New Russian OOB (or SPR OOB)

[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/ik...=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:<snip>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<snip>

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 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