USA and USMC Common Issues

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

First off the first three threads are not updating on the posts/replies. These were started around the maintenance period as a possible cause.

Here's what I've found just with APKWS II and with the AH-1Z. I will just highlight the issues here as good points were brought up here , but the problems run deeper as I looked into this and I don't know what happened with the AH-1Z as I thought it got into the patch as submitted originally. I'll need to check my crib notes on my hard copy for any differences as submitted. I'll further address this in the Helo Thread with credit to sabrasandy for the "scent" though we differ with Item 1. below.

1. Though APKWS had production runs (This is the date issue I believe.) already over the period as assigned to some UNITS already noted here in this thread (And others I've found.) it was not fielded operationally by the USMC until 3/12 in Afghanistan. See Ref. 1 and understand DID builds the source data into the articles, (Now) verifies status in the right side of the article and lists further and related reading at the bottom of the article. Ref 2 is my "shout out" to Canada.
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...d-phase-02193/
http://blogs.ottawacitizen.com/2013/...n-afghanistan/

1A. Affected USMC UNITS 172, 173, 192, 257, 502, 503 & 505. they should be armed with the HYDRA 70mm.

2. NAVAIR deemed the AH-1Z operationally ready in 9/10 after completing it's OPEVAL that month. I had submitted a fielding date of 6/11 based on I believe when they were deployed overseas. Ref. 3 & 4 (You'll have to click on Rotor Craft then click on H-1.) however states they became operational in 2/11. So though the game date and my date are within the "swag" there's only one thing to do and that's go to the middle or in this case the operational date of 2/11.
http://www.airforce-technology.com/p...1w-supercobra/
http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm...ome.rotorcraft

2A. Affected USMC UNITS 172, 173, 192 again to 2/11 start date. Also USMC UNIT 500 should be changed to 3/12 vice 9/12.

Refer to HELO Thread Pg.2 Post #12 from Feb. 13, 2011. Both these issues were at the time part of a much larger discussion as it referenced other Posts back to the APC Thread. God help me if this is a sign how this summer is going to go , this is on my work list now and will be moved to the Helo Thread for follow up.

Regards,
Pat

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

I have an appt. in the morning so I'll try to be brief. Concerning the PAVE LOW the information presented is correct. They flew their last combat mission in 9/08. You have two options here in the USMC OOB... 1) Simply DELETE both MH-53 helos UNITS 313/314. ADD both the SOAR MH-47E/G helos we fixed and added in the last patch to support both the USMC Spec Op and USN SEALS. Makes life easier for the player and will allow the AI access to them in the USMC OOB. Also USMC CH-53E UNIT 646 needs to be upgraded to the MH-53M UNIT 314 mark.

2) Just make the date change to UNIT 314, however the CH-53E UNIT 646 will still need to be updated and I can support this change. Option 1) requires a little more work at each end, however it is the more relevant choice.

3) The CH-53K Program is still moving along. As you know I was on this from the start here, so USMC UNIT 647 will be submitted for a change in it's TI/GSR in the 50/60 range based on the last updates I've gotten.

This is reminding me of a story about a fisherman and his "can of worms"!?!

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

I have an appt. in the morning so I'll try to be brief. Concerning the PAVE LOW the information presented is correct.
They flew their last combat mission in 9/08.
http://defensetech.org/2008/10/08/by...-hello-osprey/
http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/fac...t.asp?id=12439 Note the armament section at the bottom.
http://www.mh-53pavelow.com/pave_history.html
We have two options here in the USMC OOB... 1) Simply DELETE both MH-53 helos UNITS 313/314. ADD both the SOAR
MH-47E/G helos we fixed and added in the last patch to support both the USMC Spec Op and USN SEALS. Makes life easier for the player and will allow the AI access to them in the USMC OOB. Also USMC CH-53E UNIT 646 needs to be upgraded to the MH-53M UNIT 314 mark.

2) Just make the date change to UNIT 314, however the CH-53E UNIT 646 will still need to be updated and I can support this change. It will however cause a redundancy issue. They are the same helos only difference lies in designation and names between the USAF, USMC and USN. Option 1) requires a little more work at each end, however it is the more relevant choice.
http://www.marines.com/operating-for...super-stallion

3) The CH-53K Program is still moving along. As you know I was on this from the start, so USMC UNIT 647 will be submitted for a change in it's TI/GSR in the 50/60 range and EW (Maybe.) based on the last updates I've gotten.

This is reminding me of a story about a fisherman and his "can of worms"!?! Still not as bad as those Turkish LEO's from 2/3 years ago!!

A little F&F 6 after my appt. should set me right though!
Good Night EVERYONE!

Regards,
Pat