Anomaly reports

[DRG]

Originally Posted by Pibwl;786668As

I've said, the manual, published by the Soviet MoD in 1963, states, that both variants (P and PK) can carry 20 soldiers with full combat equipment. I have an impression, that you think, that for some reason I'm lying to you, trying to convince you to change BTR-50PK's load In any case, I'm attaching the first and 4th page of manual - I didn't produce this document myself.Regards
Michal

What we have ( and I'm done with this as of right now ) is nitpicking by source. Any disagreement or doubt is directed at the source and waving one source around like it's the holy grail is a waste of time. We could spend the rest of our lives ( and I have no intention of doing that ) "debating" the merits of one source over another and I could spend the rest of my life making corrections to the OOB's based on whoever just popped up with a new source ( and I have NO intention of doing that either )

Let's look at one historically popular vehicle and some "sources" for a moment

One would think 66 years after the last one was made and hundreds of thousands of pages written about the vehicle that all sources would agree on the road speed of a Tiger 1 yet one on line source of detailed information says the Max level road speed is 28 mph or 45 kph whereas another well used on line source the same thing but adds that this was not recommended for normal operation

I have a Profile Publication that gives the max road speed as 23 MPH ( 37 kph ) and I have a Weapons of World War 2 encyclopedia that claims it's 38 kph ( 24 MPH ) and another encyclopedia that says it's 37 kmh and 23 mph.

So much for "sources" but in this case it's a safe bet 37 or 38 is close enough but when you convert that to game speeds 37 = 12.33 which is rounded to 12 and 38 = 12.66 which rounds up to 13 and I have NO DOUBT there are people who think it should be 15 because the Fprado webpage says the Max level road speed is 28 mph /45 kph . The just haven't shown up yet, but they will and I have no double there are other sources that differ from these numbers. ( and Prado is quoting those numbers from another "source" )

If I had more time and a staff of 10 I would keep a record of each unit in each nation and note the changes made and who asked they be made then let anyone who disagrees argue it out with them but I don't but I do know the Russian OOB was seriously gone over a few years back so if anything in any other OOB differs from the Russian OOB values the Russian OOB values will be the correction.

We still have some OOB's using NATO names for equipment. Andy prefers NATO names and I prefer the Russian designations and it's a PITA to keep the weapon specs in all the OOB's the same when Iglas are named "Gimlet" but that goes off topic.

The point is, no matter what, somebody will have a source that differs from somebody else's source. When the Russian OOB was redone the BTR-50PK's were very specifically given a 114 carry cap and the rest 120.


Don

[Pibwl]

I understand, that you must be very busy coordinating all OOBs and deciding, what changes should be made and if they are justified. However, it's not, that I'm waving one source against another - there is only one official and first-hand source, which is a military manual, and it's backed up by works of Russian experts, like M. Baryatynski. On the other hand, there are no sources for lower number - only suppositions or opinions of people, who had improved the Russian OOB before, impossible to track now. There is no reason to deny the officially given number, since it concerns a feature easy to be verified by APC users, not as vague, as (for example) speed.

You all did a great work, I myself joined SPMBT only recently, but I see some things, that could be improved or corrected to bring the game as close to historical truth as possible. And I'm treating it serious. I'm interested in military stuff, mostly Warsaw pact, for some 25 years, and I have some knowledge, backed up by local sources. You may decide to change the number of BTR-50's troops or not, I won't be offended - but the decision shouldn't be made on a basis, that somebody once stated it as 14 soldiers so it must be true, contrary to reliable sources.

To end the dispute on BTR-50, I've made a simulation of placing soldiers on five known benches. The soldiers (taken from Bradley) are 50 cm wide, but they could be even wider. I hope it proves, that it was possible, although of course uncomfortable (and not used in practice too often).

I must however admit, that I've found a side effect of increasing BTR's capacity: when deploying an unit, two sections go to one APC, leaving another one empty. In fact, the Czechoslovak Army in the 1960s used two APC for three 7-men sections this way (I was going to propose appropriate changes). I don't know, how about the Soviet Army, but I assume it had to be similar with such capacious vehicles. It however would demand further changes in formations, for which I have no sources.

Please, let me know, if you're interested in further suggestions what to improve in Eastern European OOBs, so I know if to devote my time to it further (I have some half-ready ones).

Regards
Michal Derela