[X] Plan Yet Another Plan Mk2
-[X]Tank Recommendations
--[X] Everyone: Visibility, ergonomics, ventilation and crew communication need to be given more attention, going forward. They shouldn't neglect speed and reliability, of course.
--[X] Everyone: Ask all manufacturers for estimated cost and production time for comparison (how fast do they estimate being able to start production, how expensive do they anticipate the tank being, and how many per month do they estimate being able to produce). Also for official crew requirements and functions.
--[X] Everyone: We all like machines guns, but moderate it.
--[X]Thryssen: Suggest that they improve crew safety and exhaust system on future models, this also had too many machine guns; remove tank from infantry tank competition.
--[X]Skoda: Improve the fuel supply and system, and if possible replace the hull gun with an autocannon or just something generally lighter and faster than the 3,5 cm howitzer; in general, lighten tank to try and get a bit more speed; suggest shortening 10,5 to shave off some weight as well. If not already there, a good rangefinder. Track retention could be improved. If possible, allow for the possibility if a engine retrofit in the future, as stronger and better ones come into market.
--[X]Reindhardt: Advise that GK-3 is a decent tank, although there are some reservations about multi-turret tanks; advise use of speaking tubes for communication between turret and driver or otherwise fix communication issue between commander/driver; If a speaking tube or intercom is not a practical replacement for the GK-3's signal lights due to engineering constraints or noise, make an effort to improve their visibility; advise finding a way to fix issues with track retention; advise they drop about, and at least, half of the machine guns on the GK-3, make use of freed up weight and cost by significantly thickening armour, especially on sides, they ought to aim for at least 20mm, though of course extra is better; remove GK-2 from infantry tank competition.
--[X]Wanderer: Consider advancing the W-5, W-6, and W-8 models as cavalry tanks. Advise rebuild/new transmission on W-8. Advise revisit of crew ergonomics. The W-6 had accuracy issues. Recommend he find a way to increase production speed; remove W-6 and W-8 from the competition. The later could use a machine gun, too.
-[X] Recommendations to High Command
--[X]Several of the designs show promise and will likely be suitable for adoption, but we would like one more round of maneuvers and testing after manufacturers make recommended changes, as they've been interrupted midway. Note that testing has not, as of writing this notice, reached the armour phase.
---[X]The Skoda model is ideal for assaulting strongpoints, particularly once fuel issues are resolved.
---[X]The GK-3 is an acceptable substitute if budgetary limits are too tight, especially once the submitted design revisions are made.
---[X]A combination of GK-3 and SzW-1 might be the best for breaking through enemy strongpoints/supporting infantry, depending on cost and production efficiency.
---[X]The W-5 and W-8 could be very good options for adoption as a cavalry tank once the production bottle-neck is overcome, provisioned they pass the armour trials.
----[X]Potentially look into renegotiating for the ongoing contract being delivered as W-5s rather than W-2s for an increase in cost, provided they pass armour trials.
