The FASTBOAT Patch page.

[DRG]

lots of interesting things..........

[DRG]

When I get a day or two with no distractions ( that ain't today or tomorrow ) I will look this over. I just printed out all 5 pages....quite impressive when held in the hand

"Brevity" would be one of those "sock" items

[DRG]

The Oliphant info is great and I was finally able to dig up some good top down views of the main versions and have new Icons for the entire line. The old ones were added as " good enough" guesses as no decent drawings existed a decade ago...... they were close in that they looked like tanks but the reality was quite a bit different for all types

[DRG]

I mentioned that TAIWAN has a big issue so…
TAIWAN/CHANGE/MIA1 ROC/UNIT 025/NEVER DELIVERED/FMS NOT APPROCVED/CHANGE IN GAME STATUS TO UNAVAILIBLE/RECOMMEND SAME AS REQUESTED FOR OLIFANT Mk-2B BASED ON THE SAME THREE POINTS NOTED ABOVE.

Pat, I feel certain that this has been discussed before. Open that unit up in the game or MOBHack......what do you see ? If you have the latest version of the OOB which seems that you do not you will see it named M1A2 Abrams-P and if you look at the unit class it is in you will see it along with one other tank in the "Prototype Tank" formation that can only be found if you dig it out of the Misc folder so yes, it could be removed but what's the point ?

What is bothersome to me is you reported it as "MIA1 ROC" and it's name was changed last release BUT it has been in a Prototype tank formation since 2008(!!) on the off chance someone might want to play "what if"......though admittedly that is doubtful. I can only assume these are old notes and you did not check the latest OOB's before posting them here

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

To Taiwan, yes it was and I had no issues. You will also find a couple of more like that as well soon like the CHANGE(S) made to the Ukraine's OPLOT- M and Thailand's OPLOT-T (Now) from the last patch.

The point of this exercise again is for me to get all those individual posts across almost 12 to 14 pages of them back together and grouped.

Even you said you printed out what I posted (I haven't yet, but will.) and it sounds like you "rediscovered" the SADF OLIFANT information from your Post #230 of the previous page bottom.

That's why this Thread has been here all these years because it's "Homeplate" or "Ground Zero" for the my inputs to you and others of what "might be" coming.

What happened in the 2017/2018 (Lesser extent and already fixed in this Thread properly.) and 2018/2019 Campaigns was a mess and reminds me of how I first started out which then was only with a handful of inputs by posts and easily managed.

However I seem to remember a call from "some of those close to me here" and one I recognized myself all those years ago, that due to gradual and steady increase of submissions that I had to organize myself in a more concise manner. Again the reason for this Thread.

All that went to **** during these last two campaigns and especially the 2018/2019 one as you know.

My final analogy, I promise.

When you build a car and please for some of you reading, the basic concept if you will , is you start with the Frame (This Thread) add the Engine (Thread Posts) continue to the Body (Our discussions etc. of the Patch Posts in this Thread as needed.) then we prep it for delivery to the showroom by Detailing and Inspecting the car fully (This you and Andy putting the Patch Release together). And finally off to the Showroom where the excited and anxious customers can't wait to see the new car!!

Oh yeah the customers is us!

So finally (And there was much celebration. ) in the 2018/2019 Campaign, the Engine came first without the Frame of the car, kinda makes it's tough to build the car that way, let alone drive it.

As already posted before I added that "Patch Post", I apologize for any inconvenience and confusion this may have caused, however...

I respectfully, would like to build that 2019/2019 Campaign Car right, before I move onto what will probably be the late model 2019/2021 Campaign Car.

And again this is to me the reference point "Home Plate", "Frame" or "Library" whichever you prefer, even "PITA" has worked here in the past and that's OK to! .

I intend to enjoy the rest of this evening as CINCLANTHOME just stopped in and see 1917 tomorrow. I love my weekends, though sometimes they don't seem long enough!

Regards,
Pat

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Don,
This by way of a status report.

First to INDIA: I see you had already entered the ARJUN MK 1-A, along with that tank there'll be changes to the ARJUN in general. Nothing major overall but I'll be looking to get the ARJUN itself removed as this is more and more appearing to have been named ONLY for the test bed units. So the ARJUN Mk-1 is looking to be the first operational type, which had 14 improvements made to it based on the OPEVALs before going into production..

Also, and I've brought this up several times over the years, but with newer information in doing the build for the ARJUN Mk-1A (And yes I see you already added it.) it looks like LAHAT is dead.

The reasons are two fold 1) We knew it was plagued by technical difficulties for years and 2) It doesn't fit India's tactical operational needs. Simply this is due to the fact LAHAT is designed as a long range engagement weapon which doesn't "turn on" until it's further down range, where Israel wants it to operate. Anything closer it'll let the MG deal with it.

India wants a ATGW it'll engage targets at a closer range if need be, this is a preference versus a need. Their MG is very close to being as good as the CHALLENGER 2 MG.

They are currently testing an ATGW to meet their needs.

USA - Still sorting through the ABRAMS posts, there just was so many pages of data, a couple "back and forth" posts as I flushed newer information (USMC FEP as an example.) etc. etc.

FRANCE - I see you fixed the MMP ATGW that had the 0 Vis. to 60 TI/GSR. That was what I had as well.

RUSSIA - Have some date changes concerning the T-80BV Series of tanks. Already researched.

But to give you something to do ,
CHANGE/SOUTH KOREA/K2 PIP/UNIT 033/TI/GSR 55/or 60 (I can see this clearly, but, I leave it to your discretion.)/vice/TI/GSR 40/FC 55/vice/FC 50/MIGHT REQUIRE LATER START DATE//The K2 PIP is the "Top Dog" in the K2 Series of tanks.
https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/moder...ck-panther.php

Now I'm going to watch APOCALYPSE NOW in 4K. Ride of the Valkyries by Richard Wagner will never have sounded better to me then it will on my YAMAHA 4k HTS. Plus the DOORS AND Soundtrack, it's going to be a good night!

CINCLANTHOME is going to LOVE THIS!!

Good Night!! Back to the GRIND tomorrow.

Regards,
Pat

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Well as usual when I start looking into something I uncover more issues of which in this case are minor compared to many others we've encountered out here. The issues are with SOUTH KOREA with their more recent armor.

I'll set it up in my normal format later as I sense the "clock is ticking" (And NO I DON'T HAVE ANY INSIDE INFORMATION OF ANYTHING TO COME.)

So Don don't have a "heart attack" (Or for that matter anyone that follows my posts.) at my "briefness" if you will.

First, I get it concerning K1-88 UNITS 021-023, though I think two can be combined into one unit, maybe.

Second, I would strongly recommend changing the name of the KIA1 UNIT 024 to either K1A1/A2 or K1A1/2. I highlighted the first one as I'm seeing it described as such in more of the refs. The K1A2 was another improved model but, and I agree with many of the refs. that the improvements were "minor in nature" as to not warrant a separate unit. We did the same with the Russian T-72B3/B4 as I recall about three years back.

Third, Is there a reason the K2 UNIT 025 is not armed with the KSTAM munition? They have them and this tank was designed to fire it. Some people are calling it an ATGW, I STRONGLY disagree, it's designed to be fired at a higher elevation and the refs are describing/or comparing it to firing a mortar or artillery. Further the description of KSTAM much more reminds me of the STRIX the very effective SWEDISH (?) 120mm Anti-Tank top attack mortar round. The picture of it even resembles the STRIX and looks more like a "mortar" round in the below ref. The below is taken from the same ref. and is a composite of other refs.

"Korean Smart Top-Attack Munition (KSTAM), sort of fire-and-forget semi-autonomous ammunition that operates at 2–8 km (1.2–5.0 mi), launched in a mortar-type high trajectory."
https://weaponews.com/weapons/653540...tle-tanks.html

Also concerning the K2, I'm trying to confirm whether or not South Korea has already started to field "KAPS" (APS) on those tanks. And yes, I see you equipped it as such. For everyone else KAPS was one of the improvements slated for the K2 PIP.

Fourth, The T-80ROK UNIT 029 and BMP-3ROK UNIT 061 were retired last year. I thought I posted this last summer or early fall. But for the sake of argument based on the dates of the refs. being in the March/April 2019 timeframe, I believe JUN 2019 would work well or DEC 2019 if you want to be more conservative about the END date.
https://www.strategypage.com/htmw/ht.../20190406.aspx

Fifth, From what little is out there to include HYUNDAI/ROTEM (Which doesn't even mention the K2 PIP.) website, I believe a better START date for K2 PIP UNIT 033 would be JAN 2023.

Most every ref. talks about the K2 PIP being a "few years away". The first para says it all.
https://www.reddit.com/r/GlobalPower...ement_program/

But I'll be more optimistic about the K2 PIP based on the political situation on the peninsula and the world in general.

Regards,
Pat


POSTSCRIPT: Added on 2/6/2020 1155 Here's a short STRIX video I posted when we addressed this weapon a few years back. Again KSTAM (Though improved.) uses basically the same technology with also radar technology.

STRIX has long been rumored to use either a Video or Radar to supplement the IR seeker.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhd1d2sW_3I
https://saabgroup.com/media/news-pre...ld-leadership/

[Suhiir]

Originally Posted by FASTBOAT TOUGH

I flushed newer information (USMC FEP as an example.

Not sure Don wants to hear this if it has anything to do with the armor values.

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

I was simply making the point as to why I'm holding off getting the ABRAMS data into this thread. You of all people know well, that my submissions start in this thread. That did not happen in 2018/2019.

You have with all due respect, no idea how many hours and refs. I had to spend and go through just to post what I did on the ABRAMS, and it started with a request from I don't know who to look into the USMC M1A1 FEP.

I found two separate ABRAMS in the game that were actually the same tank. Dates were messed up, a couple using production dates vice FOC one's. Most of those errors were in this game BEFORE Don and Andy stepped in.

I actually submitted numbers for the FEP at least 2 times as data "bled over" from the USMC and USA.

I have disciplined myself to do "deep searches" on any piece of equipment I submit, to avoid rework for everyone else and myself. As Col. Kurtz said "...the horror, the horror." well I've seen enough of that here.

I would love to have one Patch Campaign go smoothly to the point that the equipment submitted didn't lead down a "rabbit hole" affecting other units, just one year. I don't see it happening because I suspect there are more, if you will, "relics" left to be found.

I do love "order in my world" and I accept the challenge that "chaos" brings to life. It's the spice of life.

So no, I think you missed the point I made completely from that post.

I have no idea what Don used of my submission for the FEP or any other ABRAMS or equipment I posted into the MBT Thread during 2018/2019.

You might better understand if you went through those eight or more pages just on ABRAMS in the MBT Thread. Start around Page 87 or so.

I deviated from my mode of operations. I ignored this thread, for the sake of getting equipment in the game or modified. That'll never happen again.

I own that. Now I'm paying the price for that "tactical error" but, at least it's at my pace around CINCLANTHOME and work and training.

So I end with what you posted with now the complete sentence to put it all in context for the portion you used.

From Post #233
"USA - Still sorting through the ABRAMS posts, there just was so many pages of data, a couple "back and forth" posts as I flushed newer information (USMC FEP as an example.) etc. etc."

Regards,
Pat

[DRG]

IN reply to each point you made

First.....it is good enough as it is with three progressions
Second...Done
Third....Done
Forth... Done
Fifth....Done