Talk:United States Porpoise-class submarine
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the United States Porpoise-class submarine article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg)
.jpg)
External Torpedo Tubes
editThe P-classes were built with six torpedo tubes; early in the war, two forward external torpedo tubes were added to five of the boats. Based on information from NavSource Photo Archives it appears that the submarines receiving the tubes were: Porpoise, Pike, Tarpon, Pickerel, Permit. If anyone could confirm this it would be an interesting addition to the article. Also, perhaps someone in the know might explain why other vessels (some of which survived the war, like Pollack) did not (apparently) receive external tubes.
No General Characteristics
editThe Porpoise class was made up of three fairly distinct subclasses. I'm unwilling to write a single "General Characteristics" section and imply that they're more similar than they really are, and if I were to write a three-parter it would be enormous. I'm leaving it off, but the individual articles have detailed characteristics. TomTheHand (talk) 15:12, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
- Alden lists them as three distinct classes (Porpoise, Shark, Perch). Why are they bundled in the first place? Andy Dingley (talk) 16:56, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
- Lenton lists them as a class, in 3 groups, but I'd tend to agree with Alden. They appear distinctive enough to be separate classes. TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 21:52, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
- Norman Polmar list them as one single P class (SS-172 to 181), but Fontenoy described them as 3 different classes. What is a design number (shipyard's or BR&C's) ? --Matrek (talk) 00:27, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
- Miller lists it as a single class, but calls it the Porpoise/Shark/Perch-class. I added general characteristics for the P-1 Type, since I think there's simply too much data omitted. By stating clearly that the general characteristics only concern the P-1 Type as defined in the article, it gives at least some general impression without the hassle of having to read up on the individual ships. How's that for a compromise? Tonyingesson (talk) 08:52, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
- Norman Polmar list them as one single P class (SS-172 to 181), but Fontenoy described them as 3 different classes. What is a design number (shipyard's or BR&C's) ? --Matrek (talk) 00:27, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
- Lenton lists them as a class, in 3 groups, but I'd tend to agree with Alden. They appear distinctive enough to be separate classes. TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 21:52, 16 April 2012 (UTC)