tell me when they were withdrawn from service.( aside from the guess I made above ) One might assume they were replaced by the Yak-14 and 1948 does tie in closely to the Yak's introduction but assumptions are usually wrong. I'm guessing the G-11 was withdrawn in the early 1950's. In the case of the Yak 14 ALL sources I have points to them being withdrawn from service in the late 1950's yet you have them in-service until the mid 1960s'

So..... how long did both gliders really stay in Russian service??

Don

[KraMax]

Dear DRG.

I will be glad to help you.

The second name of glider G-11 is name G-29. G-29 there was its name in the course of working out of projects, then it has received the name by quantity of transported commandoes of 11 persons - G-11. This glider is easier for finding by name of G-29, than G-11.

http://easyget.narod.ru/air/g_11.html
http://www.avia-rest.ru/g/g29.php
http://www.airwar.ru/enc/glider/g29.html

In descriptions of this glider it is said, that this glider was not made since 1945 for 1946, but then it made till 1948. In these descriptions of history of a glider there is nothing about when this glider have removed from arms.
I have looked data in other gliders were on arms and have found.
In the description of glider C-25:

http://www.airwar.ru/enc/glider/c25.html

Here there is a description that after glider tests in 1948, in 1 year gliders G-11 have begun have removed from arms of Red Army. And in 1951-53 replacements of all gliders on Yak-14 have begun. I think it were possible to tell with confidence that since 1953 in Red Army only Yak-14.

Yours faithfully.

[DRG]

Thank you. That's close to what I found and guessed for the G-11/G-29 as well.

However. The info I am finding on Russian Military gliders in general is that they were withdrawn from service in the late 1950's. "In the late 1950s transport gliders were withdrawn from service, as obsolete mean of transport" as Helicopeter became more numerous and reliable is typical of the remarks What do you have that shows them being in service into the 1960's? The translations I've run have not been very helpful.

Don

[KraMax]

I have not found exact date of removal from arms of all gliders in the Soviet Army.
Last serial glider of the Soviet Army - Yak-14.

http://www.airwar.ru/enc/glider/yak14.html

In the description it is told that:

"Very soon all of them have replaced on An-12, Mi-4 etc."

But exact date it is not written. I think that indeed, all gliders have removed from arms prior to the beginning of 1960.

[KraMax]

photos Yak-14:

http://www.avia-yk.ru/images/yk14/yak14-3.jpg
http://www.avia-yk.ru/images/yk14/yak14-2.jpg
http://www.avia-yk.ru/images/yk14/yak14-4.jpg
http://www.avia-yk.ru/images/yk14/yak14-6.jpg
http://www.avia-yk.ru/images/yk14/yak14-7.jpg
http://www.avia-yk.ru/images/yk14/yak14-8.jpg

[KraMax]

We have change units.

change units:
units 898, 899, 900 - change carry 124.
available until 89 max.
unit 901 - rename, change carry 130. available from 90.
unit 905 - rename. change carry 136. available from 97.

remove units:
unit 906 - Mi-17 - export variants and export name.

change formations:
formations 654-659

new formations 675-680

To download it it is possible from here: www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf)
or
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.zip (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.zip)

[KraMax]

photos Mi-8ATMSh
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/mi8amts_01.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/mi8amts_01.jpg)

photos Mi-8MTV-5
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/Mi-8MTV-5.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/Mi-8MTV-5.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/w_Mi-8MTV-5_01.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/w_Mi-8MTV-5_01.jpg)

[KraMax]

We have change units.

change units:
units 909, 910, 911 - change size=3.

To download it it is possible from here: www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.obf)
or
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.zip (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/obat011.zip)

[badger45]

Hi Don,

I have just stumbled upon the book, dedicated to rocket assisted grenades in Russian army. As it is in Russian, I will just summarize info about RPG-1 and RPG-2 found there. BTW it is free for download at http://www.army.lv/?s=2002 / direct link: http://www.army.lv/files/133.pdf

RPG-1 was developed from 1944 to 1947. The development was finally canceled due to "much time lost on finalizing the grenades (this was connected with unsatisfactory performance caused by imperfect function of fuse ...) leading to moral obsolescence of the complex. Works did not continue in 1948, the weapon was not finished and it was not accepted in service."

Practical firing distance on target height 2m was 50 meters, penetration 150mm. Grenade weight 1.6 kg, initial speed 40 m/s. Calibre of weapon 30mm, grenade 70mm. Grenade designation PG-70.

Works on RPG-2 started at 1947, in 1949 it was accepted for service. 1957 appeared new modification which had some infra sight and was designated RPG-2N (probably N=nocnoy=night).

Practical firing distance on target height 2m was 100 meters, penetration 200mm. Grenade weight 1.84 kg, initial speed 84 m/s. Calibre of weapon 40mm, grenade 80mm. Grenade designation PG-2.

The book seems pretty reliable and realistic (Russian sources are sometimes biased, so one must be careful). For example, recently discussed B-11 has following data: practical firing distance on target height 2m was 450 meters, penetration 290mm. Grenade weight 12.54 kg, initial speed 400 m/s. Calibre 107mm.

Regards,
badger45

[KraMax]

In this book it is written that aim range of shooting B-10 = 1000 metres and B-11=1200 metres. But these data do not coincide with data taken of the documentation (the shooting table) to these guns.

[badger45]

It very much depends on what you define as aim range, which is not specified there and therefore does not interest me.

BTW I see, the edition is from 1965... I wonder if it is possible, that during about 10 years between first model of B-10 and the edition of the manual there was some modernization of sight. It looks quite different than more primitive equipment of SPG-82. What I suggest is, that 1000 meters were used with early models from middle fifties and 1400 meters applies to newer ones of middle sixties. But that is only hypothesis http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Regards,
badger45

[KraMax]

badger45 said:
It very much depends on what you define as aim range, which is not specified there and therefore does not interest me.

BTW I see, the edition is from 1965... I wonder if it is possible, that during about 10 years between first model of B-10 and the edition of the manual there was some modernization of sight. It looks quite different than more primitive equipment of SPG-82. What I suggest is, that 1000 meters were used with early models from middle fifties and 1400 meters applies to newer ones of middle sixties. But that is only hypothesis http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Regards,
badger45



There are no data about that that B-10 or B-11 were modernised sometime. There is a table of shooting of these tools, the crew conducts shooting under these tables. The distance of 1400 metres - HEAT will overcome a shell approximately for 5 seconds.
The distance of 450 metres - speaks only about that that this distance of a direct shot for which it is not necessary to regulate a sight.

[KraMax]

new photos:

www.pecypc.kz/kramax/4/foto1.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/4/foto1.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/4/foto2.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/4/foto2.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/4/foto3.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/4/foto3.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/4/foto4.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/4/foto4.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/4/foto5.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/4/foto5.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/4/brdm-2m30ags.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/4/brdm-2m30ags.jpg)
www.pecypc.kz/kramax/4/brdm-2m30ags2.jpg (http://www.pecypc.kz/kramax/4/brdm-2m30ags2.jpg)

[Marcello]

I have some organization questions.
What was the structure of a soviet border guard company in the 1970-1990 timeframe?

[KraMax]

Same as well as at mech. infantry on BTRs.
Links on proofs at me is not present. Believe it the truth.
It is important to divide frontier guards into special maneuverable group of fast reaction and the usual frontier guards who were on duty on border. The arms of frontier guards were sometimes much better than at usual armies in the heart of the country.

sorry for my bad English.