Polish OOB2 corrections/suggestions (v.6)

[PvtJoker]

Originally Posted by Pibwl

BTW: I don't want to overturn all rules, but why BMG has a range of only 10, if it was an ordinary MMG, and its coaxial version has a range of 24?... The tankettes are therefore handicapped in the game (apart from the British Carden-Loyd, which uses CMG)
Michal

The reason why BMG's have a limited range is, if I remember correctly, because in a typical tank with a turret they are mounted quite low, but even more importantly, the vision devices available to the gunner were quite poor and often the elevation of the BMG was fairly limited as well. All those combined limited the effective range of the BMGs in the mind of the designers, which is fair enough, although there of course would have been differences in how limiting those factors were in different vehicles. As a generalization it is still quite reasonable, since there is limited data available about the actual details of the BMG position in many tanks and the designers could not climb inside the vehicles to check it. The limitation, IIRC, goes back all the way to the original SP.

That said, the assumption that the main weapon position of tankettes is similar to the BMG position in larger tanks is just faulty logic and not a reasonable generalization. I am have little knowledge about details of the Polish tankettes, but at least in the original Carden-Loyd and the Italian CV series tankettes both the machine gun elevation and vision from the commander-gunners position was fairly good, especially if unbuttoned. Vision from a buttoned-up vehicle was of course not as good, but still better than most BMG position I have seen. So, I don't think the tankette main MGs should be called BMGs at all or considered analogous the them. They should have the same range as regular CMGs and TMGs.

[Pibwl]

I agree - all tankettes should be given TMGs.
In the Polish TK-3, an MG had ordinary open sights, in case of TKS it was mounted in a ball mounting, with a scope, and 20 deg of elevation. So they can't be worse, than infantry's HMGs.

(BTW: it will be another story, but Italian early tankettes should have single 6.5mm MG, not a twin).

Michal

[Pibwl]

456 FT-17 - a proper picture for MG-armed FT is eg. 27560.
It seems, that official name was just Renault FT (sometimes called in documents "Renault M 17 FT").

457 FT-18 - name FT-18 was never used in Poland. I suggest a name "Renault FT 37mm".

There is a problem with formation 381 Inf Tank Co, because it should have no commander's tank. Maybe it should be replaced with utility car? Or we'd have to live with a a small inconsistency.


462 PZL P-37A Los - correct designation of bombers is PZL-37A Los or PZL.37A Los, without "P"
It concerns also units 581-584

Unit 462 PZL-37A should be slower - 4 (now 5) (less than 400 km/h)

Unit 582 PZl-37B, with 100-kg bombs, could have radio 92, as most typical.

464 PZL P-23A Karas - the same, correct designation is just PZL-23 or PZL.23, without "P".
Same for 613-615.

[PvtJoker]

Originally Posted by Pibwl

I agree - all tankettes should be given TMGs.
In the Polish TK-3, an MG had ordinary open sights, in case of TKS it was mounted in a ball mounting, with a scope, and 20 deg of elevation. So they can't be worse, than infantry's HMGs.

(BTW: it will be another story, but Italian early tankettes should have single 6.5mm MG, not a twin).

Michal

I know. Single water-cooled 6.5mm Fiat-Revelli M.14 on the CV-29 and a single air-cooled 6.5mm Fiat-Revelli aircraft machine gun on the early production CV-33. Elevation and horizontal traverse could be adjusted and locked separately (the mount was a kind of two axis gimbal in the CV-33) very much like a typical HMG mount.

The only Italian tank to use twin 6.5mm coaxial machine guns was the FIAT 3000. The current OOB has such armament on some armored cars as well, but in reality the MGs in those turrets (which were quite big) were on separate flexible mounts and even had separate gunners.

[DRG]

Originally Posted by PvtJoker

ry much like a typical HMG mount.
in reality the MGs in those turrets (which were quite big) were on separate flexible mounts and even had separate gunners.

Which we cannot model so we use a 2x MG


Don

[PvtJoker]

Originally Posted by DRG

Which we cannot model so we use a 2x MG
Don

Actually, the armament configuration of those vehicles is analogous to dual turrets, so it's most accurate to model them as two separate TMGs rather than as twin coaxial MGs. The basic idea of separate gunners and flexible mounts for the machine guns is to enable the MGs to engage two separate targets if necessary. Of course the SP engine does not model that very well either, but at least two separate MGs gives the vehicle a higher chance to actually hit something than a single twin MG.

[Pibwl]

465 PZL P-11c - it was deployed to units from 11/35 only (now 11/34), so it seems redundant, because it ends at 12/35, and next unit 596 may as well start at 11/35 (now 1/36) [a book on Polish aircraft by A. Morgała]
Otherwise, it could be renamed P-11a and made available from "summer of 1935", until 9/39, with radio=91 and 188 Vickers MGs. But there's no such need IMO.

All P.11 seem too fast - max 375 km/h, so maybe it should be 4 (now 5)

597 PZL P-11c - variant with 4 MGs started to appear in late 37 (say 11/37) (now 1/36) [A.Morgała]

598, 599 PZL P-11c - P.11 could carry ONLY up to four 12.5kg bombs, so these two units should be replaced with one with #193 bombs (unless we want to create the other one with 2 bombs, or 2 MGs instead of 4).
As far, as it is known, no camouflage was used, so icon 2945 is improper (there were only experiments)


466 9TP - no sabot ammo.

470 FR AMR-35,
471 FR D-2,
472 FR B-1,
473 FR AMR-35ZT
474 FR Somua S-35 - French tanks, to be removed.

476 Renault UE - it should have top armour.

477 H-35 - as I have written, there were a couple used in 1940 for training only, so it can be left out.

However, three H-35s (or H-38s - sources differ), acquired in early 1939, were used in combat in 9/39, so it can be changed to represent these units.
I suggest full name Hotchkiss H-35. May be class 102 Cruiser tank.
It should be available in three-tank platoon in 9/39 only.

478 Humber Mk II - used only for training in 6/42-10/43, just like unit #431 Humber Mk.III. Radio should be x1.
It had also Besa CMG.

479 Rolls Royce A/C - precisely Rolls-Royce. A couple were used for training in 6/42- ?/43 (now 7/40-7/41) - they could have seen action, if Rommel had broken through at el-Alamein.
Armament should be 148 Bren AAMG and fixed Boys, it also had smoke mortar.

.

[Pibwl]

483 Spitfire Mk.XIV - I treat aircraft as a general allied support, nevertheless it's worth IMO to replace Mk.XVI with Mk.IXe, which was commonly used by the Polish - and since 4/44 with bombs.
it should be armed with two cannons, 2 x #164 .50 MG, 1 x 500 lb bomb, 2 x 250 lb bombs.
Icon should be 4618 with clipped wings.
Better picture is 30025 - which shows similar LF Mk.Vb, from a Polish 316th Sqdn.

Besides, it's worth to add Mustang Mk.III, also used by the Polish, and since 4/44 for bombing.
It should have specifications and icon like British OOB 186 Mustang Mk.1, but 4 x .50 MGs

(BTW: British Mustang Mk.I should have 4 x .50 MGs instead of 6, and 4 x .30 MGs, and speed=7, not 8 - its max speed was around 628 km/h, only Mk.III and IV had a speed over 700 km/h. US OOB Mustangs P-51B and D have speed=7, while they could have 8).


486 Panhard 178 [scout veh.] - as 461 above - not used.
Formation 455 Panhard Troop - to be removed

491 Honey Recce - in Polish units known as Stuart Recce.
Used from late 1943 or early 1944 (say 1/44 - now 9/42)
Better photo is 27739 (and of correct version)
According to Magnuski, without a turret, a max speed exceeded 70 km/h.

Same for 231 Honey Ammo Tank - name Honey wasn't known.

Formation 149 Recce Tank - Available: 09/42-12/46 needs correction as well

494 Lloyd Carrier - correct form is Loyd https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loyd_Carrier

It wasn't armed (and as a rule, had no armour - there were kits of front and side plates only)

495 Citroen-K P17 - should be used from mid-31, also in Poland (now: from 11/39)

505, 507 Rifle Squad - picture 30211 without LMG will be more appropriate

.

[blazejos]

Hello

When you talking about modification of Polish OOB I just tough about my file with I done around 2 years ago is more an encyclopedic than playable file so I try separate units and formations in chronological order. Generally I include there everything what I found about polish pre-war army until 1939 for example proposed 75mm AA gun which was discussed by PIBWL .There are also now correct icons of polish riverine ships (yes correct icons was included inside shp in previous release so is even not necessary to add shp files). I try to modelled also polish underground army from 11/39 through creation of the AK to anticommunists organisations post disband of AK 10/44. Polish army in France first infantry units created in September 39 (only for human) to June 1940 with R-40 tanks which also was discussed. Formation for Polish Army in France was copied from French OOB. I never finish part about Polish army in UK lost motivation. Formations are done based on page about polish structures mentioned in previous posts so are as close modelled as I can but I assume that are not exactly correct for game engine and are named in polish comparable to German OOB with German names of formations. Hope that PIBWL will be able take some inspiration about already included icons and units and formations which may be possible to add to polish OOB from that file and rewrite this into specification for changes in official OOB for next version. This OOB now fit inside an blue OOB so is easy to check formations inside game.

Blazejos

[Pibwl]

Originally Posted by blazejos

There are also now correct icons of polish riverine ships (yes correct icons was included inside shp in previous release so is even not necessary to add shp files).

Correct icons are great news

So, units 510-511 Krakow (and Wilno if we create it) should be given icon 3488; units 512 to 523 - icon 3487; unit 538 - icon 3489.

Also unit 548 Taczanka should be given more appropriate icon 3492

Other supplements for previous comments:
400 37mm AT-Gun - its weapon #13 37mm wz.36 L45 has worse performance, than identical tank gun #15 37mm wz.37 L45, without a reason. They should be the same, with penetration 5 at least (as I've mentioned before, their performance might justify increasing penetration to 6 IMO - for all countries. Their performance figures are rarely given, but they are generally better, than PaK-35/36 - see eg. Jaeger platoon http://www.jaegerplatoon.net/AT_GUNS1.htm ).


There might be created a formation available in 9/39 only: 'Dubno' Half-Co (a "half-company" of Dubno group), with one platoon of 3 R-35 and one platoon of 3 H-38(H-35). A commander would be given 368 Polski Fiat 508.


Next comments:

561, 562 Wz.28 (available in 9/39) - they should be given other class, so that they can't be chosen in armoured car squadrons (there were only 3 left in 1939). Maybe 230 Colonial AC, with an appropriate platoon (named eg. just "Wz.28 platoon").

Probably in 1939 there only remained MG-armed version, but this is my educated assumption (all but 3 cars had been converted to wz.34, so probably all gun-armed cars were converted). In any case there could remain no more, than one gun-armed.

Name could be changed to Wz.28 Citroen (they were sometimes known as Citroens, also in documents, due to Citroen-Kegresse chassis). This name was in fact also used sometimes for wz.34 car, but not in any modern publications.

563, 564 Peugot M1918 - they were used by the Army until 1935 at least (http://derela.republika.pl/peugeot.htm) (now 12/31)
Photo 29490 of unit 564 actually is MG-armed car - correct is 29488.

These cars were actually known just as Peugeots, and their proper designation is unknown (they were wartime models, so often used "1918" is not correct, and wasn't official in Poland). Maybe MG-armed one should be named Peugeot AM, and gun-armed Peugeot AC, according to French nomenclature? Or gun-armed one should be named Peugeot (37mm)


567 Peugot M1918 - name as above. Better action photo for MG-armed version is 29490

573 Peugot M1918 - name as above. Crew was 4(5).

568 Wz.28 - Could be used until 12/36 at least, like units 664-665 (12/34). Name as 561.

663 Wz.28 - as above.

664, 665 Wz.28 I - there was no such designation - we may call it Wz.28 (late). I'll try to find better pictures. There's no reason for 665 to have rangefinder.
Light sloping of rear 8 mm plate does not justify armour=2 IMO. In fact, all wz.28 cars had similarly thin armour at front (now 2).

.