Talk:Type IX submarine

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Deck Gun?[edit]

I've read in a few sources that not all Type IX's had deck guns due to scarcity of materials in the late war. Anyone have a reference? Kaszeta 13:56, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

A: Deck Guns were removed in the late war, not because of shortages, but because there was little tactical opportunity to use them and their presence added to the mass and drag of the boat.

U-boat?[edit]

I STIll dont Know what a U boat is.

Have you tried looking up U-boat?

Down for the count[edit]

I corrected the metric equivalents for range; the mi were converted as if statute, rather than nautical. I also added torpedo diameter. Trekphiler 01:58, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IXD/42[edit]

There is such a thing as an IXD/42, it was a slight modification with increased horsepower. I've noticed edits going back and forth about it(including my own). Please, try to talk about it here. Noha307 (talk) 19:48, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Range wrong[edit]

Range is too big by a factor of two since this edit over a year ago [1]. Good reminder to never trust Wikipedia data without verifying it with another source :(. 99.236.75.239 (talk) 05:40, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deck Gun type?[edit]

In several places the deck gun is referred to as a "Utof" deck gun. I've not seen this designation mentioned anywhere other than the web. I suspect it is a cut-and-paste of a typographic error from uboat.net.

Freetown, Sierra Leone ?[edit]

"and U-107 out of Freetown, Africa under the command of Günther Hessler, "

This assertion makes little sense. Freetown is in Sierra Leone, which was a British colony, not Vichy French. How could a U-boat be operating out of a British-controlled port ? Eregli bob (talk) 09:17, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

German WP mentions Lorient, France, as U-107's home port. But I haven't found a reference to source this. --Syzygy (talk) 11:02, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is clear that U-107 sank a number of ships within a few hundred miles of Freetown. Correct english would be "off Freetown", not "out of Freetown". I have amended the sentence accordingly.Eregli bob (talk) 12:54, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Range is still Wrong[edit]

I noticed that ranges were totally wrong for this boat and i corrected it and referenced them accordingly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Immortals (talk • contribs) 19:31, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

IXC and IXC/40[edit]

Is IXC/40 considered a subtype of IXC, or an entirely different type? I ask because German submarine U-505 says "She is the only Type IXC still in existence", while German submarine U-534 says "The U-boat is one of only four German WWII submarines in preserved condition remaining in the world, the only other IXC boat being U-505 in Chicago, USA." It seems to me that, depending on whether IXC/40 is a subtype of IXC or a different type, one or the other of these statements is wrong. Thanks, cmadler (talk) 18:16, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ship's complement[edit]

In reponse to User talk:Kendall-K1#Your revert of my "Ship's complement" param edit - Nov. 2016, from my talk page:

"Complement: 48 to 56 personnel" seems awkward and unnecessary to me but I don't feel all that strongly about it. If you believe it's an improvement, go ahead and restore it. Kendall-K1 (talk) 14:44, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unclear wording[edit]

In the lede, this appears: "The extended range came at the cost of longer dive times and decreased maneuverability." After thinking about it for a minute or two I realized that "longer dive times" probably means that it took longer for the boat to submerge. But when I first read it I took it to mean that the boat could stay submerged longer, which is hardly a "cost". Someone knowledgeable should probably try to reword this. Thanks. Earendur (talk) 19:00, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You're right that it's ambiguous, but it's also unsourced. As such, any changes would be Original Research, as the sentence may well be already. While I'm aware that content in the Lead is not normally sourced, it doesn't appear anywhere else in the article. Given that the article has had a {{Refimprove}} since 2008, I removed the claims. They can be added back after a reliable source is found. - BilCat (talk) 19:12, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on German Type IX submarine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:19, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Type_IX_submarine&oldid=1213815774"