Soviet OOB11 corrections and suggestions

[PvtJoker]

Minor corrections and suggestions to Soviet OOB:

There is an inconsistency with how the machine gun turrets are modelled: T-28 (Unit 020 etc.) has BMG's, but T-35 (Unit 021 etc) has TMGs. I think the latter is more closer to the truth (the turrets had hatches with enabled to gunner to view outside if needed), but at least it should be consistent.

Units 001, 002, 003, 095, 101 etc. see the discussion about armor values in the "Finnish OOB35 Corrections and Suggestions PART 2 -- Units" thread. In addition, many BT-7a tanks had an AAMG as well.

Unit 020 T-28 M1938: see the thread mentioned above for armor protection. Also, many had an AAMG mount, so an additional variant with a DT AAMG could be added. The MG turret weapons could be combined to a single weapon similar to Unit 021 to allow adding of the AAMG.

Unit 006 T-40: suggest giving the Weapon 152 AP Pen value 2 to simulate the B-32 API bullet (penetration about 20mm at 100 meters), and transferring at least 40 rounds to AP. Further suggest making a new variant starting Jan 1942 with Sabot, and of course also add Sabot value to Weapon 152 with Penetration 3. This is to simulate the tungsten-core BS (also called BS-41) API bullet, which was a 12.7mm version of the bullet used with the 14.5mm ATRs. The BS was NOT an APCR projectile but a conventional AP bullet with tungsten-carbide core instead of hardened steel core, so it had the same muzzle velocity and effective range (actually slightly better) as normal steel core AP bullets (increased weight of the projectile was compensated by adding more propellant).

Unit 007 T-60 M1941 etc.: the 20mm ammo count was 780 rounds, so 75 engagements is on the low side.

Unit 008 T-70 M1942 etc: the original T-70, which this is supposed to be, carried only 70 rounds for the 45mm gun. The M1943 carried 94.

Unit 035 SU-122: according to http://www.battlefield.ru/sp-guns-specs.html carried 40 rounds for the howitzer. HEAT became available only in May 1943 according to the same website.

Unit 335 T-40S: the correct name for this tank would be T-40 "030" or T-30. The T-40S had the same armament as the original T-40, but deleted amphibious capability. Production of the T-40S started a couple of months earlier than T-30. Armor was not increased as such (construction was changed to all welded), so it should be the same as Unit 006 for all T-40 variants. Speed should also be the same. All of these tanks were officially called just T-40; the "030" was the factory index of a T-40 with a 20mm TNSh AC. T-30 seems to have been the most popular contemporary name for this variant. T-40S is an unofficial post-WW2 designation. Ammunition load was 750 rounds of 20mm ammo, so even with longish 7.5 round bursts we would get 75 "engagements" (currently only 44). More standard 5 round bursts would give 150 engagements.

Weapon 011 37mm ZP obr 39: Armor penetration 51mm at 300 meters, so at least 6 in game terms. (http://www.battlefield.ru/61k/stranitsa-2.html)

Weapon 37mm L46 B-3: a copy of the 3,7 cm PaK 35/35, so AP Pen 4 is implausibly low. See also: http://www.battlefield.ru/b3-1930.html, which would indicate at least 50mm penetration at 100 meters. The PaK 35/36 was not such a high tech gun that the Soviets could have somehow failed in copying it (or its ammo).

Weapon 033 76.2mm obr 39: max. range 13,290 meters (203)

Weapon 036 76mm obr 00/02: max. range 8,800 meters (176)

Weapon 037 76mm obr 02/30: max. range 13,500 meters (204), assuming L/40 version. The earlier L/30 version, still used in WW2, had a max. range of 10,600 meters (201)

Weapons 048 & 050: almost same muzzle velocity, same ammunition, same penetration. The AP Pen 8 given to L-11 is probably closer to the truth.

Weapon 054 76mm L51 obr 36: max. range 13,500-14,000 meters, 204 in game terms, anyways.

Weapon 059 107mm M1910/30: max. range about 16 km (206).

Weapon 060 76.2mm M1942 FG: max. range 13,290 meters (203)

Weapon 068 100mm D10 Gun: AP Pen 16, while other Soviet 100mm guns have 18. The 100mm ammunition did improve after the war, but according to http://www.battlefield.ru/d10/stranitsa-2.html the basic BR-412 could already penetrate much more than 160mm at muzzle (about 175mm extrapolated).

Weapon 071 105mm obr 37 IG: judging from the image of Unit 356, this is a captured 10,5 cm leFH 18M. The max. range of that piece was 12,325 meters (202). It isn't available as off-map artillery in the current OOB, but better to correct it anyways.

Weapon 074 122mm obr 10/30: max. range 8,900 meters (178)

Weapon 081 152mm L32ML-20S: penetration with (S)APHE ammunition about 135mm (14) at 100 meters, slightly more with APCB available since late 1944. I don't know if the APCB penetration is enough for AP Pen 15 in the game. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/152_mm_...37_%28ML-20%29

Weapon 084 Satchel Charge: has unrealistically high WH Size, HE Pen and HE Kill for a charge carried by hand. Compare to German OOB Weapon 229.

Weapon 136 PTRD obr 41 ATR: had sights only up to 1000 meters. However, ballistics were the same as PTRS (Weapon 143). It already has a lower accuracy than barrel length (1350mm) would give it, so in my opinion you can give it the same range as PTRS. Giving them different ranges makes no sense and neither does the current range 14 (see below).

Weapon 143 PTRS obr 41 ATR: had adjustable sights up to 1,500 meters (30). Current range 14 also means that penetration beyond 250 meters is unrealistically low (ballistically the 14.5mm bullets were/are superior to 12.7mm bullets).

Weapon 210 25mm ZP obr 40: muzzle velocity was 900 m/s, so AP Pen 2 is unrealistically low. Although I have no penetration test data for this gun, it is pretty safe and quite conservative to assume AP Pen 4 with that kind of MV and 25mm projectile.

Suggestion: add 152mm M1909/30 Howitzer (name could be 152mm obr 09/30) and corresponding on map units. This was the most numerous 152mm howitzer of the Red Army almost until the end of the war. Max. range 9,500 meters by Jaeger Platoon (http://www.jaegerplatoon.net/ARTILLERY6.htm), 8,850m by Wikipedia.

[Pibwl]

Originally Posted by PvtJoker

Unit 335 T-40S: the correct name for this tank would be T-40 "030" or T-30. The T-40S had the same armament as the original T-40, but deleted amphibious capability. Production of the T-40S started a couple of months earlier than T-30. Armor was not increased as such (construction was changed to all welded), so it should be the same as Unit 006 for all T-40 variants. Speed should also be the same. All of these tanks were officially called just T-40; the "030" was the factory index of a T-40 with a 20mm TNSh AC. T-30 seems to have been the most popular contemporary name for this variant. T-40S is an unofficial post-WW2 designation.

According to a monograph by I. Moshchanskiy "T-30, T-40, T-40S" of Военная летопись series, generally right, but not exactly.
This unit indeed should be named T-30, which was semi-official designation, used sometimes also in the army and factory documents. However, increased armour is correct - "030" index was connected just with armour strengthened to 15mm and some minor improvements, that entered production from around 8/41. Actually it should be given armour 2 also at hull rear - it was 13 mm, lightly sloped.

Part of "030" tanks were produced with DShK MG, only part were given 20mm gun from late August, although it was initially unreliable and their production was low. Dates are correct then
Part of them had radio - say 21 or 31 (now 01).

There should be also added T-40S as a Light Tank, armed with DshK, like unit 006, but without swimming capability - produced from late July 41. It should be available in 8/41-12/42.
(A drawing in this book suggests, that T-40S had strengthened amour as well, to lightly sloped 13mm from all sides, although there's no such clear mention in a text - IMHO it should be strengthened to 2 to represent also DShK-armed T-30s).


Also part of original 006 T-40 were quipped with radio - it should have some 21-31 of radio chance. By the way, a front armour 2 might be too big - it was 9 mm sloped at 30deg from vertical.

Michal

[Pibwl]

T-26 family:

T-26 in all its mutations has too much frontal armour 3 - it was only 15 mm, close to vertical, the same for turret's front.
Only in model 1939 it was raised to 15-20mm, very slightly sloped, but, according to a Russian monograph, a protection remained roughly the same, because instead of cemented plates there were homogeneous plates used.
The same for other users, like Spain.

004 T-26 M1933s (variant with AAMG) - AAMG on standarized P-40 mounting was accepted in 1937 only (1/35).
"s" in M1933s is redundant - unless it's supposed to indicate AAMG. It could be marked with "P-40", or maybe "+"?.

A problem with AAMGs on T-26s and T-28s and some other tanks is, that only part of tanks were equipped with them, and in case of T-26 they are generally not seen on photos, apart from photos from tests... Pity, that there's no magic way of randomizing AAMG presence.


176 T-26TU M1931 - twin-turret tanks weren't armed with 12.7mm TMG (Russian sources don't mention such armament) - and DShK itself was developed in 1938 only. It could be changed to so-called T-26 M1932 with short-barrel PS-1 37mm (Hotchkiss-based) gun and MG.
I can't find gun specifications at the moment, but a good approximation should be French 37mm SA18, with penetration 3 and range 30 - only it should keep its penetration through all the range (it had longer barrel, and probably more modern rounds). Or is it weapon #12 37mm PP obr 15R, used on MS tank?
There were 222 rounds carried.
Correct picture is 19697.

It was available from spring 1932 - I believe they were extinct by some 1938 (there is however one photo from 1937)

Hull rear armour was the same 13 or 15 mm, as other sides (now 1)


There were also a handful of twin-turret tanks made (20-30?) with longer 37mm B-3 gun (weapon #14) - used in around 1932-1935.

Twin-turret gun tanks constituted only some 1/4 of twin-turret tanks, so maybe it's worth to create them as separate class and create mixed units with gun tank and twin-turret light tanks? (T-26 M1931 is the only class 12 Light Tank available in this period).


222 T-26 M1931 - hull rear armour on twin-turret tanks was the same 13 or 15 mm, as other sides (now 1)
Standard tanks without rear MG had 122 gun rounds (now 100)


224 T-26 M1933 - it was produced only from summer 33 - not earlier, than 9/33 (now 3/33 - a date of prototype tests)

337 T-26 M1937s - Kolomiets' book recognizes it as "model 1938".
Radio chance should be more - some 20 (now 10), since more tanks had radio by then, although M1938 itself was not numerous transitional model (code 1)

338 T-26 M1939 - gun ammo was even 186 (165 had tanks with radio).
They remained in use in small quantities on some theatres until the end of war, even against Japan - although there should be made another entry, so that it's not chosen by the AI instead of T-34.
Radio chance should be more - some 20.
In official documents they were known as T-26-1 - maybe call them T-26-1 M1939?

517 T-26 M1939+ - might be called T-26E (no official designation, but E was commonly used for Russian "ekranirovanny" or "s ekranami"). First were made and used in combat in 2/40 (now 4/41). There are knowns photos from combat in 2/44 (now ends at 12/42)
Hull sides and turret sides were also strengthened with some 20 mm plates (possibly even 30-40mm plates were sometimes used)

.

[Pibwl]

Originally Posted by Pibwl

004 T-26 M1933s (variant with AAMG) - AAMG on standarized P-40 mounting was accepted in 1937 only (1/35).
"s" in M1933s is redundant - unless it's supposed to indicate AAMG. It could be marked with "P-40", or maybe "+"?.

A problem with AAMGs on T-26s and T-28s and some other tanks is, that only part of tanks were equipped with them, and in case of T-26 they are generally not seen on photos, apart from photos from tests... Pity, that there's no magic way of randomizing AAMG presence.

All in all, I believe, that much more probable was encountering plain T-26, than T-26 with AAMG. I haven't seen any photo of abandoned or destroyed T-26 with AAMG fitted, and only some have AAMG mounting. Even if a peculiar tank had AAMG, not always would a commander stick out and fire it (in fact he would probably either aim a gun and CMG, or fire AAMG).

Therefore, IMO AAMG variants should have radio x1, and there should be created plain T-26 M1939 with radio x0 (M1938 was rare anyway, so AAMG model with x1 is enough).

Michal

[PvtJoker]

Originally Posted by Pibwl

T-26 family:


337 T-26 M1937s - Kolomiets' book recognizes it as "model 1938".
Radio chance should be more - some 20 (now 10), since more tanks had radio by then, although M1938 itself was not numerous transitional model (code 1)

338 T-26 M1939 - gun ammo was even 186 (165 had tanks with radio).
They remained in use in small quantities on some theatres until the end of war, even against Japan - although there should be made another entry, so that it's not chosen by the AI instead of T-34.
Radio chance should be more - some 20.
In official documents they were known as T-26-1 - maybe call them T-26-1 M1939?

517 T-26 M1939+ - might be called T-26E (no official designation, but E was commonly used for Russian "ekranirovanny" or "s ekranami"). First were made and used in combat in 2/40 (now 4/41). There are knowns photos from combat in 2/44 (now ends at 12/42)
Hull sides and turret sides were also strengthened with some 20 mm plates (possibly even 30-40mm plates were sometimes used)

.

About the radios: have you considered that the game engine always gives formation leaders radios? So for the radio chance to be say 20%, it would require that in real life one of every five non-command tanks had a radio. The availability of radios did increase towards the end on the 1930s, but if I remember correctly, it only meant that all platoon command tanks were equipped with a radio, whereas among early production T-26 M1933 only the company commander's tank had a radio (which can't be modeled in the game).

The front hull armor value for the T-26 is somewhat of a problem. Most of it is close to vertical with 15mm plate, but the middle part is 7mm at 80 degrees (40 mm penetration path) and the lowest part (impossible to hit with AT guns, but still possible with ATRs) is 15mm at 62 degrees (32mm penetration path). Whether these constitute enough of the frontal surface to increase it to Armor Value 3 in game terms is not clear.

The turret on the other hand is round, and so is the gun mantlet, or since M1938 most of the turret frontal area consists of the large rounded gun mantlet. It's probably the rounding that made the designers of the OOB to give it Armor Value 3. If that is really warranted or not is again not clear.

About the T-26E: there does not seem to have been a real standard for this upgrade. Finnish experience with them indicates that they were very under-powered and unreliable. Consequently the Finnish army never up-armored their T-26s in a similar manner (unlike the Finnish T-28s which were all upgraded to T-28E standard). There is no way to model mechanical unreliability in the game, but if armor is added from the current rather modest upgrade, the speed should be cut down even more.

Concerning AAMG: I agree that most of the time T-26s did not have the AAMG fitted. There is really no other way to do model that in the game than to make two different variants and give the AAMG variant radio code x1 so that the AI does not pick them very often. Human players can still do so if they wish to, and there's really nothing wrong with that. The AAMG seems to have been a little more common with the T-28 M1938 that with the T-26, but still not universally fitted.

[Pibwl]

As for the radios, they weren't reserved for commander's tanks. According to Bariatynski, there were made 4102 single-turret tanks without radio and 4034 with radio, and their output was roughly even from 1934. This indicates, that it could be even more, than radio=20.

BTW: in 1018 single-turret tanks without radio produced in 1940, 208 had AAMGs (there are specific data available for 1940 only).

As for armour - well, 7mm plate at 80 degrees may cause a bullet bounce, but it seems to me, it is not equal to 40mm... If we keep 3, than I want the same for 7TP and Vickers

As the T-26E: I agree, that a speed could be cut down even more (there is no precise data, but some 7-8 looks correct). And it rather should have no AAMG.

[sku]

just one minor correction

343 Stalinezs - the name should be 'Stalinets'

[blazejos]

Just do like to propose adding of some small AA weapons in soviet OOB & allies like LWP and Czechoslovakia. I add atachment with jpg and lbm for proposed units

Unit 191 DShK AAMG

New Picture DShK AA single.lbm for replace drawing

New Unit DShK AAMG Triple

Three MG DShk on inside frame which can rotate similar to western AA guns used after Normandy invasion

New Unit Gaz-AA DShK AAMG

Single Dshk installed on truck from 1943 looks like that was one of standard installations of this MG for AA protection in second half of war

New Unit Maxim AAMG single

Single Maxim MG ready for AA fire in my opinion by looking on uniforms of soldiers on one photo this was earliest deployment of this MG to AA duties since beginning and by compartment with another photo I suggest that was common well until end of the war and meaby even longer as well as maxims where in use.

New Unit Maxim AAMG double

Double variant may be ancestor of of famous quadruple and as we can see on one of the photos was also in use

Unit 568 Maxim AAMG double

There is nice photo for quadruple maxim for replace drawing


Unit 39 GAZ AAMG

There is also nice new photo from Red Square with solders in uniforms and helmets from pre war times


Unit new GAZ MM 25mm

Photo is from Vyborg area from 1944 so this 25-mm gun 72-K was well in use until end of the war and even longer guns itself until around 1955. Production of this vehicles with 25mm gun started in 1941 probably after German invasion and around 200 was made according to source http://www.wio.ru/galgrnd/flak/spflak.htm



Unit 347 & 384 25mm 1940 72-K

Manufactured until end of 1944 in big number 4067 pieces. Was in service long after the war until 1955 there where two variants lighter manufactured from 1940 to 1943 without shield and after 1943 with front shield. In Polish LWP this guns was interdicted in 1944 and used together with 37mm gun. Ammo after war was also manufactured in Yugoslavia and was delivered to soviet satellites in Eastern Europe, Africa and Middle East Just do like to propose add armour for heavier unit and change date of availability.

Unit new 25mm 1944 94-KM

Double 25mm 1940 build inside a frame of 37mm gun production start in 1944 12 was build and finish 1945 when 225 was build. Totally 337 was constructed difference are guns build on cars chassis. Is possible that ground version was with shield and on truck chassis without source for truck based version http://www.wio.ru/galgrnd/flak/spflak.htm

Unit 379 76.2 mm AA 1938
Better photo of this 1938 version in ground fire position photo is from Stalingrad


Unit new YAG-10 with 76.2mm AA gun

They were build in 1933 in small number only 61 but were used in Moscow defence. Based on heavy truck Yag

[Griefbringer]

Originally Posted by blazejos

Unit 347 & 384 25mm 1940 72-K
Manufactured until end of 1944 in big number 4067 pieces. Was in service long after the war until 1955 there where two variants lighter manufactured from 1940 to 1943 without shield and after 1943 with front shield. In Polish LWP this guns was interdicted in 1944 and used together with 37mm gun. Ammo after war was also manufactured in Yugoslavia and was delivered to soviet satellites in Eastern Europe, Africa and Middle East Just do like to propose add armour for heavier unit and change date of availability.

As far as I know, there is no way in this game to represent the difference in protection provided for a mobile artillery piece by the presence or lack of gunshield.

(Armour ratings being only used for vehicles and fortifications.)

[Mobhack]

Originally Posted by Griefbringer

As far as I know, there is no way in this game to represent the difference in protection provided for a mobile artillery piece by the presence or lack of gunshield.

(Armour ratings being only used for vehicles and fortifications.)

Quite so. There are no gunshields. There is also no body armour for infantry.