The new improved 8.1 oob thread

[BulletMagnet]

Ok guys the other thread is a mess.SO i will atempt to start a new CIVIL one where we can all find our happy place.No rock throwing,no smack talkin,No crap slingin.The OObs and nothing but the oobs so help us god.
Carry on.[8D]

[Kevin E. Duguay]

Is the SU-37 SPG in the Russian OOB gone yet? I have a nice Icon from I think Warhorse for a nice SU-45[;)]

[Major Destruction]

Quick replies before this one gets locked too.
[&:]

The M19 mortar according to my information (which is open to discussion) did not see active service in WW2. As a unit that is classed as light mortar, it can be modelled for use in the same manner as any other light mortar, including those with bipods and those without. There is no distinction in the game.
Now, your suggestion of placing the weapon into airborne or special services units as a secondary infantry weapon has merit. This would entail creating a new weapon in the weapons list (not impossible) and using it in units after May 1945.

The SU-37 is still in the game. But that is not carved in stone.
What is the icon number for Mike's SU-47 icon? It would be nice if it were 590.

Calliope: This unit was removed from the onboard assets before version 2. It was found to not work properly as onboard unit in the earlier beta versions. There may have been other issues but as this decision was so long ago, I don't remember or have the relevant email discussion. Scenario designers can use this unit as an onboard asset by editing their OOB to give the unit onboard SP Rocket class (110) then purchase and deploy the unit. This is made possible by placing the icon in the game.

[Kevin E. Duguay]

Major,

Im off to the local library to grab that book by I.V. Hogg, about the M19. In the mean time this is info from the ASL Rule Book. Their research is usually verry well done so here goes.

Text:
M19 60mm Mortar: Also known as the T18E6, this was a lighter, simplified version of the M2. Only a small number were made, and were issued to a few airborne and special purpose units. The M19 used the same tube as the M2, but had a much smaller baseplate and no bipod. It also differed from the M2 by being trigger-fired.

Range, Min-2 Max-15 Could only use charge 1 with small baseplate.

Ammo, Same as M2, HE WP IR

Available from January 1944 to end of WW II and beyond.

More from Bruce N. Canfield's; U.S. Infantry Weapons of World War II

The successful use by the Japanese of their "knee mortar" resulted in some modifications of the 60mm mortar in an attempt to come up with a similar type of weapon.

Canfield then goes on to describe how the Japanese mortar worked and why it should not be fired from the knee. The next paragraph talks about how some troops used the standard M2 tube only to save weight. In this paragraph He mentions a passage from the book "Band of Brothers" where the mortars were used in such a way.

" Malarkey found his mortar tube, but not the base plate or tripod (sic). Setting the tube on the ground, he fired a dozen rounds toward the Manor. Guarnere joined him, working another mortar tube. They discovered later that every round hit its target. "That kind of expertise you don't teach," Winters commented. " It's a God-given touch." When Malarkey ran out of mortar rounds, his tube was almost compleatly buried. An old French farmer got a shovel to help him dig it out."

He continues: The above passage not withstanding, the mortar was rarely used in such a fashion as any sort of accuracy was extremely problematical when the weapon was used without the mount and sight.

In order to improve this situation, the M19 60mm mortar was standardized later in the war. The M19 consisted of the standard M2 60mm mortar barrel with a cap that contained a specially designed trigger mechanism. this trigger mechanism was activated by a lanyard and permitted the mortar to be lever fired rather than drop fired, as was done with the standard mortar. This resulted in better accuracy than simply useing the standard mortar in the drop fire mode,(without baseplate sights etc. KED) but lack of sights and a steady base made it less effective than the M2 mortar. The M19 was not fielded in extremely large numbers because it was not accurate at ranges much beyond 200 yards. It's compactness and light weight made it a useful weapon in certain types of close range combat, but the standard M2 mortar with either the M2 or M5 mount and collimator sight was much more accurate and deadly to the enemy."

I'll quote I.V. Hogg next if you like.[;)]

Saving my ammo for later, but I need a response. Thank you and GOOOD DAY[:D]

I will repeat myself again, why have two weapons with the exact same stats that differ in name only? What would be wrong with including the short range version of the 60mm mortar (M19) that would reflect it's intended use?[&:]

[Kevin E. Duguay]

Mike's SU-45 will have to be given its own slot. I do have the Icon however.

Calliope: I have seen ranges posted by others in this forum for this weapon ranging from 1100 to 4000 yds. Either way it should be brought back as an on board artillery asset because of this fact alone. Even at 4000 yds it would become useless on some of the larger maps.
( 22 to 80 hex range )[&:]

I'll try to get more info on this thing too![;)]

[Alby]

ORIGINAL: Kevin E. Duguay

Calliope: I have seen ranges posted by others in this forum for this weapon ranging from 1100 to 4000 yds. Either way it should be brought back as an on board artillery asset because of this fact alone. Even at 4000 yds it would become useless on some of the larger maps.
( 22 to 80 hex range )[&:]

I'll try to get more info on this thing too![;)]

germans , ruskies, USMC, and brits get their on board rockets,
why not the USA?? [:D]

added the USMC [;)]

[Kevin E. Duguay]

GOOD POINT!!!!!

[Kevin E. Duguay]

Major,

Book has been out, I'm mad[:@] I had it in my hand and let it go!! Read above posts!![;)]

[Frank W.]

(post moved to"Bitch & Moan" thread")

[KG Erwin]

Whoa, Alby--the USMC DOES have on-board rockets--these are the 22-hex/1100 yard short-range Mk7s I mentioned. The truck-mounted ones aren't available though, until April 1945. They were only used on Okinawa.
However, we also have LCTs equipped with these beginning in January 1944. Of necessity, these have to venture close to shore to be effective, but will also be within range of enemy shore batteries and mortars. Hazardous duty, indeed.
The long range 4.5s are still there, too, for off-board support.
Stuart or Bryan will have to address the "medium-range" rockets for the US Army. The Marines apparently didn't have these made available to them. They only had the "in your face" or safely distant versions.

ORIGINAL: Alby

ORIGINAL: Kevin E. Duguay

Calliope: I have seen ranges posted by others in this forum for this weapon ranging from 1100 to 4000 yds. Either way it should be brought back as an on board artillery asset because of this fact alone. Even at 4000 yds it would become useless on some of the larger maps.
( 22 to 80 hex range )[&:]

I'll try to get more info on this thing too![;)]

germans , ruskies, and brits get their on board rockets,
why not the USA?? [:D]

[harlekwin]

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin

Whoa, Alby--the USMC DOES have on-board rockets--these are the 22-hex/1100 yard short-range Mk7s I mentioned. The truck-mounted ones aren't available though, until April 1945. They were only used on Okinawa.
However, we also have LCTs equipped with these beginning in January 1944. Of necessity, these have to venture close to shore to be effective, but will also be within range of enemy shore batteries and mortars. Hazardous duty, indeed.
The long range 4.5s are still there, too, for off-board support.

ORIGINAL: Alby

ORIGINAL: Kevin E. Duguay

Calliope: I have seen ranges posted by others in this forum for this weapon ranging from 1100 to 4000 yds. Either way it should be brought back as an on board artillery asset because of this fact alone. Even at 4000 yds it would become useless on some of the larger maps.
( 22 to 80 hex range )[&:]

I'll try to get more info on this thing too![;)]

germans , ruskies, and brits get their on board rockets,
why not the USA?? [:D]

The USMC is NOT the USA(United States Army).

The USA had the units and the units had the ability and were in fact used during Cobra and beyond.

[KG Erwin]

No, they aren't, Sven, and I'm certain the USMC would never wish to be. (That smiley is in memory of Marine legend "Chesty Puller", and infers nothing else).[;)]
Bryan or Stuart will have to step up and discuss what the US Army has available.

[JJKettunen]

(post moved to "Bitch & Moan " thread)

[Rune Iversen]

(post moved to "Bitch & Moan" thread)

[BulletMagnet]

(Bullet Magnet: I took care of it.)

[harlekwin]

Well since evidently the "B+M about the OOBs" thread is going to be a repository of the unwashed masses and likely ignored I will post a post I made there here as it is a serious one and I welcome any input or analysis of my point by the washed masses as well as we unwashed.

Please feel free to opine.

I have been pondering the 150mm Pen of the 76.2 HEAT round for Ivan and it got me to thinking.....

The game does not properly model the wildly variable nature of HEAT penetration. A deviation of as little as 10% in the jet degrades penetration 30% or so IIRC.(I will dig up a table if able) Anyway point of impact and the surface have a lot to do with how the jet forms.

I understand that the engine will not handle and the model is NOT equipped to factor in deviations in point of impact rendering an effect on the formation of the jet, but my concern with the radical pen increase is that if anything barring a randomizer the drive should be to underrate not overrate HEAT rounds. Don't misunderstand I am not advocating a reduction in existing HEAT round stats but the radical increase leads to a performance that is in no way indicative of reality at all and has a chilling effect on tactics.

All of the powers understood the ease with which the era's heat rounds could have their damage reduced and took field expedient measures to do so. The game does not and cannot render the wildly variable nature of these expedients so what we are left with is a vastly overrated heat round engaging NO counter measures. I am not at this late date in the life of SPWAW advocating a radical shift just explaining the reasoning behind my resistance to the 150mm penetration.

HEAT rounds pen is given for a flush hit center mass on a body of steel. That happens like oh "never". I wish it did but wish in one hand and .....

you get the idea....

[;)]

Believe me if it were that easy SABOT would never have been invented.

[Goblin]

ORIGINAL: Frank W.

ORIGINAL: Kevin E. Duguay

GOOD POINT!!!!!

the "tiger kiddies" - (c) by ammo sgt. -
will not agree

Guess this one qualifies as OK for this thread....

Goblin[8|]

[KG Erwin]

Yes, thank you, harlekwin. Your knowledge is a valuable resource, and everyone on the team realizes this. The team is reading this forum.

[KG Erwin]

Goblin, you're a good friend of mine, so don't feel bashful. If you have facts and sources to back them up, then post away. [:)]

ORIGINAL: Goblin

ORIGINAL: Frank W.

ORIGINAL: Kevin E. Duguay

GOOD POINT!!!!!

the "tiger kiddies" - (c) by ammo sgt. -
will not agree

Guess this one qualifies as OK for this thread....

Goblin[8|]

[Goblin]

Fact : If anyone of a number of certain people posted what Frank did, the post would have been moved or deleted already. Consider this recieving a complaint about it, because I am officially complaining about its irrelevant nature.

Goblin