Talk:Submarines of the Imperial Japanese Navy

=Department of Corrections=

Untitled
A couple of points. I seriously doubt the I-400s had 4 diesels, each with 3000hp; more likely they had about 7000hp total, still more than any contemporary. Also, I've seen the "I-200 class" always called I-201. What's with that? Trekphiler 11:42, 12 November 2006 (UTC)


 * After a readthrough, I deleted:
 * "the largest, longest ranged and most deadly torpedo in use at the time"
 * because Japan's own Type 91 destroyer torpedo was better
 * I corrected "four 3,000hp" to "1825hp (1360kW)" and changed
 * "enough fuel to go around the world one-and-a-half times, more than enough to reach the United States from either direction"
 * to
 * "range 37500nm at 14 knots. "
 * I deleted "of 4192 battery cells" as unsubsantiated & improbable. I corrected "5000HP motors" to "2500hp" & "double the horsepower" to "nearly double" & added "MAN" (again based on Fitzsimons). I'd also question they had schnorchels.
 * I also deleted
 * "Its name was combination of sei (clear sky) and ran (storm), literally “storm out of a clear sky,” because the Americans would not know they were coming. It had a wing span of 40 feet (12 m) and a length of 38 feet (11.6 m)."
 * as not on point. Trekphiler 04:14 & 04:45, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Only 6 submarines?
You wrote  "only  6  submarines"  tried  to  cross the ocean  betwenn Japan  and  Europe  but  you  mention only 5 of  them. This is  a  little  mistake. Moreover you  forget  several  German  and  Italian  submarines  which  reached  the  Japanese occupied  area,  for  example  the  Italian  submarines  "Cappellini"  (reached  Singapur  on July 14, 1943, "Giuliani" (reached  Singapur  on August  1, 1943), and "Torelli"(reached  Singapur  on August 31, 1943).

Wrong picture for the AM type
The picture shows I-400 a Sen-Toku type submarine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.137.120.127 (talk) 22:01, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Carrying the weight?
I see mention of freighter subs, but no details. Did I miss something? I've seen them described as YU-1s (based on the Ha-101), design begun in 1943, built by Hasado Iron Works, Hitachi Shipbuilding, & Kudamatsu; 273 tons surfaced/370 tons submerged, 40.8x4.1x2.7m, crew 13, payload 40 tons freight. Just don't ask for a source... Trekphiler 11:19, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

I-64
What was I-64? No mention of this boat on the page. Drutt (talk) 09:37, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Type 95 vs Type 93
Don't want to trigger an edit war over this, since it's just not that crucial a point, but the Type 95 and Type 93 were siblings, both being oxygen-fueled weapons coming out of the same development program. Type 95 was for submarines and Type 93 was for destroyers, and, yes, it was the Type 93 that Samuel Eliot Morison dubbed the Long Lance. My point is that I think the best statement is that the Type 95 is closely related to type 93 -- not that the Type 95 was the Long Lance (it wasn't) or that it was confused with the Long Lance (doesn't seem to really capture the relationship correctly.) Thought I'd bring it up here before modifying the article, though. Yaush (talk) 15:26, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

cost of the individual sub programs?
If anyone has access to that info, please add it to the article.HammerFilmFan (talk) 22:01, 6 January 2013 (UTC)