Finnish OOB 5.5

[Pibwl]

In case it went unnoticed in the other thread, it's worth to add T-20 Komsomolets artillery tractor, copied eg. from Russian oob (#552), but with corrections:
- carry should be 7 soldiers or light guns
- speed was up to 50 km/h
- it had armour 1 all around (although soldiers on a platform were vulnerable)
- it was armed with 1 DT TMG.
- used until 1961

(specs' and name changes concern all oobs, but, as I wrote in other place, no country should use Komsomolets after the war except Finland, and they should be replaced with something else, for example Ya-12).

Regards,
Michal

[DRG]

- carry should be 7 soldiers or light guns

Which, of course, makes it next to useless and when mixed in with more robust prime movers only generates complaints about it only able to tow the 76mm gun.

"Completness" is wonderful but it's also a PITA for us and most players this is why that has 114 carry capacity in the OOB's that have it.

It's a G A M E and in some cases reality needs to be bent a bit

Don

[Suhiir]

Originally Posted by Pibwl

In case it went unnoticed in the other thread, it's worth to add T-20 Komsomolets artillery tractor, copied eg. from Russian oob (#552), but with corrections:
- carry should be 7 soldiers or light guns
- speed was up to 50 km/h
- it had armour 1 all around (although soldiers on a platform were vulnerable)
- it was armed with 1 DT TMG.
- used until 1961

(specs' and name changes concern all oobs, but, as I wrote in other place, no country should use Komsomolets after the war except Finland, and they should be replaced with something else, for example Ya-12).

Regards,
Michal

If I might offer a suggestion.

When you come up with a possible addition or change to an OOB stop and ask yourself :

Is this merely cosmetic or does it "add something" to the OOB?

Can some new item or change to an existing one be relatively seamlessly and easily added to the OOB without requiring a massive change to the existing formations?

How common is the new item? Do enough of them exist to warrant inclusion in the OOB?

Does an existing item in the OOB fill the role of the new item?
(A good example is trucks, there are a zillion different makes and models with minor differences in speed and carry capacity but most OOBs use a fairly generic light, medium, and heavy truck)

[Pibwl]

Originally Posted by Suhiir

If I might offer a suggestion.

When you come up with a possible addition or change to an OOB stop and ask yourself :

Is this merely cosmetic or does it "add something" to the OOB?

Can some new item or change to an existing one be relatively seamlessly and easily added to the OOB without requiring a massive change to the existing formations?

How common is the new item? Do enough of them exist to warrant inclusion in the OOB?

Does an existing item in the OOB fill the role of the new item?
(A good example is trucks, there are a zillion different makes and models with minor differences in speed and carry capacity but most OOBs use a fairly generic light, medium, and heavy truck)

Come on, proposals are for free - it's up to decision of our HQ. I proposed Komsomolets only because it is already available in several oobs (yet with incorrect specs) and it has own icon and picture. On the other hand, Finland was the only country, which used them after the war. It is interesting example of armoured MG-armed artillery tractor, which could be also used as a tankette.

As for trucks, if we have lots of free slots, we could also fill them with wider variety of trucks, to give better taste - but it's only my humble opinion.

As for Don's answer - it's a fair enough reason to keep its high carry capacity, though in fact it was only a tractor for AT-guns. But I think it's worth to give it its gun and armour at least, and change Komsomolets in other countries to actually used tractors?

Regards
Michal

[DRG]

Michal..... The sure path to being ignored is start posting requests for a "wider variety of trucks, to give better taste".

Right now you are posting very useful information that I am adding to the list to check when I get to it. Don't screw that up by going on about trucks.

OK?

Suhiir posted a perfectly reasonable suggestion that I wish more people would take seriously.

Yes I know what the Komsomolets was designed to tow and for the most part they didn't exist after WW2 and yes we have it in a few OOB's already and I'm betting it's never used.

Don

[Pibwl]

Originally Posted by DRG

Michal..... The sure path to being ignored is start posting requests for a "wider variety of trucks, to give better taste".

That's why I don't

Originally Posted by DRG

Right now you are posting very useful information that I am adding to the list to check when I get to it. Don't screw that up by going on about trucks.

Thanks. Everybody needs a motivation sometimes

Excuse, that sometimes I might repeat the same info in several threads.

Regards
Michal

[dmnt]

Quick dates issue I just today realized:

Units 335, 336, 348: XA361 AMOS/STRIX
(Also affected: 800: Jurmo NEMO)

Availability date is set to 1/2012, when in fact they were rolled out in 2006 and have been presented in FDF military parade already in 2007.

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums...=1#post2549111

AMOS / STRIX is a double barrel mortar whereas NEMO is lighter, single barrelled one. They share the same lethality figures and rate of fire (12). AMOS claims 26 rpm (apparently 2 x 13), whereas NEMO gets rated to 10 rpm burst / 7 rpm sustained.

This doesn't seem to be in line. Perhaps NEMO should be lowered a bit, AMOS is already in the high end there with ROF 12 (and equipping two weapon slots). Swedish STRIX has 8 for ROF whereas the Finnish counterpart has 12. I believe this is a genuine (minor) error that should be fixed. NEMO could probably have ROF 8 then.

 nationid | nationality | obslotno |      name       | rateoffire 
----------+-------------+----------+-----------------+------------
       65 | Finland     |      335 | XA361 AMV AMOS  |         12
       65 | Finland     |      336 | XA361 AMV STRIX |         12
       65 | Finland     |      348 | XA361 AMV AMOS  |         12
       65 | Finland     |      800 | Jurmo NEMO      |         12
       65 | Finland     |      999 | XA361 PASI AMOS |         12
       66 | Sweden      |       49 | SSG AMOS DF     |         12
       66 | Sweden      |      432 | AMV AMOS        |         12
       66 | Sweden      |      433 | SSG 120 AMOS    |         12
       66 | Sweden      |      434 | SSG 120 STRIX   |          8

[DRG]

On the list to investigate.......

Don

[DRG]

Originally Posted by dmnt

Quick dates issue I just today realized:

Units 335, 336, 348: XA361 AMOS/STRIX
(Also affected: 800: Jurmo NEMO)

Availability date is set to 1/2012, when in fact they were rolled out in 2006 and have been presented in FDF military parade already in 2007.

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums...=1#post2549111

Rolled out WHERE ???

FYI the winVer1 OOB's show the in service date as 1/2006. A couple released after that it was pushed back a couple of years because of noted delays then the last release was altered based on this info.

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showt...AMV#post769206


Post #40 if that thread

C2. CHANGE: FINLAND/AMV AMOS/UNITS 335 & 348/Fielded dates to JAN 2013 vice Jan 2008. /The below source though not complete does start to mention contract issues. The Jan 2008 date was about the time the Swedes were having their legal issues with PATRIA as mentioned above in the APC section for the AMV. Also it's my understanding that the AMOS and NEMO systems are from the start capable of direct fire support out of the box, wouldn't it make sense to delete FINNISH UNIT 335 based on that and ensure that the SWEDISH AMV AMOS is a copy of FINNISH UNIT 348? Note dates are only 1yr. apart.
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...-Turret-06692/ Note it says "initial order" for the AMOS.
http://www.defpro.com/news/details/20563/ Specifically mentions that amendments were made to the original 2003 contract.
http://www.army-technology.com/news/news105201.html Again as above.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/propo...e_news_48.html Again as above. I'm convinced that issues with the contract existed and I'm willing to bet it had to do with PATRIAs legal issues in Sweden as part of the cause in the delay as well. If you go to the equipment side of a couple of the above sites they support what's in the OOB however those obviously have not been updated to reflect the news side of these sites from this past Dec. of 2010 when PATRIA released the press notice.

So you and Pat can debate this out. Pat's presented a number of sources to reach his conclusion which is somewhat MORE convincing that one post on a forum showing a unit in a flag day parade in 2007. This does not prove they were in service so I'm not changing anything ( AGAIN ! ) until a consensus is reached.

If you want to prove to me they were actually IN SERVICE in 2007 you'll need to find better sources than Pats or the one you provided.


Don

[152H55]

2013 availibility for AMOS is correct, the Finnish Defence Forces' official site here (in Finnish) (Google translation in English) confirms operational status in 2013.

Other suggestions, Ruotuväki, the official newpaper of the FDF (here, .pdf in Finnish, page 5) mentions that Valmet Redigo liaison aircrafts (unit 543 in Finnish obat, used as an air OP aircraft) are to be retired by the end of 2013. They have been replaced by Pilatus PC-12 NG which are already operational from late summer/early autumn of 2010 (8/2010?).

Also, can anyone confirm that FDF has really bought/is going to buy STRIX ammunition for AMOS as I can't find any source for this.