ANZAC OOB15 v.8.1 - few observations

[Pibwl]

2 Mk VIc - "c" variant used only from 3/39 by Great Britain, I don't know since when by Australians (in North Africa only?)

8 M11/39 - much better proper photo is 3659

169-173,175 Patrol - photo shows Bren section, while it has no Bren

290,291 Humber Scout I,II - Mk. I was produced only from early 1943, and Mk II from 1944, according to J. Magnuski's book and Czech "Army Wheels in Detail Humber Mk.I,II Scout Car".
However, Mk II didn't differ in armour, only mechanical changes - both had 14 mm in front and sides, 12mm rear.

297 M-H II MG - photo is Mk. III, proper is 12557. They were manufactured in South Africa from 1940-41 only, I don't know since when they were used by Australians, but I assume, that they got them in North Africa, no sooner than 3/41, like the British. Ending date might be extended then (now5/41)

298 M-H II ATR - photo should be ordinary 12557, not canon-armed. Same notes as for usage.

299 M-H II 2pdr - same notes as for usage - maybe gun conversions appeared even later.

350 Ford GPA Amphib - I don't recall any photo of MG-armed GPA.

368 3 pdr Gun Empl - phot isn't 3pdr (rather 3in) - maybe Finnish 23569 picture.

431 Machinegun Sec - photo is Bren, it should be rather Vickers

[Pibwl]

According to a Polish article by T. Basarabowicz in "Militaria i fakty" 2/200, the first Australian tanks were ten Mk.VIa, delivered in 8/1937 only (also Osprey NV217 "British light tanks" says 1937)

Mk.VIc and earlier models were given only n 1940 in North Africa.

Osprey NV217 says, that six Mk.IIb were given to the 6h Divisional Cavalry Rgt in 10/40.

289 Rover - according to http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-.../lac-rover.htm and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rover_Light_Armoured_Car , delivered only from 4/42
Possibly a better name would be Rover LAC.
Wikipedia and http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww...r_light_AC.php claims, that armour was up to 16 mm in front, crew was 5, and speed was up to 80 km/h

[DRG]

Originally Posted by Pibwl

169-173,175 Patrol - photo shows Bren section, while it has no Bren

You may be the ONLY person on the planet that DOESN'T realize how ridiculously nitpicky that comment is.

Quit wasting my time with trivialities. I'm right on the edge of ignoring your posts altogether

Don

[Pibwl]

Originally Posted by DRG

You may be the ONLY person on the planet that DOESN'T realize how ridiculously nitpicky that comment is.

I may be. Sorry, try to ignore such nitpicking, if you don't think it's worth changing.

To finish with this OOB:

- New Zealand forces used also Dingo scout cars in Italian campaign (#115 from British OOB, may replace one of 290/291 Humber Scouts)

[DRG]

Originally Posted by Pibwl

I may be. Sorry, try to ignore such nitpicking, if you don't think it's worth changing.

Here's a better idea......... THINK before posting something like that........what's next ?? Counting the men in a photo and complaining I have too many or two few to match the unit ? The comment about the photo showing a Bren....( and this isn't the first like that I've seen from you ).....when there was no Bren in the unit is only one small step from complaining a photo shows a regular squad when it should show a scout unit or similar trivial minutia . The ONLY OOB issue mentioned this year that springs to mind that could conceivably make an actual difference to game play was the observation that the heavy Russian SP guns ROF was too high and I adjusted all units in both games to correct that.

Don