Uncle Anton
Lighthorseman
Actually, their official qualification is "Royal Australian Rifles".
Absolutely no way. After WW2 the CAC (Commonwealth Aircraft Company) was a world leader in air design. I know, my grandfather was a senior designer. At CAC he worked on DC-10's, Tornado, FA-18, Bell helicopters, MACHE jets, and the list goes on.
If you want an Aussie war plane, try the Mosquito.
ROFLMAO. Collins Submarine - Randomly un-usable and must return to port for repairs.
The Aussie UU should actually be the Light Horse Regiment. Cavalry++ which upgrades to tank.
SAS should be better than the seal. SAS are more in line with Brit Commandos than seals. SAS/Commando = seal+marine.
Heh. K, I'm too much of a forum newb to multiquote, so I'll just do dot points again...
First of all.... Hi Dale! Mate, GREAT work with your mod hey.... ahem, yeah anyway... I think I'll just go over why I said what I said... for the ViSa team's benefit if no-one else's, just so there's some kinda qualification behind my remarks...
1) Actually, RAR stands for "Royal Australian Regiment", and has been a designation since 1948 when the title Royal was first approved and the Army was re-modeled. I suggested "AIF Infantry" quite simply because that denotes Australian Imperial Force, representative of Australian regular soldiers prior to 1948 (ie in both world wars)... since this mod has modern infantry if you were going to make a UU which replaced vanilla infantry the era should be indicative of 1901-1948, not post 1948.
So basically... "AIF Infantry" if the UU replaces Infantry, "RAR" if the UU is going to replace modern infantry. Since the UU the team has chosen is Infantry, then it should be "AIF Infantry"....
2) Cool to hear about your grandfather.
The work he would've been doing kinda ties in with what I was trying to say about an Aussie air unit, that being that like the majority of kit we've used throughout our military history, we've taken other people's equipment, and modded the hell out of it to make it better. But since the different UU's are just there for aesthetics, it makes more sense just to ensure the appearance is right. Good example is Australia's current equipment. Take a look at an RAAF 'Vark or Hornet. Even if their avionics, engines etc have had the malarkey modded out of them, they still look the same as the stock counterparts we bought off the yanks. This would've also been the same for the Mustangs, Meteors and other planes that the RAAF has used in the past.The reason why I suggested the team just use the spitfire is that a) There's no model of a mosquito that I've seen on these forums that could be used, and b) it would be indicative and representative of Australian use of British equipment pre-Cold War, not to mention the fact that in both world wars (again indicative of the unit era), most Australian pilots would fly cross attached to RFC/RAF (depending WW1 or WW2).
3) @ Collins... Hehe. Yeah, yeah I know.... But other than the "Oberon" we don't have too many types of subs we've used other than the old AE class.
Heh. I remember during my chocko days... at Kapooka, the obstacle course was designated "the Collins-class obs course" by our platoon staff, coz half of it didn't work... 
Bottom line - "Oberon" or "Collins".
If someone has a diff suggestion, lemme know.4) Yeah, there's been a bit of debate for SASR vs Mounted Infantry as UU. I wasn't in any way suggesting we swap SASR for the Mounted Infantry unit. I was actually suggesting that SASR is put in instead of the Sub unit. I'm a former Lighthorseman myself (Did 3 years with the 10th), so there's no way I'd suggest we get rid of this.... I'm too biased
I think the Mounted Infantry unit is named well though. Australia wasn't the only country to have "Light Horse" units, and initially for Boer War many of the levies which the first AIF Australian Light Horse regiments would take their origins from were termed 'Mounted Infantry'. I think they're well represented anyway. Mounted Infantry should stay as is IMHO
