Talk:Type 91 torpedo

Military history: Technology / Weaponry / Asian / Japanese / World War II C‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

C

This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force
	Asian military history task force
	Japanese military history task force
	World War II task force

Japan: Military history C‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project, participate in relevant discussions, and see lists of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 21:18, May 4, 2024 (JST, Reiwa 6) (Refresh)JapanWikipedia:WikiProject JapanTemplate:WikiProject JapanJapan-related articles

C

This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by the joint Japanese military history task force.

WikiProject Japan to do list:

Peer review: Kako River (Japan)
A-class review: None

Featured content candidates –

Articles: None
Pictures: None
Lists: None

Good article nominations: Pure Japanese, Vinland Saga (TV series), Japanese destroyer Ume (1944), Mai Fujisawa, Godzilla Minus One
Add requested images to articles that need them.
Pages for Deletion: Participate in Japan-related deletion discussions.
Improve and expand Japan-related stubs.
Create some requested articles.
Help translate an article from the Japanese Wikipedia into English.
Assess unassessed articles

Need help[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Merge proposal[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Ugly typography[edit]

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)[reply]

Irrelevant Material[edit]

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)[reply]

Eight-cylinder radial? Not possible.[edit]

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)[reply]