Talk:List of specifications of submarines of World War II

Overview
This is an attempt to create a summary overview of the main submarines of World War II for easy comparison. It is not an attempt to list all possible types nor is it to list in extreme detail the specifications of each. Rather this page can be a link point to other pages that have more detail.

Bryan MacKinnon (talk) 10:15, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Adding additional submarines
I'm looking to get as many submarines in the list that had an impact during the War. When adding, please use the same units as in the column header (nautical miles, feet, etc). Each entry should hopefully standardize the units in each column to save display space; hence, the individual cells would not have different units than the column header. Unfortunately, not all reference sources distinguish between tons, long tons, and metric tons.

Bryan MacKinnon (talk) 03:21, 4 August 2013 (UTC)


 * If there is not enough space, then perhaps some material should be lost. Draught and beam could be lost since unless the submarines have particularly unusual profiles they give no more indication of the size than length alone does. Displacements are usually in long tons, for which conveniently the metric tonne is a close approximation. GraemeLeggett (talk) 10:22, 4 August 2013 (UTC)


 * ♠IMO, even the actual dimensions aren't really important. Surfaced/submerged tonnage, yes. If you're seeing a 1500 ton boat against a 700 ton boat, do you care if the 1500-tonner is 308 ft or 300?
 * ♠Beyond that, things like length vary by overall or waterline, so which is being measured, & is that common for all?
 * ♠I would add the actual number of diesels or electric motors, since the German boats generally only had two, the U.S. boats four.  TREK philer  any time you're ready, Uhura  14:40, 5 August 2013 (UTC)


 * In the original version, I had the number of engines and motors included but in the end, when it comes to overall performance of the boat, the number of engines and motors was a secondary data point but I don't have a strong feeling on this point. I agree that the draught could be removed and perhaps the beam but the length I think is quite important when comparing different boats. It is a good indicator other factors. One of the original motivations I had for creating this page was the comparative size of the boats in addition to the range and armament.  Standardizing on long/metric tons is fine too.

Bryan MacKinnon (talk) 02:31, 8 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I don't think number of engines/motors is essential (only usual). I can also see the point on length, given the measurements are standardized.  TREK philer  any time you're ready, Uhura  09:36, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Merger Proposal with World War II section of Submarine
This is a useful article, but I wonder if it might be better placed under the World War II section of the Submarine article. What do you think? Cutiekatie (talk) 00:16, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I think you'd eventually see this broken out separate anyhow. This is too narrow, IMO, for the general page. Subs in WW2, yes (& ATM, I can't recall if there's a page on it & don't feel like looking :.  TREK philer  any time you're ready, Uhura  16:35, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. I've put a 'see also' link on the Submarine page instead. That might draw more attention to this information. Cutiekatie (talk) 19:48, 26 November 2013 (UTC)