Talk:Type 91 torpedo

Need help
Need help for edit. Since this is a stub, you can shrink, delete or roll back. Best regards. --Shun Zero (talk) 03:43, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

I attempted to polish the translation but could not bring myself to commit a change. How can anyone put into dry, unemotional terms the story of schoolgirls treating casualties of an atomic bomb? Two sister factories producing the same weapon, one annihilated, the other spared the same death due to an error on a map? Its a tragic story, and I feel humbled to have tried and failed. --2602:306:C45E:9940:B1D5:471D:87FC:112D (talk) 21:26, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Merge proposal
Having spotted Thunder fish on new article patrol and done some rescuing, I now believe that this artcile should be merged to type 91 torpedo as Thunderfish is basically just the translation from Japanese of Gyorai. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:36, 5 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree. The words "Thunder fish" should be a direct translation of the Japanese word "Gyorai" (gyo=fish, rai=thunder), which means "torpedo".  So, Thunder fish shall be a link (or redirect) to Torpedo.  (Note that "Type 91 torpedo" is one of "Gyorai"s, and they are not the same.)
 * However, almost all contents of Thunder fish is already included in Type 91 torpedo (this article) now, I think. It may be better that some lines about the attack on Perl Harbor are moved in this article.  --Kazov (talk) 08:59, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Ugly typography
Do we really need to convert every unit into one or two equivalent units? It makes this rather dense article almost unreadable, since the unit conversions take up nearly as much space at the actual text. Leave it in knots and metres, the type of person who's going to plow through 60 kilobytes of Wiki prose on obscure WWII weapons is motivated enough to do his own conversions. --Wtshymanski (talk) 17:41, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Irrelevant Material
There's lots of stuff that probably needs to go. I think those equations need to go too. Isn't this page about a particular torpedo not the general mechanics of torpedo bombing. Usiruk86 (talk) 23:53, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Eight-cylinder radial? Not possible.
It is written in the Type 91 article that the torpedo's main engine was "an eight-cylinder, single-row radial." As far as I know, that is not possible. The dynamics of radial engines require that they have odd numbers of cylinders per row. My only source is 50 years of flying as a pilot behind radial (and other) engines.173.62.31.201 (talk) 17:34, 8 February 2018 (UTC)