Incorporate NATO naming conventions into database

[mjbrennan99]

Has anyone suggested that non NATO equipment also be listed with the common NATO designations? I openly admit that I am ignorant of 95% of the Russian weapons designations. Because of this, It makes identifying load-outs particularly burdensome.

 

For example:

 

AA-1 "Alkali" (Kaliningrad K-5)

AA-2 "Atoll" (Vympel K-13)

AA-3 "Anab" (Kaliningrad K-8)

AA-4 "Awl" (Raduga K-9)

AA-5 "Ash" (Bisnovat R-4)

AA-6 "Acrid" (Bisnovat R-40)

AA-7 "Apex" (Vympel R-23)

AA-8 "Aphid" (Molniya R-60)

AA-9 "Amos" (Vympel R-33)

AA-10 "Alamo" (Vympel R-27)

AA-11 "Archer" (Vympel R-73)

AA-12 "Adder" (Vympel R-77)

AA-X-13 "Arrow" (Vympel R-37)

 

I'd like to argue that providing this NATO naming convention data is akin to providing English language cockpits to Russian aircraft. Is this not reasonable?:)

[Home Fries]

No problem with that suggestion at all, though to pacify the purists the NATO designation should be the one in parens.

 

I think this should be expanded to the SAMs as well.

[Exorcet]

To be honest, the encyclopedia needs a massive overhaul. Half of the planes list a gun as the only armament.

 

It would also be nice if we could switch the units to something other than metric.

[159th_Falcon]

Nah, i like the Russian designations better. Prolly cause i don't know any NATO ones other then;

AIM-120

AIM-9

MK-82

GBU-97

 

you get the idea, use NATO designation's for NATO equipment and RUS designations for RUS equipment.

 

But that's just my preference.

 

Also, i wan't my RUS cockpit back, especially nagging nadia.

[Xeno426]

The db_weapons_data.lua alrady has the NATO designation for most weapons under the "NatoName" heading. It would be nice if there was an option to have that data used either instead of or in addition to the Russian designations.

 

I don't know what you'd do for weapons like the KAB-500L, since there are quite a few weapon systems that the West simply had no designation for.