Soviet 00B 11 Corrections/Suggestions

[Pibwl]

Originally Posted by Rosollia

In the Soviet oob there are BT-7 and T-26 tanks that have the 7.62mm DT BMG weapon. However none of these tanks had a bow machine gun. .... Many BT-7 and T-26 tanks did however have an AAMG.

Would replacing the BMG with an AAMG for the following units be a good idea?

Removing a rear-facing MG is a good idea (especially, that not all tanks had one), but only some tanks were armed with AAMG, from 1937, and usually they are not seen on photos.

[DRG]

One more error:

222 T-26 M1931 - DShK is wrong armament. Apart from some tanks with short-barrel 37mm Hotchkiss gun, twin-turret tanks were armed with two 7.62mm MGs only (not to mention, that DShK was developed in 1938).

Michal

It's already been changed which mean either someone else has pointed this out or we found it ourselves without help or you've reported it twice.( THAT has happened more than once..... ) Either way GIVE IT A REST for now.

[Pibwl]

Sorry - I've spotted some other minor issues, and the only reason I decided to write it, was I though this one was important. Good it was fixed.

Michal

[DRG]

Originally Posted by Pibwl

Sorry - I've spotted some other minor issues.......

Michal

Of course you did Michal.... I have no doubt someone will come along in five years or so and find "other minor issues" in that OOB or have a "new" source that disputes a vehicle speed or it's armour etc etc and they may even declare some of your corrections wrong.

That's what makes all of this so "interesting"

Don

[Pibwl]

Originally Posted by DRG

I have no doubt someone will come along in five years or so and find "other minor issues" in that OOB or have a "new" source that disputes a vehicle speed or it's armour etc etc and they may even declare some of your corrections wrong.

I agree, that some of my corrections could appear wrong in the future, if new, more thorough sources will be published - but most are definitely right and correcting existing errors. I'm basing upon books published by Russian authors in past 15 years, who have now freedom of research. A "minor issue", about which I wrote, is for example, that most of armoured cars appear several years too early - but it might wait. As for armour, I usually don't check it (with exception in case of Pz-III, which appeared IMHO justified).

I hate to add you work, but checking it (for free and without any appreciation) also takes my time - and my point is to save yours, providing you with precise info - if you want to improve the game. That's all as for now.

Regards
Michal

[DRG]

[quote=Pibwl;818766]

Originally Posted by DRG

I hate to add you work, but checking it (for free and without any appreciation) also takes my time - and my point is to save yours, providing you with precise info - if you want to improve the game. That's all as for now.

Regards
Michal

I've never suggested I don't appreciate it..... I always welcome new information. What I don't appreciate is getting flooded with information two years in a row just as we are doing the final checks and assembly. Try again ANYTIME but March..... September or October would be wonderful.....not March so put another way. I appreciate the information, ( and the way you present it, right to the point )......your timeing........not so much. That said , everything you have provided has for the most part, made it into the game.

The armoured cars can wait. Anyone who really cared would have said something about them before now and not a lot of people bother playing battles in the 1930's..... remember, that OOB started life in 1998 and I'll bet the corrections you want to make go back to units entered then ( that would be about the time the books you are quoting were still being written )

Don