Finnish OOB 5.5
 

/me puts on a helmet to protect his vulnerable head from angry admins

Now, before I start posting all my opinions I want to thank you for the magnificent work you've done. I know Finns have been loud in this forum before and nitpicking all the details they perceive should be changed, but this time I come back with some evidence.

Finnish defence forces is in progress of updating their equipment pages, starting with SAM:

Finnish defence forces AA missiles.

Finnish OOB unit 350 and unit 353, Pasi Crotale and Pasi Crotale M respectively, availability dates are a bit early. FDF specifies it was modernized during 2009-2010, therefore maybe 350 should be available until 12/2010, 353 available from 1/2009, representing the transition period. Or then just 1/2009 as the transition phase.

Also the ItO 05M specifies that they're using BOLIDE, a slight inconsistence as OOB specifies ammunition as RBS-70 II, where Bolide is the upgraded version of Mk 2. No information is given when they moved on to Bolide exclusively. Therefore, unit 207 RBS-70 SAM and 352 Bandvagn RBS-70 => Change weapon 1 to Bolide?

I also remember reading that Finland was not going to modernize the BMP-2 anymore (re: 033, BMP-2FIN), but I can't find any reliable references for that. I'll post here if I can find them, but IIRC they're opting for getting more CV 9030s instead.

Unit 112, AGS-17. Finland decommissioned the weapon for unreliable ammunition after an incident that took a life of a reservist. In finnish machine translation.

Instead, KrKK 05 was introduced quickly and AGS-17 is no longer in use. Still, unit 574 AGL Nest is only using AGS-17, should probably be available only until 12/2004 and then another unit using KrKK 05 available from 1/2005. Maybe the names for weapons could be consistent, too. AGL in Finnish military web pages in 2007

ENTER WISHLIST

Please also include the Guard Jaegars, the way you think it'd be best. Guard Jaegars are trained for fighting in built areas, and are using equipment not available at normal Jaegar units (yet). I remember testing night vision stuff during my conscription in 1999.
Some of the equipment and actions can be seen in this video (In Finnish) (jump to 2:25 if you will)
What's different (all these are also available for special jaegar units):
- Shrapnel protection vest with added plates
- Optics, red dot sights (at least since 2005)
- Tactical radios
- Access to grenade pistols
- Access to shotguns (mostly Guard MPs)

What I think could be done:
Copy from ordinary jaegars, maybe change the unit class to Guards Infantry, if the added bonuses aren't strange or out-of-place.
+1 morale for the radios and the warm feeling of security from wearing a shrapnel vest
+3..5 to weapon accuracy from optics
Possibility for weapon combinations, including shotguns and grenade pistols
Add a support platoon or two, 95 RCL M, KrKK 05 or Mortars
Vehicles: Pasi XA-185, trucks


Special Jaegars should also have access to red dot sights.

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

Speaking of Finland, I have several minor remarks (mostly month corrections according to a Russian article in Tehnika i Vooruzhenie 1/1999):


#003 PT-76 - first were delivered in the end of 10/63 (practically 11/63). I believe they should be PT-76B in fact, produced since 1959, with D-56TS gun with stabilizer. I don't know how about Finnish tanks, but standard Russian ammo load was 24/4/4/8.

#008 T-34/85 M44 - M44 is absolutely useless and non-official addition

#013 T-54B - first were delivered in 9/59

#017 T-72M1S - first were delivered on 13.12.84 (practically 1/85)

#027 BMP-1 -first were delivered in 6/81.

#048 XA-180 PaSi - first were delivered in 8/84

#109 Jaeger section - proper pic is 41086 (Rk.62 rifle)

#117 Jaeger section - proper pic is 11109 (Rk.54 is just a Soviet AK)

#121 Jaeger section - proper pic is 41086 (Rk.62 rifle)

#130 infantry sec - proper pic is 14099 (Rk.56 is just a Chinese Type 56) (or 17098)

#133 Pioneer section - proper pic is 11109

#145 Mil Mi-8 - when it was armed, it carried 4x16 57mm rockets as a standard, so their number could be doubled or the weapon should be upgraded to 4x57mm S-5K (eg. from Russian oob - not weapon 190). Also some AP shots should be given.

#146 Mil Mi-4 - the MG wasn't DShK - weapon's name should be changed to TKB-481 or A-12,7 or just 12.7mm MG or TKB MG (Mi-4 is the only unit using this weapon in oob)

#215 MT-LBv - first 10 were delivered only in mid-12/84 (more were delivered only from 1988)

#281 scouts - proper pic is 11109

#282 scouts - proper pic is 14099 (Rk.56 is just a Chinese Type 56) (or 17098)

#291 ski scouts - proper pic is 11109

#292 ski scouts - proper pic is 14099 (or 17098)


#328 152 TELAK 91 - delivered in 11/91

#345, 346 StuG M40G - they should have also some MG (MG-42?)

#380, 381 37mm AT-Gun - better pic is 36974 (Bofors 37 mm)

#383, 384 45mm AT-Gun - proper pic is 29423 (Soviet 45mm)

#423 Coast Jaegers - proper pic is 11109 (Rk.54 is just a Soviet AK)

#424 Coast Jaegers - proper pic is 41086 (Rk.62 rifle)

#491, 491 Patarooper sec - proper pic is 11109 (Rk.54 is just a Soviet AK)

#514 Reserve Section - proper pic is 14099 (Rk.56 is just a Chinese Type 56) (or 17098)

#520 WSK SM-1 helicopter - Max speed was 185km/h (61 instead of 76) - concerns all countries (SM-1 and Mi-1)

Regards,
Michal

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

I'll put this on the list and look into it when we re-start work on the game


Don

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

Finnish Wikipedia (yes, I know it's really unreliable) tells that it was taken into field tests in 1994 for the first time. It would fit the general Finnish mentality to keep it in lab studies for a couple of years before going to the field. One could think that it would be hurried in case of conflict, so availability of 1993-1994 would probably be applicable.

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

AFAIK Finnish StuGs had DT machine guns installed in loader's shield after arrival in 1943/44. Source:www.andreaslarka.net

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

#532 Sisu Proto - it was produced since 1965 (Sisu KB-45, then A-45), not 1946. We could make some other truck with generic name before this date.

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

Finland abandons its (last?) two Mil Mi-8s and donates them to Hungary.
(In Finnish) http://www.hs.fi/kotimaa/artikkeli/S.../1135268482771

Units 145, 147: Limit availability to 12/110

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

Finnish national broadcasting corporation has a small article "In pictures - Legendary FDF equipment at the end of the road" listing equipment that's to be upgraded or removed from service and replaced.

http://yle.fi/uutiset/kotimaa/2011/0...n_2833626.html

Probable paths:
APILAS => NLAW
Pasi XA-180 / -185 => Patria AMV
23 ItK 61 "Sergei" (23mm AAG) => MANPADs
Pasi Crotale => More Unimogs?
66 KES 88 Orak (LAW M72A5) => ?
7.62 RK 62 (Assault Rifle) => ?
BTR-50 / -60 => ? (Probably just scrapped, no advantage over AMVs)

Then there's radios, cooking equipment, tents etc. with no simulational value.

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

FDF Army to purchase TI equipment (In Finnish)

Translation:
Defence Forces to purchase thermal imaging equipment

The Army Materiel Division has signed an agreement of acquiring thermal imaging equipment, authorized by the Department of Defense. Tender was won bt the American Raytheon ELCAN Optical Technologies, which supplies Phantom TI units in 2012. The purchase price including VAT is € 6.5 million.

TI equipment will improve the Army's ability to fight in dark and will improve the capability after Finland abolishes anti-personnel mines. The Army Materiel Division was mandated by DoD in February 2010.

Equipment maintenance and installation will be performed by Finnish company called Millog Oy. The acquisition includes an option for later purchases.

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

Got confirmation, Finland scrapped T72s in 2007-2008 (which also resulted in a nice corruption scandal and criminal court, but I digress) except for the engineering tanks.

From 2006, In Finnish: http://www.hs.fi/kotimaa/artikkeli/P.../1135224786324
Quick fixed English machine translation:
The Finnish Defence Forces will discard this year about 350 tanks by selling them for scrap. Due to the purchased German Leopard tanks and demands for savings in storage costs that have accumulated on decommissioned equipment, FDF had to sign the first scrapping contract.

The Finnish Defence Forces will gain on average EUR 10 000 per tank. The contract with Stena Metalli the three-year scrapping program also includes scrap metal pick-up at FDF locations as well as the collection from Kittilä blast area shrapnel collection.

About T72 in Finnish Wikipedia: http://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/T72#K.C...C3.B6_Suomessa
Now, T-72 fleet is out of the Finnish Defence Forces use. The tanks were sold and unsold scrapped in Jyväskylä Seppälänkangas industrial area starting in late 2006. In 2007 Armed Forces decided to scrap the 240 main battle tanks, 220 vehicles and the assault tanks and more than 200 field guns. Some of the scrapped vehicles were T-72s and field guns 152-mm howitzers. Colonel Markku Laine stated that the upkeep costs of the old equipment would have exceeded their sales value in a long run.

In late summer 2007 T72 surplus stocks of spare parts were sold thru Patria Weapons Systems to the Czech Republic. The buyer was a Dako Cz, and the purchase price of EUR 4.1 million, including spare parts 430 000 titles.

In Finland, the T72's were replaced by the Leopard 2 A4.


In effect, Finland scrapped old Soviet equipment of T72 (NOTE! Not the mine clearing ones!), BMP-1 (already correct in the OOB) and some howitzers. IIRC the discussion was that there's no point in keeping different guns of (approximately) same caliber, favoring SPAs over static howitzers.

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

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

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

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

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

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)

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

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

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

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

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

That's why I don't :)

Thanks. Everybody needs a motivation sometimes :)

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

Regards
Michal

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

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.

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

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

Don

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

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

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

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

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.

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

Rolled out from factory to the testing for FDF.

Thanks, I'll check this out.
Sounds fair and reasonable. The big issue here is how we define if something should be in the OOB or not, so consistency between the decisions. 2013, mentioned in post above, is the day they start training conscripts with the vehicles they ordered in 2010 (start of mass production), as mentioned in FDF site (in Finnish)
"Kehitystyö käynnistettiin 1990-luvun lopulla ja alkuperäinen arvoltaan 120 M€ sopimus kehitystyöstä ja hankinnasta allekirjoitettiin vuonna 2003. Nyt tehdyllä sopimuksen tarkennuksella käynnistetään vaunujen sarjatuotanto."

"The development of concept was started in late 1990's and the original contract worth 120 M€ for development and purchase was signed in 2003. Now signed amendment*) of contract will start the mass produce of vehicles."

*) tarkennus; improvement in accuracy or precision; clarification

I now found out what's the big hassle about:
Original time frame was that the prototypes would be tested in 2006 and mass deployment in 2008-2009.
"Puolustusvoimat tilasi vuonna 2003 Patria Hägglunds Oy:lta Amos- Fin kranaatinheitinapanssariajoneuon kehitystyön, 0-sarjan ja sarjan. 0-sarjan kenttäkokeet toteutetaan vuonna 2006. Sarjatoimitukset ovat vuosina 2008-2009."
http://web.archive.org/web/200711141...&equipment=167

Then national broadcasting company news:
http://web.archive.org/web/200904301...a_566436.html?

After three years of field tests (news in Feb/2009) they are still working to improve the safety of the loading system and the rate of fire. They had been delivered 4 vehicles, 0-series (prototype) as they are called and 20 to be delivered when the deal is finalized.

Now to the consistency issue: FDF has equipment that is not in field use but in test; would it be used in a war or would it not? The same thing goes with every technology they get their hands on, it's first tested for 2-5 years before they decide whether to start training conscripts, improve the equipment or abandon that stuff. I believe I raised this issue also with the Russian made SPA howitzers as well; FDF has them but they haven't trained conscripts to use them. In the OOB the equipment that's in storage is included even though there's no peace time use for it at all. I'll be glad if you Don could give the general guideline on what counts worthy to be within the OOB and what does not. It'd probably reduce the number of invalid error reports.

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

This could be a "high brow" approach to the question, in such that maybe Finland is trying to hide behind a cloud of mystery as to whether they possess STRIX (Sweden has been using the round since 1994 and is to be used on their AMOS/NEMOS systems.) or not. That they had them, we know, it was tested and considered for AMOS in 2002 when mounted on the XA-200 platform when Finland was evaluating the system. Patria is indicating they (Finland) only use conventional 120mm mortar rounds, this round is the 120 MERHE or Mortar Extended Range High Explosive round. But there is plenty on the net to suggust Finland (In 2005-2007) chose also the MAT-120 multi purpose CM round which in fact Finland has in storage. The MAT-120 is produced in Spain and used by them and others. But an legitimate ammunition industry source shows Sweden, Finland, Australia (SAAB-BOFERS is located there as well.) and Switzerland as users of the STRIX. So as a sampling I'll provide the following below in order of the para above (Hopefully.) First based on the last couple of hours of "word teching" the search parameters and in summary of the topic I offer (Boy I ramble when tired!) :shock:
1. 120 MERHE Round-100%
2. MAT-120 AP/AT CM Round/In real war yes to usage and game.-100%
3. STRIX Round based on info available-75% To further quantify this observation I just need to look to #2 above, if you are willing too intend to use MAT-120 (By buying and storing it you are.) it would make sense to have STRIX around as intermediate solution until MAT-120 gets into the field. That's my opinion and some of you already know how I feel about opinions, suffice to say I have a matching set then!?!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhd1d2sW_3I
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/xa200/
http://www.amos.fi/
http://www.army-guide.com/eng/articl...p?forumID=2231
http://dmilt.com/docs/PGM.pdf

And I stand by my research from last year the PATRIA scandal set back both Finland's and Sweden's programs in the courts of those countries for contract improprieties.

I also know in advance someone will read the Libya article and say something about "they were there" remember all these rounds are interchangeable with fielded 120mm mortar teams and their tubes.

Just saw the above posted. To answer I work with Don on the following basis to avoid programs dying on the vine for various reasons. No equipment (New) for the Patch Posts that are not expected to be fielded within a two year time frame, if modifications do occur these will hopefully be easier fixes for Don down the road, I offer ARJUN and F-35 as most recent examples in the thread (MBT and F-35b Threads.) Exact dates are normally not hard and fast in most sources, so I try to allow for all dates given, manufacturing, shipping and training as best I can; refer to Patch Posts from last years submissions dealing with the BTR-4 to Iraq and Thailand and GRIPEN to Thailand. We maintain a six month "swag" if you will on dates for new and or modified equipment as I submit them. I spend more time on research then putting together the Patch Post and there are numerous examples where I have followed up on equipment status as already put into the game. This is a "check and balance" of what was submitted and if you will a confidence booster for Don and others to my sources and well me I guess for lack of better words. ARJUN, M60T, OPLOT for Thailand the Ethiopian T-72 (And where are they?) are prime examples of how long I track development before submitting them for game submission. This is to avoid the 50+ units just last year I submitted for deletion (That were but for a couple of them EFV and Su-47(?) BERUIK(? MEMORY MUST BE GOING!) because many people have to have it now in the game like the F-35 which I can see being gone for some country users in the game before 2020. You'll get a better feel for all of this and the process in skimming the Patch Posts. Gotta go clock ticking on my rack time and edit time.

Regards,
Pat

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

Currently we can only guess, so it probably would be better left out of the list until we know for sure.

Thanks Pat. The FDF states (ambiguosly) on their page:
XA361 can fire all the current 120mm mortar rounds, illuminating rounds and smoke rounds.

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

I try to endeavor to ONLY add units that make it to the troops that have to use them not the date someone in a factory starts bolting them together. OBVIOUSLY the line can become blurred. "Authoritative" sources do not always differentiate between acceptance, field trial testing and actually issuing them to the troops or sorting out stories from someones second cousins best friend with the drinking problem who swears they were in service at date X.

.......so we do the best we can with the info available


Don

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

Back from the short holiday trip...

Don, I was hoping for a general guideline on what to report and what to not. I believe it'd help reduce frustration for both players as well as for you when people have some generic idea on the stuff that should be in the OOB. I understand perfectly your point on avoiding going back and forth with the stuff that was supposed to be there but wasn't.

So, if we think of the whole cycle in the FDF point of view:

• Ordering phase (estimated field date possible)
• Manufacturing phase (estimation precision improved)
• First deliveries
• Acceptance testing
• Adjustments (with AMOS, took 2-3 years!)
• More deliveries (accepted tests)
• Field tests
• Training for instructors
• Training for conscripts
• Removed from peace time service: no more in active use, no training of conscripts
• Removed from war time service
• Scrapped/sold

We're currently on item number 8 here. You could say that "ok, we add units typically when they're at point 9, but they can be added at point 7 or 8 if they would be used with high probability in a conflict." Of course there's no point of adding anything at ordering phase as situations can vary and projects be cancelled.

Then to removal, I see that you have put the end dates heavily on the last phase, when it's scrapped and it's 100% certain that no old grunt would propose driving those tanks from the armour museum to the battle field. That's a good line and reasonable and therefore the fights over what should not be available anymore are rare (also; having more choices never limits you, but I digress).

Thanks Pat and Don for your amazing work. People here want to support you, but we need your help to do it so that you feel you've been helped!

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

Read some earlier threads about trucks and move classes, but couldn't find a general line: should off-road capable trucks be move class 3?

Finnish OOB (65)

Units 094, 532, 533, 534 Sisu HMTV / Proto / Masi / Rasi (Heavy truck, medium truck, medium truck, heavy truck):

Move class is 2 where as I think it should be 3 (A/T Wheel).
If there is need then some "Civilian / generic truck" or other solution for other than all terrain trucks could be created. These trucks share some parts with XA-180/185 Pasis.

SA-150 in pictures: http://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sisu_SA-150
SA-240 in pictures: http://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sisu_SA-240
Sisu HMTV: http://www.military-today.com/trucks/sisu_e11t_6x6.htm

variant SA-241 also exists, with a 12.7mm AAMG.

Some nations have heavy A/T trucks: Sweden, Austria, Greece, Yugoslavia/Serbia, Bosnia-Herzegovina.

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

If it's a 4x4 or 6x6 then yes it should be MC 3. If it has drive wheels at only one end it's MC 2 or default


Don

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

An interesting Leopard 2R mineclearing tank: http://www.tanknutdave.com/component...nt/article/360

According to a Polish article from 2007, they were to be delivered by 2009, maybe in 2008. Armament: NSVT AAMG, 16-tube SD, crew 3.

Michal

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

I'm assuming the "turret" is fixed (?? ) but we all know what assuming gets us.

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

Yes, it is.

Michal

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

OK then this is what it will look like.

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/attac...1&d=1326848989

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

Great!

Michal

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

They're all AWD trucks, so 4x4, 6x6 or 8x8 depending on configuration.

All-terrain trucks on FDF site:
Finnish legislation changes demanded that in times of peace the conscripts must have seats even on trucks, so seat capacities are included in the information. SA-150 "MaSi" and SA-240 "RaSi" are not in active use by that list, but are probably stored somewhere still, without seating.

4 "HMTV" class trucks are in use with different specs:

Sisu E11T 6x6: Material and personnel transport, puller: seats 3 + 20, carry capacity 15.7 t (metric tonnes). Produced: ?
Entered service: 1998 (http://www.military-today.com/trucks/sisu_e11t_6x6.htm)

Sisu E11T 8x8: Material transports and pulling: seats 3, carry capacity 19 t. Produced 2000-2006
Entered service: 2001 (http://www.military-today.com/trucks/sisu_e11t_8x8.htm)

Sisu A2045 4x4: Material and personnel transport, puller (esp. 120 mm mortars): seats 3 + 12, carry capacity 6 t. Optional armor. Produced 2006-
Entered service: 2009. Replaces Sisu Proto (A-45). http://www.sisua.net/gallery/v/SA/a2...5+_4_.jpg.html
http://www.suomensotilas.fi/pdf/SISU_english.pdf

Sisu E13TP 8x8 "Kärpänen", "Fly": Armored truck, material transports and pulling: seats 2, carry capacity 10-12.7 t depending on configuration. Produced 2006-
Entered service: 5/2010

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

I forgot: could 4x4 trucks be classified as Medium trucks and have less space and probably size smaller than 4? Now there's no separation between what FDF designates as heavy truck as compared to the norm. They just have a small radio code difference in the OOB.

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

Gahh, 30 minute time limit for edits.

The other medium trucks do have issues as well, the 2WD truck could be included as a heavy truck without A/T capabilities.

ZIL 6x6 is missing the A/T capability, I suspect Volvo truck was as well an A/T truck. FDF relied on confiscating civilian trucks in case of conflict, so generic civilian trucks could be added.

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

If you need to edit, then cut and paste to your email program then edit as necessary then paste into the forums and then you will NEVER exceed the 30 minute limit.

However...... I am NOT going to get drawn into a obsessive "debate" about frigging TRUCKS.........OK ? I cannot overstate how little I care about where to draw the line between "medium" and "heavy" trucks but GENERALLY it is carry capacity . The highest carry capacity's get to be called "Heavy" but what's "heavy" in one OOB might be Medium in another and........( wait for it.......) ....I DON'T CARE because IT'S NOT IMPORTANT.

Little trucks are "light" BIG trucks are "Heavy" and anything in between is "Medium" if that's really required..... those are the guidelines.

OK??

I can assure you Andy feels the same way and I am NOT.. ( repeat ) NOT going to add "generic civilian trucks" but what I MIGHT do if this keeps up is rip out every truck in every OOB beyond one that will be "light" one "Medium" and one "Heavy"

PLEASE...FORGET THE DAMN TRUCKS and concentrate on more "important" things

Don

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

Yep. If I were redesigning the OOBs from scratch then there would be just small, medium and large trucks. Saves on game slots, and saves discussions with rivet counter types over how many cup-holders this or that one has, and would have saved us quite a few icons as well.

Andy

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

Okay, to sum it up what I wanted to say:
Finnish OOB lacks A/T designation for AWD trucks, which is a big thing as trucks are used to transport the infantry and mortars. It's a biggie because the typical terrain will be filled with forest and there's a lack of roads.

What you call them is not as important, how you categorize them is not as important, if you don't have an armored version of them that's not important.

It's your OOB after all, and just saying "IMO not worth the trouble" is enough for an explanation. Users are able to post and use modified OOBs in PBEM games. Don's response seems harsh to me and makes me feel unwelcome: a simple "It's just trucks, it's minor and not worth trouble changing them apart from the move class." would have sufficed.

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

The trucks that exist in the Finn OOB were given AT wheel capability this morning.

What I don't need or want is MORE trucks that do the same thing as the old trucks but with different names so what I did was save you a lot of time and effort posting info I won't use. The fact they were just 2WD instead of 4WD was useful and I have placed a note in the files to check other nations as well

Don

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

Some more inaccuracies and outdated equipment in Finnish OOB:

ATGMs
Formation 142 Bn ATGM Platoon (used in Coastal Jg Co)
The ATGMs available are AT-4 and AT-5 (local designation PSTOHJ 82, 82M)

They have been phased out of service (They're not listed under current equipment, in the OOB removed from BMP-2s from 1/05 on) but there is no more recent equipment for Inf-ATGM units in the OOB. Availability should end at the point where Spike MR is available (1/03) or at least other options be given. Units from 71 to 74 Inf-ATGM should be duplicated and given TOW-2B or Spike as the main weapon.

TOW-2 (non-B, designation PSTOHJ 83) is not probably in active use any more, but could be kept in if it actually is still stored yet not active. TOW-2B (designation PSTOHJ 83M) still is.

Units 071-074: Availability to end in 12/2002, add new units with TOW-2B and Spike MR

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

Thought I'd post this here:

In the new 6.0 FIN OOB after the date June 2007 formation "MBT Company" only has two tanks in it...

Re: Finnish OOB 5.5
 

Formation 52 Points to the wrong platoon type that ends in 2007.

Fix - change all 3 platoons in formation #52 from 1009 "Tank platoon" to 1053 "MBT Platoon", until we issue an updated OOB.

Cheers
Andy