Inquiry: Why does WRD not have a standardized unit naming system?

User avatar
Fade2Gray
General
Posts: 8659
Joined: Wed 1 May 2013 23:30
Location: IED proof in Iraq
Contact:

Re: Inquiry: Why does WRD not have a standardized unit naming system?

Postby Fade2Gray » Mon 26 Feb 2018 21:48

inb4 ALB >>>>>>>>>>>> RD
Image
Image
Think you have what it takes to enlist into the military? You sure about that?

Scheintot887
Sergeant
Posts: 50
Joined: Tue 27 Jan 2015 15:54
Contact:

Re: Inquiry: Why does WRD not have a standardized unit naming system?

Postby Scheintot887 » Tue 27 Feb 2018 10:52

Fodder wrote:As stated above it's to give units distinction between each other.

It's so bad how they named japan, hachi-maru shiki instead of Type 89 or Kyu-maru shiki instead of Type 90 but when comes to AA they used nicknames like Guntank, it makes it so confusing.


Read this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_87_s ... rcraft_gun


Quote: 'It is also nicknamed by field officers as "Guntank" after the similar-looking mobile suit in the Mobile Suit Gundam series.[1]'


I think 90式戦車 (formula tank) Kyū-maru-shiki-sensha is closer to their naming logic than "Type 90" would have been because they're focusing on local nicknames where the scope is the army using the vehicle.

User avatar
lastcrusade101
Sergeant First-Class
Posts: 144
Joined: Sat 1 Aug 2015 20:40
Contact:

Re: Inquiry: Why does WRD not have a standardized unit naming system?

Postby lastcrusade101 » Wed 28 Feb 2018 05:26

I agree with much of what’s been said, and especially agree that for infantry in particular, having local names is a freash breath of air when every other game has “Marines” for every single faction.

However, while I agree that nations that didn’t use the nickname shouldn’t have it (F-16 for the dutch not being called the Fighting Falcon), that doesn't explain how even in the US tree, the Block 52 is missing the “Fighting Falcon” designation.

Basically, I was wondering if it was just some sloppiness, or if there were actual reasons for it

I still autistically love the game though
120 Smooth-bore > 120 Rifled

User avatar
damoj
Command Sergeant Major
Posts: 322
Joined: Mon 26 Sep 2016 10:07
Contact:

Re: Inquiry: Why does WRD not have a standardized unit naming system?

Postby damoj » Wed 28 Feb 2018 07:27

lastcrusade101 wrote:I still autistically love the game though


iktfb

Scheintot887
Sergeant
Posts: 50
Joined: Tue 27 Jan 2015 15:54
Contact:

Re: Inquiry: Why does WRD not have a standardized unit naming system?

Postby Scheintot887 » Wed 28 Feb 2018 12:01

lastcrusade101 wrote:I agree with much of what’s been said, and especially agree that for infantry in particular, having local names is a freash breath of air when every other game has “Marines” for every single faction.

However, while I agree that nations that didn’t use the nickname shouldn’t have it (F-16 for the dutch not being called the Fighting Falcon), that doesn't explain how even in the US tree, the Block 52 is missing the “Fighting Falcon” designation.

Basically, I was wondering if it was just some sloppiness, or if there were actual reasons for it

I still autistically love the game though


To be honest with you, I think the only reason the Block Versions are not called Fighting Falcon is because the name is to long. Usually namespace is limited to a specific number of characters in software development and to let the Block-52 shine it's called Block-52 instead of F-16C Block-52 Fighting Falcon. On the other hand, I've never heard someone who appended Fighting Falcon to the Block-52, altough its still an F-16C.
The second "problem" is that some Block versions use different nicknames like stated in this example (watch colors, for specific information about the model read text):

fas.org wrote:The F-16C and F-16D aircraft, which are the single- and two-place counterparts to the F-16A/B, incorporate the latest cockpit control and display technology. All F-16s delivered since November 1981 have built-in structural and wiring provisions and systems architecture that permit expansion of the multirole flexibility to perform precision strike, night attack and beyond-visual-range interception missions. All active units and many Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve units have converted to the F-16C/D, which is deployed in a number of Block variants.

Block 25 added the ability to carry AMRAAM to the F-16 as well as night/precision ground-attack capabilities, as well as an improved radar, the Westinghouse (now Northrop-Grumman) AN/APG-68, with increased range, better resolution, and more operating modes.
Block 30/32 added two new engines -- Block 30 designates a General Electric F110-GE-100 engine, and Block 32 designates a Pratt & Whitney F100-PW-220 engine. Block 30/32 can carry the AGM-45 Shrike and the AGM-88A HARM, and like the Block 25, it can carry the AGM-65 Maverick.

Block 40/42 - F-16CG/DG - gained capabilities for navigation and precision attack in all weather conditions and at night with the LANTIRN pods and more extensive air-to-ground loads, including the GBU-10, GBU-12, GBU-24 Paveway laser-guided bombs and the GBU-15. Block 40/42 production began in 1988 and ran through 1995. Currently, the Block 40s are being upgraded with several Block 50 systems: ALR-56M threat warning system, the ALE-47 advanced chaff/flare dispenser, an improved performance battery, and Falcon UP structural upgrade.

Block 50/52 Equipped with a Northrop Grumman APG-68(V)7 radar and a General Electric F110-GE-129 Increased Performance Engine, the aircraft are also capable of using the Lockheed Martin low-altitude navigation and targeting for night (LANTIRN) system. Technology enhancements include color multifunctional displays and programmable display generator, a new Modular Mission Computer, a Digital Terrain System, a new color video camera and color triple-deck video recorder to record the pilot's head-up display view, and an upgraded data transfer unit. In May 2000, the Air Force certitified Block 50/52 [aka Block 50 Plus] F-16s to carry the CBU-103/104/105 Wind-Corrected Munitions Dispenser, the AGM-154 Joint Stand-Off Weapon, the GBU-31/32 Joint Direct Attack Munition, and the Theater Airborne Reconnaissance System. Beginning in mid-2000, Lockheed-Martin began to deliver Block 50/52 variants equipped with an on-board oxygen generation system (OBOGS) designed to replace the obsolete, original LOX system.

Block 50D/52D Wild Weasel F-16CJ (CJ means block 50) comes in C-Model (1 seat) and D-Model (2 seat) versions. It is best recognized for its ability to carry the AGM-88 HARM and the AN/ASQ-213 HARM Targeting System (HTS) in the suppression of enemy air defenses [SEAD] mission. The HTS allows HARM to be employed in the range-known mode providing longer range shots with greater target specificity. This specialized version of the F-16, which can also carry the ALQ-119 Electronic Jamming Pod for self protection, became the sole provider for Air Force SEAD missions when the F-4G Wild Weasel was retired from the Air Force inventory. The lethal SEAD mission now rests solely on the shoulders of the F-16 Harm Targeting System. Although F-18s and EA-6Bs are HARM capable, the F-16 provides the ability to use the HARM in its most effective mode. The original concept called for teaming the F-15 Precision Direction Finding (PDF) and the F-16 HTS. Because this teaming concept is no longer feasible, the current approach calls for the improvement of the HTS capability. The improvement will come from the Joint Emitter Targeting System (JETS), which facilitates the use of HARM's most effective mode when launched from any JETS capable aircraft.

Block 60 - In May 1998 the UAE announced selection of the Block 60 F-16 to be delivered between 2002-2004. The upgrade package consists of a range of modern systems including conformal fuel tanks for greater range, new cockpit displays, an internal sensor suite, a new mission computer and other advanced features including a new agile beam radar.


All other F-16 versions are called with their nickname.

Some examples:
F-16.net wrote:Official International names
Although "Fighting Falcon" has been adopted as the official name for the F-16 by many international customers, some airforces have indigenous names for (specific variants of) the F-16:
    Netz: or 'Hawk' - used by the Israeli Air Force for its F-16A/B aircraft.
    Barak: or 'Lightning' - used by the Israeli Air Force for its F-16C/D (block 30 & 40) aircraft.
    Sufa: or 'Storm' - used by the Israeli Air Force for its F-16I aircraft.
    KF-16: Designation used by the RoKAF to denote the South Korean produced F-16s. Note that this designation does not follow the US Tri-Service designation system. The 'K' simply stands for Korea in this particular case.
    Jastrzab: or 'Hawk' - used by the Polish Air Force for its F-16C/D block 52 aircraft.




Sources:
https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/f-16.htm
http://www.f-16.net/articles_article10.html

User avatar
lastcrusade101
Sergeant First-Class
Posts: 144
Joined: Sat 1 Aug 2015 20:40
Contact:

Re: Inquiry: Why does WRD not have a standardized unit naming system?

Postby lastcrusade101 » Wed 28 Feb 2018 13:53

^ dope ass answer TBH

I guess I’m just being autistic about it TBH. I would have prefered if for the IDF, it just added the local nickname after the real life designation (like F-16C Barak). The KF-16 is different to me since thats a different designation, not a nickname. Same for the F-15K Slam Eagle. Which I wish was in the game soooo badly lol

As I’m making super modern decks thanks to WAB Noob’s sandbox mod (Polish F-16s and Finnish K9 thunders for example), I find myself wishing the names of certain vehicles had some form of standardization so I could just have all the nations’ inventories open and scroll to their alphabetical positions (though sometimes the planes in the same row share no similarites, and the organization only reads the first row’s letter before placing it

Seperate question, why does South Korea have 2 FK-16s and one F-16? Shouldn’t they all be KF-16Cs?
120 Smooth-bore > 120 Rifled

Scheintot887
Sergeant
Posts: 50
Joined: Tue 27 Jan 2015 15:54
Contact:

Re: Inquiry: Why does WRD not have a standardized unit naming system?

Postby Scheintot887 » Wed 28 Feb 2018 15:41

lastcrusade101 wrote:^ dope ass answer TBH
I guess I’m just being autistic about it TBH. I would have prefered if for the IDF, it just added the local nickname after the real life designation (like F-16C Barak).


F-16C Barak is not the official designation. It is just Barak. Look up at Wikipedia where IAF planes are listed.

wikipedia.org wrote:Designation: United States General Dynamics F-16C/D;
Entered Service: 1987-;
Hebrew designation: Barak (Lightning) ברק;


lastcrusade101 wrote:The KF-16 is different to me since thats a different designation, not a nickname. Same for the F-15K Slam Eagle. Which I wish was in the game soooo badly lol


F-15K Slam Eagle is out of scope because it started its service in the early 2000's.
KF-16 explanation follows down below *

lastcrusade101 wrote:Seperate question, why does South Korea have 2 FK-16s and one F-16? Shouldn’t they all be KF-16Cs?

The F-16C Peace Bridge (I) was never called KF-16C Peace Bridge. The second and third versions of the Peace Bridge were.
So it is:
  • F-16C Peace Bridge (I)
  • KF-16C Peace Bridge (II)
  • KF-16C Peace Bridge (III)
f-16.net wrote:Peace Bridge II
...
Locally, the F-16s will be designated KF-16. Under the terms of the agreement, Lockheed Fort Worth will manufacture the first 12 aircraft, the next 36 will be delivered in kit form and assembled in South Korea, whereas the last 72 will be built in South Korea by Samsung Aerospace.
...



Sources:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_a ... _Air_Force
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_users_article18.html
https://www.airforce-technology.com/pro ... lam-eagle/

Fodder
Sergeant Major
Posts: 297
Joined: Fri 7 Oct 2016 20:15
Contact:

Re: Inquiry: Why does WRD not have a standardized unit naming system?

Postby Fodder » Wed 28 Feb 2018 21:26

Scheintot887 wrote:...

Yeah, using local names is great and using english to pronounce of kanji characters is the best way to do it, but its inconsistent.

Instead of using english word for Tan-SAM short arrow it should've been Tan-SAM chikaku ya or hachi-ju ichi shiki SAM, and for Guntank it should've been hachi-nana shiki jiso kosha kikanbo.

But then there bigger problems then unit names.

Scheintot887
Sergeant
Posts: 50
Joined: Tue 27 Jan 2015 15:54
Contact:

Re: Inquiry: Why does WRD not have a standardized unit naming system?

Postby Scheintot887 » Thu 1 Mar 2018 11:54

Fodder wrote:
Scheintot887 wrote:...

Yeah, using local names is great and using english to pronounce of kanji characters is the best way to do it, but its inconsistent.

Why? How is it inconsistent?

Fodder wrote:Instead of using english word for Tan-SAM short arrow it should've been Tan-SAM chikaku ya or hachi-ju ichi shiki SAM, and for Guntank it should've been hachi-nana shiki jiso kosha kikanbo.

Like I've already mentioned, it is common to limit namespace in Software Development. Because english is a globel language they probably decided to stick with it which makes it consistent.

Fodder wrote:But then there bigger problems then unit names.

We are not trying to fix a problem here. We are talking about the given names.

User avatar
lastcrusade101
Sergeant First-Class
Posts: 144
Joined: Sat 1 Aug 2015 20:40
Contact:

Re: Inquiry: Why does WRD not have a standardized unit naming system?

Postby lastcrusade101 » Thu 1 Mar 2018 13:33

For Japanese tanks in particular, I wish they called it Type whatever it was. Not only is the example of Guntank a strange anomaly in the list, they did the same thing for Chinese tanks (which were added at the same time so its not like it's outdated). Why would the same game, with units added at the same time, call the Type 88 the Type 88, and not Bālíng Shì, while calling the Type 90 a "Kyu Maru Shiki"?
120 Smooth-bore > 120 Rifled

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 40 guests