The FASTBOAT Patch page.

[DRG]

Any FRES units that should be deleted use MOBHack to give me the unit numbers. I have adjusted all dates to 6/115

I'm still amazed the B-52's are flying....'nough said, but if you find any info that gives an equivalency such as the EW will be equivant to that used by a B-1 or a B-2 let me know.

If the engine upgrade for the puma makes a real difference to the speed it should be changed but it would have to be >1 point. Lot's of times engine upgrades only really increase fuel economy or ease of maintenance and real world speed stays about the same but if it adds 10kph to the top speed it would be worth considering

Don

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Don,
Just got back, thanks for the reply. Don't worry I'm now MOBHack trained (Yes I hear you all-Thank God about time!) at least for the unit numbers.
1. You got it.
2. B-52's at least for another 25+/- about 5yrs. depending on sources.
3. They talk about increased lift which normally leads to increased tilt both combine in layman's terms to speed. These will be new engines if memory serves. I'll have quick notes as normal.
4. Of things to come same for USA Apache they will be extended for a projected 30yrs. upgrade info to be submitted (Block III.) which should make it equal to or on the plus side of the COMANCHE (AH-X) which will be on my Delete part of my HELO section along with others. We've come a long way since that program was cancelled almost 7yrs. ago.
http://www.military-today.com/helico...6_comanche.htm
Pic:

Thanks Again!
Regards,
Pat

[DRG]

Take a long break Pat. I'm already up to my ears

Don

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Don,
THANKS! I haven't been able to play WinSPMBT since AUG. to finish off my campaign in progress. Will work the last slowly and it'll allow me to back check a couple of things. Currently looking at about 20-25 deletions across about 5 (US @ ~ 10) major player countries of course supported by refs. Just let me know when you're ready for me to post what should be my last one (I think?) for this patch season. I believe you posted last year at the end of FEB. to cut it off for the 5.5 patch, will use that as my timeline unless you tell me otherwise. I'll still check in here for when you get to the list as just posted for any questions you might have. Going to "copy" these and put them into their appropriate threads and catch up on some news while I'm in here. By the way fully supported the move you made in the artillery area to open slots and you know how I feel about arty. THANKS to everyone for the time and effort you all put into making the game more accurate, streamlined and better to play even the folks I might make mumble things under their breath!?! Everyone take care! My computer is asking me "Do you want to play a game?" still good movie tag line! Don no responce needed TAKE CARE.

Regards,
Pat

[DRG]

No problem Pat. The info you provide is generally clear enough just occasionally things get a little mixed up which isn't surprising given the mass of data we both end up sifting through and that you are relatively new to MOBHack

I'm slowly hacking my way through it entering data and building new Icons where applicable. Good thing I'm retired. I used to have to work this into normal work schedule.

Don

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

I will be on hiatus with the "news" unless something earth shattering comes up. It's time to start on Part 1 of 3 Patch Posts for next year as discussed with the boss to avoid him having to and me having to as the info was compressed into 3 months for the last patch. But it was a more successful campaign then I could have hoped for, thanks Don, Andy and everyone else.
What to expect:
1. It'll be ref heavy, as expected by most.
2. There will be some items revisited based mostly on the fact I didn't understand Mobhack unit utilities in the earlier posts that gave Don a headache at times and he just plain ran out of time on those items, mostly from the MBT section.
3. At least with the first Post a very light spattering to cover the MBT, APC, SP&SPAA and other threads. Just not much happening there.
4. It will be avaition heavy due to the news surrounding China and Venezuela and how it's affecting their neighbors. Also with mods to existing units that I just ran out of time with myself.

I apolize in advance to everyone, as you see most of my posting is done after work and when not on my days off. Please as I asked in the very first Post of this thread I need to limit contact on these Posts to Don and Andy not out of disrespect to anyone out there but for the sake of time management and to maintain my focus as things have changed in the last few weeks for me at work. So with CINCLANTHOMEs blessing (Sort of!?!) I hope to have this first one posted by the end of June.
In the meantime I recommend the following defence news sites:
http://www.army-technology.com/
http://www.defpro.com/
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/

THANKS EVERYONE!

Regards,
Pat

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Don,
A couple of questions for you when you get the chance.

1. What TI/GSR value do you typically assign to a modern (Circa 2002/2003 with upgrades during installation process.) 2nd Gen integrated FCS Thermal Sight with full day/night capability?

The next is an opinion issue if we're thinking along the same lines in the interpretation of the data.

2. Does a government source "trump" all others? The issue at hand is I have many refs to support (One that's VERY thorough on the LEO 1 developmental timeline and who bought what with specific dates.) Here's the specific issue Turkey LEO 1A1 (Unit 033.) many say the Turks didn't buy this one until much later (If at all.) but, actually bought the LEO 1A1A1 with improved armor protection. The government source only refs the LEO 1A1 and 1A4 (Simplification of model designations?) for modernization. Providing my best sources for your opinion (Note: Based on the purchase dates I'm personally leaning towards the 1A1A1 vice 1A1.) or I'll carry on and submit to the patch what I have, which ever way you wish me to proceed for #2.
http://www.ssm.gov.tr/home/projects/...d1A1A1A4T.aspx
http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product152.html
See under Variants LEO 1A1A1, 1A3 & 1A4 (These were designated Leopard T1.) near bottom see Turkey where the LEO 1A1A1 deal is mentioned.

Thanks!

Regards,
Pat

[DRG]

1- 40

2- NO SOURCE should be considered infalible. If there is a wide range of opinion there's probably a reason for it ( like the basic info isn't very good to begin with )

In that case we pick a reasonable date then wait and see who complains then take that info and decide if it's worthwhile changing or not



Don

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Don,

1. Thanks!

2. I believe the government in this case as stated "over simplified" the types and "combined" them if you will based on ref 2. Will proceed with the preponderance of the evidence I have, after all you know how I feel on the topic of "reliable" refs.

Thanks Again!

Regards,
Pat

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Don,
No immediate reply is required.

In this thread I asked the question (See posts #49 & #50.) of what rating for VISION TI/GSR would be assigned a tank with a modern 2nd GEN FCS and the answer was 40. I know you've seen my post concerning the vision being increased to 50 on MBTs based on them being able to identify and hit a target out to 4000m. Not having this range information, would you have an issue if it is equipped with a verifiable 3rd GEN FCS (These started to appear in a reliable form ~2005.) and submitted for a particular tank? Italy's ARIETE MK II comes to mind as I just came across it today. I would like to clear this issue up as item #1 on the MBT input for the 2012/2013 Campaign. With the number of tanks thus far named, I would like to get ahead on this to research and supply specific FCS info from the manufacturer as well when submitted.
Everything else I feel is at hand, I just need to pull it together from the last two years (Jets) and threads posted thus far, a little with some and I hope nothing too much more!

Thanks in advance!!!!
Regards,
Pat