Error creating thumbnail: File missing Join our Discord!
If you have been locked out of your account you can request a password reset here.

Talk:AT-13 Saxhorn-2: Difference between revisions

From Internet Movie Firearms Database - Guns in Movies, TV and Video Games
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
 
(5 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
==Original Russian name or NATO reporting name?==
If you want an answer to why, by the way, there's a couple reasons:
Should we use the original Russian designation or the NATO reporting name to name this weapon? (this discussion also applies to the [[AT-4 Spigot]], the [[AT-5 Spandrel]], and the [[AT-14 Spriggan]]) I think we should use the original Russian designation since the NATO reporting names are code names, used in place of their original names. Even though we speak English on this site, we're not NATO, and I think we should use the original names. --[[User:Wuzh|Wuzh]] ([[User talk:Wuzh|talk]]) 01:45, 8 August 2018 (EDT)
*A fair few of our founding users are of the age where their main references are Cold War-era books and documentaries: in these, these aren't just the NATO names of these systems, they're often the ''only'' names given to these systems (mainly because the GRAU designations weren't widely known in the West). As a casual example I have a book from 1983 called ''Rockets and Missiles of World War III'' which will only ever use the NATO reporting name.
*The AT-(number) system is much, much easier to remember than the GRAU inventory code. I could tell you the NATO names from memory (which, when you think about it, isn't surprising since that's the whole point of those codes), I doubt I could manage a single one of the GRAU codes.
*The AT- codes are kind of convenient in that they can be used to refer to the missile or the system as a whole without being any less correct: the GRAU designations applied to the systems in various sources are much more confusing. AT-3 is usually referred to by the GRAU code 9M14 which is the code for the missile, AT-4 is 9K111 which is the entire system, AT-5 is 9M113 which is the missile, AT-13 is 9K115-2 which is the entire system, and AT-14 is 9M133 which is the missile. I have no idea why it works that way.
[[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] ([[User talk:Evil Tim|talk]]) 02:38, 8 August 2018 (EDT)

Latest revision as of 11:13, 8 August 2018

If you want an answer to why, by the way, there's a couple reasons:

  • A fair few of our founding users are of the age where their main references are Cold War-era books and documentaries: in these, these aren't just the NATO names of these systems, they're often the only names given to these systems (mainly because the GRAU designations weren't widely known in the West). As a casual example I have a book from 1983 called Rockets and Missiles of World War III which will only ever use the NATO reporting name.
  • The AT-(number) system is much, much easier to remember than the GRAU inventory code. I could tell you the NATO names from memory (which, when you think about it, isn't surprising since that's the whole point of those codes), I doubt I could manage a single one of the GRAU codes.
  • The AT- codes are kind of convenient in that they can be used to refer to the missile or the system as a whole without being any less correct: the GRAU designations applied to the systems in various sources are much more confusing. AT-3 is usually referred to by the GRAU code 9M14 which is the code for the missile, AT-4 is 9K111 which is the entire system, AT-5 is 9M113 which is the missile, AT-13 is 9K115-2 which is the entire system, and AT-14 is 9M133 which is the missile. I have no idea why it works that way.

Evil Tim (talk) 02:38, 8 August 2018 (EDT)