Finnish Army to be reorganized in 2015

[dmnt]

Finnish army 2015-

News in English: http://www.hs.fi/english/article/Def.../1135269953345

Finnish version http://www.hs.fi/kotimaa/Maavoimien+...a1305550386319 and http://www.hs.fi/kotimaa/Jalkav%C3%A...a1305550386284 contain more details, the most important in the game sense:

• Section leaders to be equipped with a tactical radio and data terminal
• Night vision equipment for each section
• Most important forces to be prepared to engage in attack at night time
• The fighting pairs to be replaced with a triple: Three triples form a section, three sections in a platoon. One of the sections triples will be equipped with a sniping rifle as a support weapon, others will use LMG
• Three to four platoons in a company

Therefore I suggest that:
Section: 6 men, armed with assault rifle (RK 95 + optics / 95 / 62), LMG (PKM or LMG 62), 4 x 66 KeS Orak (M72 LAW) and Hand Grenade.
Sniper group: 3 men, armed with as above, but sniper rifle (Sniper Rifle 85, 8.6mm Tkiv 2000, .50 cal sniper rifle) instead of LMG and no AT weaponry.

Platoons consist of 3 sections and support groups
Companies consist of leader section, sniper group, 3 platoons, 2 x AT group (Apilas / MBT-LAW), 2 x AAMG and a support platoon:

Support Platoon can contain

• 2 x 95 S 58-61M RCL, 4 x Apilas (or MBT-LAW) group
• 1 x Section, 2 x AT-missile group, 4 x Apilas (or MBT-LAW) group
• 1 x Section, 2 x AGL
• or a mortar platoon

The company can be a spearhead company and have TI equipment (and optical sights) in that case.

Problems: Jaegar companies should have APCs (Pasi XA-360, XA-202, XA-185, though the 185s are going to be replaced due to old age). There are not enough room for them in the platoons to support this as there will be 9 units, leaving room only for one vehicle. Having vehicles in separate platoon will make the loading of troops more difficult. Other option would be a 9 men section, but including a sniper rifle will eat one slot from either hand grenades or light AT-weaponry.

Please be free to comment or criticize as especially the support platoon might be unrealistic.

Other stuff

While at it, could we also get rid of multiple assault rifle combinations in a section? It seems futile to me to have two assault rifles (RK 54, 62, 76 TP, 95) within the same section, it's after all a personal weapon for all (none of the soldiers carry more than one).

120 Jaeger Section, Available 1989-2020, carries 7.62 RK 62 as primary and 7.62 RK 76 TP as secondary weapon. Replace second assault rifle with LMG 62.
130 Infantry Sec, Available 1992-2020, carries 7.62 RK 62 as primary and 7.62 RK 76 TP as secondary weapon. Replace second assault rifle with LMG 62.

Other troops which carry RK 54 at odd times (not including ones where it makes sense, as in reserve infantry etc.):
128 Infantry Sec, Available 1978-2020, has RK 54 and LMG 62, RK 56 (or 62) + LMG 62 is more sensible combination
309 PzJaeger Sec, Available 1983-1987, RK 54 (should be RK 76 TP, i.e. folding stock?)
310 PzJaeger Sec, Available 1983-1987, RK 54 (should be RK 76 TP)
423 Coast Jaegers, Available 1975-2002, RK 54 (should be RK 56 or 76 TP?)

[DRG]

I will note this down BUT......

more than likely I'm going to wait until 2016 to make any serious changes to that OOB because they will certainly be further changes made by then and I am already up to my ears in work as it is ( the remaining items in the error list is over 4100 lines long ) .

You may have forgotten what the US OOB looked like 8 years ago but virtually all the little toys and goodies people put in because they were "in development" have now been removed and fixing the unit's and formations was a PITA so now I'm more inclined to wait until all this is actually done THEN change things

Don

[Suhiir]

Working on the USMC OOB I had the stuff DRG/Don mentioned plus stuff the US Army used that it was assumed the USMC also used, and it didn't.
By the time I got my OOC variant done some of this stuff had been added to stock (i.e. included with the game on installation) WinSPMBT scenarios so it had to be left in the OOB even tho shouldn't be in it at all.

A good example of this was the EFV (Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle) that was recently removed from the OOB after having been in it for about 5 yeas as a "future" tech.

So I fully understand the reluctance to put in "future" systems.

[dmnt]

Originally Posted by DRG

I will note this down BUT......
more than likely I'm going to wait until 2016 to make any serious changes to that OOB because they will certainly be further changes made by then and I am already up to my ears in work as it is ( the remaining items in the error list is over 4100 lines long ) .

I understand your concern on "future tech", but this was something that was announced that they are going to work with from now on and noted that the spearhead groups and international operations are already starting to use this. Conscripts will be in the system in 2015 and it's more about reforming the tactics and operations than having new goodies. It's near impossible that they will revert the decision - and there's no change in equipment, so nothing that should be removed later on.