British OOB7 corrections and suggestions

[PvtJoker]

The British OOB07 has some error as well, especially in aircrafts and artillery:

Unit 002: The AP penetration of the 15mm Besa TMG (Weapon 101) is currently 2, but the official British Army requirement was that 70% of AP bullets had to penetrate 27mm at 100 yards at 0 degrees impact angle (http://www.tank-net.com/forums/index...368#entry43235). This in my opinion means that it should be given penetration 3. (Yes, it's a forum post -- by Tony Williams)

Unit 059 etc., Weapon 020: there were actually three different AP rounds for the 2-pdr, but only the first one (the Shot, AP, Mk.1) seems to be modelled. In September 1942 the supercharged APHV shot was introduced, which had about 10mm better penetration, and either at the same time or slightly later the APCBC shot, which was developed to deal with German face-hardened armor. It had roughly the same penetration as the APHV. The new shots could be represented by adding Sabot with penetration 8 and new units with Sabot ammo starting in 9/1942. The armored cars which still had the 2-pdr as the main gun in 1944 and 1945 most likely carried only these improved rounds (if they weren't fitted with the Littlejohn adapter to fire APCNR).

Units 127 & 137: the 18pdr field gun was still used in France and North Africa in 1940, and in Far East in 1942, so 12/1938 end date is far too early. I don't have any exact information when it was retired in Far East, but 12/1942 is probably not too far off. Also, Unit 127 name should of course be "18pdr Field Gun".

Unit 581 Colonial 18 Pdr: has a different icon than Unit 127 (the one of the 127 is correct).

Units 31, 147, 366, 367: the 6-pdr Valentines had the same telescopic sight as the 6-pdr Churchills, so FC should be 3.

Suggestion: add Valentine V. This was the major production version in 1942 and the last 2-pdr Valentine used by the British. There were no differences to the Mk. III which could be modelled in the game, but the Mk. V remained in service much longer and some were still used in Tunisia, Sicily and early stages of the Italian campaign. Availability could be from 1/1942 to 12/1943 as Infantry tank and to 12/1944 as Light Infantry Tank.

Suggestion: add Valentine X. This was the major production version of the Valentine in 1943. It put the coaxial MG back, but main gun ammo was reduced to 44 rounds. AAMG was installed occasionally like with other late Valentine marks. Many of them went to the USSR, but some were used similar to the Mk. V above. Availability could be from 1/1943 to 12/1943 as infantry tank and to 12/1946 as light infantry tank. It could also replace the Valentine IX as unit 367, so that there would not be two 6-pdr Valentines with late availability.

Unit 298: the official British Army requirement was that 70% of AP bullets had to penetrate 18mm at 100 yards at 0 degrees impact angle. That is IMHO enough that the Weapon 117 should be given an AP Pen 2 and AP rounds to units that use it. (http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/Vickers.html)

Aircraft stuff:

Unit 089: max. bomb load was 500 lbs in the centerline + 6 x 20 lbs, so the current load was not possible (the wing racks could not accommodate anything bigger). I suggest raising the "armor" of all P-40 variants (Tomahawk and Kittyhawk in the British OOB) to 10, since this fighter was known for being extremely sturdy and had a lot of armor for an early WW2 fighter.

Unit 090: real max. speed 413 km/h = Speed 4. Had only a single forward-firing MG. Theoretical max. bomb load was 4+2 250 lb bombs, although carrying bombs in the external racks limited speed and range further and was probably not used very much. It was still used in the Greek campaign for the lack of better light bombers, so availability end should be 4/1941.

Unit 091: real max. speed 420-445 km/h depending on source = Speed 4. The max. bomb load of Mk. I was 1000 lbs carried internally (110 lb bombs should be deleted).

Unit 092: bomb load was either 2 x 250 lb OR 2 x 500 lb (both wings had a hardpoint)

Unit 093: The Beaufighter IV was not actually build at all. It could be replaced either with Beaufighter I with cannon/MG armament only and available since 5/1941, or with Mk. VI with eight RP3-60 rocket armament (in addition to MG/cannon) and available in summer 1942.

Unit 094: max. speed 618 km/h = Speed 6

Unit 099: max. speed 745 km/h = Speed 7 (original Derwent I variant; the Derwent IV "long nacelle" variant was introduced in spring 1945). Availability 12/1944. Rocket load was no less than 16 RP3-60 rockets.

Unit 108: max. speed 555 km/h = Speed 6. Bomb load was 6 x 20 lbs, although in practice most production units did not have the bomb racks fitted at all.

Unit 109: max. speed was 407-414 km/h = Speed 4. Bomb load was 4 x 25 lbs.

Unit 186: max. speed 614 km/h = Speed 6. The Mustang I/Ia carried no bombs. Armament was four .50 cal and four .30 cal MGs on the Mustang I, and four 20mm cannon on the Mustang Ia. Both variants entered service about the same time (4/1942 is correct) and were used as low altitude fighters and strafers until the end of 1944, but not until 12/1946 like it is now.

Units 319-321: max. speed 224 km/h = Speed 2.

Unit 324: max. speed 442 km/h = Speed 4. Maximum bomb load was 4 x 500 lbs.

Unit 328: max. speed 341 km/h = Speed 3. Max. bomb load 2 x 250 lb + 4 x 20 lb. Only two forward-firing .303 cal MGs. Name should be Lysander Mk.I (Mk. III entered service only in 1940 but had nearly identical performance and specs.)

Unit 330: speed as Unit 091 (4). Name should be Blenheim IVF, which had five forward firing 0.303 cal MGs.

Unit 331: max. bomb load was 3 x 500 lbs, although the current load could also be carried.

Unit 332: max. speed 589 km/h = Speed 6. Name should be Mosquito F II. The NightFighter variants weren't used for ground attack.

Unit 334 : Assuming this is supposed to be Havoc II: max. speed 551 km/h = Speed 6. Armament 12 x .303 cal MG, max. bomb load 2000 lbs. Assuming Havoc I night fighter: max. speed 490 km/h = Speed 5. Armament 8 x .303 cal MG, max. bomb load 2000 lbs. Both were retired by mid-1943. Both were historically used as night fighters, so making them ground attackers is somewhat of a stretch.

Unit 336: max. speed as unit 094 (6). Most TseTses were conversions from FB Mk VI and retained four .303 cal MGs, but two is not incorrect, either. Most sources give 25 rounds for the cannon.

Units 338 & 339: availability should be 11/1933 to 7/1939. A more descriptive name would be HP.50 Heyford (Heyford being the official name). Max. bomb load was 2,500 lbs.

Unit 341: availability should be from 2/1930 and up to 12/1936. Max. bomb load was interestingly 510 lbs, which consisted of 2 x 230 lbs and 2 x 25 lbs bombs, but probably the current load could be carried as well (the British bombs were actually 112 lbs, but that is irrelevant).

Unit 342: max. speed 298 km/h = Speed 3. Max. bomb load as Unit 341, although the current one is probably close enough. Available 11/1935.

Unit 343: max. speed 428 km/h = Speed 4. Max. bomb load 1000 lbs internally in 250 lbs or 500 lbs bombs and 8 x 40 lb externally (= 1320 lbs). No other bombs could be carried externally.

Unit 244: max. speed 610 km/h = Speed 6. 2000 lbs max. bomb load was attained by carrying four modified 500 lbs bombs. (Carrying 8 x 250 lbs was not possible).

Unit 346: should be renamed "Mitchell Mk.II". The Mk.I never reached operational status with the RAF, so this should be early B-25C a.k.a. Mitchell Mk.II without external bomb racks.

Unit 347: available 5/1943. Should represent late B-25C or B-25D with wing bomb racks, which were all called just Mitchell Mk.II by the RAF.

Unit 248: available 1/1942. Suggest historical tactical load, which was 6 x 1000 lbs and "some" (non-standardized number of) 250 lbs bombs in addition; max. possible in game would probably be 3x8 = 24. I don't know if so many would have actually fitted in the bomb bay; 16 would be a safer bet.

Unit 349: suggest historical demolition load "Abnormal", which was 14 x 1000 lb bombs.

Unit 354: max. speed 488 km/h = Speed 5. Max. bomb load 2000 lbs. Available until 4/1946 (used historically mainly in the Mediterranean area).

Unit 400 & 401: max. speed 688 km/h = Speed 7. Absolute max. bomb load was 2 x 1000 lb + 1 x 500 lb bombs, practical maximum 2 x 1000 lb bombs. The current loads are fine, but perhaps a 2 x 1000 lb load could be added.

Weapons:

Weapons 005 & 007: The Breda AA gun fired the 20x138B Long Solothurn cartridge and like I wrote in my suggestions for the Finnish OOB, all guns firing that cartridge should have the same AP penetration, in my opinion 4.

Weapon 020: see my suggestion to model later APHV/APCBC ammunition above.

Weapon 021: penetration should be 6 as in Italian OOB and also according to most sources.

Weapon 036: max. range with modern ammo was 10,100 meters, which should be enough for Range 201.

Weapon 071: real max. range 11,270 meters (201).

Weapon 076: real max. range 15,500 meters (206)

Weapon 102: real max. range 18,000 meters (208)

Weapon 103: real max. range 11,200 meters (201)

Weapon 104: real max range 23,513 meters (214)

Weapon 136: max. range 6,700 meters by Wikipedia, 7,500 meters by Jaeger Platoon. Take your pick. In any case should not be in off-map units.

Weapon 248: max. range with pre-1944 100 lb shell 14,813 meters (205), 16,550 meters (207) with 82 lb light shell available in 1944. Should perhaps split the weapon (and units) to reflect the range increase. OTOH it only affects counter-battery resolution.


Sources: Wikipedia with appropriate source criticism (checked citations), Joe Baugher's http://www.joebaugher.com/uscombataircraft.html for US made aircraft, for Valentine: http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww..._Valentine.php and http://www.wwiivehicles.com/unitedki...ntry/valentine. Others mentioned in the text.

[Pibwl]

You could compare with these suggestions, whether there are any discrepancies http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=49907

[PvtJoker]

Originally Posted by Pibwl

You could compare with these suggestions, whether there are any discrepancies http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=49907

Didn't see any discrepancies. You spotted a few errors with the aircraft I didn't, and of course a huge number of armored car and truck related stuff I didn't pay any attention to. I actually set out to suggest increases in the light tank heavy MG AP values, since I remembered what Tony Williams had written about them, and also to correct the inflated off-map artillery ranges that seem to plague almost every OOB (probably because the pre-date the current standardization of off-map ranges). In the process I noticed some problems with the aircraft as well, which then became a major part of the post.

Only possible redundancy would be the Valentine III/V question. The Mk. III was used much longer like you wrote and the Mk. V even longer, but they had no differences which could be modeled in the game. So adding the Mk. V would be just for the sake of historical accuracy. Perhaps it would be better just to extend the dates of the Mk. III. One possibility would be to rename the unit "Valentine III/V" while extending the dates.

For Andy about the infantry personal weapons: I have to agree with Cross that changing them back to generic names would be a loss. Once you have them right they shouldn't require "maintenance", and they do add flavor.

[PvtJoker]

Addendum:

Unit 184: max. speed 544 km/h = Speed 5. I would rename this to Boston III. Available until 12/1945.

Suggestion: add "Boston III Intr" (Intruder) as Ground Attack (unit class 243). Armament: 4 x .303 cal MG + 4 x 20mm cannon, bomb load 2 x 500 lb + 2 x 250 lb. Other specs the same as above. Available from 6/1942 to 12/1945. Historically used mostly as a night intruder, but did fly some daylight missions later.

Suggestion: add "Boston IV" as Ground Attack. Armament 2 x .50 cal MG, bomb load 8 x 500 lb. Available from 6/1944 to 12/1945. Armor 10. Other specs as unit 184 above.

Another suggestion:

I think the Vickers Wellington level bomber would be a nice addition. It was the mainstay of the Bomber Command during the first 2½ years of the war and one of the best medium bombers in 1940 and 1941. Not that most players actually use level bombers, and historically the Wellington was used primarily as a night bomber, but I think it would deserve to be in the game. I will try to cook up a shp file for it, although I have no experience on shp file editing.

[DRG]

If I decide to add it, I already have a Wellington

[PvtJoker]

Addendum 2:

Unit 345: max. speed 314 km/h = Speed 3. Max. bomb load was 4000 lbs in four hardpoints (all up to 1000 lb), so the current load of 6 x 500 lb was not possible.

(I wonder whose idea originally was to add a flying boat as a level bomber doing tactical support for ground units...)

To facilitate its inclusion, Wellington specs for the game. The different marks were similar enough that single specs suffice:

Available from 10/1938 to 12/1944, Crew 6, Size 5, Speed 4, Max. bomb load 4,500 lbs (could carry GP bombs up to 2000 lb*), Armor probably 10 thanks to the geodesic construction.

* In fact the Wellington could also carry the 4000 lb "Cookie", but that bomb had no tail and was used only for area bombing.

Sources: Wikipedia and http://uboat.net/allies/aircraft/types.htm

[DRG]

Originally Posted by PvtJoker

Unit 093: The Beaufighter IV was not actually build at all. It could be replaced either with Beaufighter I with cannon/MG armament only and available since 5/1941, or with Mk. VI with eight RP3-60 rocket armament (in addition to MG/cannon) and available in summer 1942.

.......eight RP3-60 rockets in summer 1942 ??


I don't think so

[PvtJoker]

Originally Posted by DRG

.......eight RP3-60 rockets in summer 1942 ??


I don't think so

Quite right, they were still in testing. Early 1943 would probably be a good bet. I couldn't find exact information.

[DRG]

Originally Posted by PvtJoker

Aircraft stuff:

Unit 090: real max. speed 413 km/h = Speed 4.



.

I acknowledge that there can be problems with aircraft speed.

Some of that can be simply traced to different sources quote different speed

Some of that can be traced to early OOB work where definitive sources were not always readily available and the speed was guessed at ( or typically ....."X is 5 and this was faster so lets give it 6" ). The rule laid down in MOBHack help were written after this was discovered to be a problem but the problem is pervasive

That said what we are dealing with in this game is primarily ground attack and ground attack typically takes place near the ground so performace at sea level should be the speeds used even though it's sometimes difficult to find that. Typically you get a maximum speed rating and that's "good enough"

The fairey battle for example....... we had 5 and that would represent an aircraft that can fly between 450 and 549 kph

one source http://desertwar.net/fairey-battle.html claims

Its maximum speed at sea level was only 335 km / h

That's a 3 in game terms

I have found no source that claims the Battle could fly at a speed that would justify a 5 so a 3 or 4 would be more correct with 3 being "most correct" in game terms in the context of a ground attack aircraft

Now....... that's just one example of hundreds. We have 11 "P-47's" in the game 1 is rated 6 speed, the others 8. 8 is way wrong. 8 represents an aircraft that can fly between 750 and 849 km/h. The only way a P-47 could go that fast is if they were plummeting to earth wingless with the throttle to the firewall and even then it's iffy.

What this all means is now I have " review all aircraft speeds " on my to do list and what that means is this year the chances are dealing with all the error reports I have recorded to date and getting ALL of them in the game are approaching slim to none. ( which means some of you really need to find something else to do for the next few months ...... my PLATE IS FULL)

That said as a rule of thumb I would suggest that since generally only top speeds are given in sources ( unless they are really good sources.. ) and those top speeds are only achieved at altitudes much higher than ground attack operate that whatever the "top" speed is it should be one less in the game for ground attack and I know I'm opening up my own can-o-worms with that but it also must be remembered that if the speeds 5 or 7 there's really not a whole lot of difference once the variables the game runs on are tossed in......... but YES, it would appear than in the game now aircraft speeds are generally "optimistic" based on the rules in MOBHack and I will be reviewing them as best I can

For those interesting in things like this .........

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/

is a very interesting source that contains a lot of data such as.."Spitfire Mk IX versus Me 109 G " that has not only some excellent photos but detailed performance graphs that shows that the difference between low level performance and "Maximum" performance in those two aircrafts is about 100 kph. The Spit in this example tops out around 415 MPH ( 668 kmh ) but it's on the deck performance is just below 350 mph ( 555 kph )so what would be a 7 in game should be 6 ( we give it 7 so in the ballpark )
this report........


Unit 400 & 401: max. speed 688 km/h = Speed 7

falls in line with the 695 km/h, 687 km/h and 708 km/h quotes I found but the above source gives this..


High Speed at S.L. 345 mph

.......and that's 555 kmh and that equals 6 in game speed

So yes, the 8 we have now is wrong and is on the list to be corrected but for ground attack....... what they are used for in the game.......... 6 is closer to "reality"


Don

[PvtJoker]

Don, I have been aware of the issue you wrote above for some time, but I didn't mention it here, because I thought it would be easier just to use the maximum speed, and also I didn't want to add more stuff on your plate. In some cases speeds at sea level can be easily found, in others not. In addition, if we want to be really nit-picky, external stores usually limit the speed even more, since they add significant drag.

Reviewing all the aicraft speeds is a big task, especially if absolute maximum speed can't be used. I just did that for the USMC OOB, but didn't post it here yet, and I used maximum speeds. Now, I can try to re-do it at sea level speeds if you want to. Joe Baugher's American Combat Aircraft (http://www.joebaugher.com/uscombataircraft.html) is a good source, since it has all USAAC/USAAF/USAF aircraft (unfortunately only some USN) and it usually lists speeds at several different altitudes. Unfortunately I do not know any on-line sources which would do that consistently for British or German aircraft, let alone Russian, Italian or Japanese.

Oh, and the P-47M actually could do 756 km/h (470 mph) at 9,000 meters (30,000 ft)