This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Bayern-class battleship 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 |
![]() | Bayern-class battleship is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() | Bayern-class battleship is part of the Battleships of Germany series, a featured topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on September 15, 2018. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
"That the basic design of the Bayern class was carried over into the Bismarck class twenty years later is just a legend. The only similarity between the Bayern and Bismarck class is the arrangement of the main artillery in 4 turrets with 2 barrels."
There is another opinion about the similarity of those ships: http://www.avalanchepress.com/Baden.php —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.114.153.102 ( talk • contribs)
My only comment is that I'd like to see conversions into non-metric measurements to cater to our American readers. Other than that it's up to your usual standards. Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 04:31, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
Why is it SMS Baden (1915) if it was launched in 1916 and completed in 1917? Likewise SMS Württemberg (1915) is a redlink, but SMS Württemberg (1918) redirects to the ship class article. There might be other oddities, but these are the ones that struck me. Headbomb { talk / contribs / physics / books} 15:56, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Needs a more balanced approach; the article seems to suggest that a high MH is an unreserved advantage, when it is one of many design compromises. Highly stable designs, though resistant to list, are more affected by wave action and consequently tend relatively poorer gun platforms & seaboats, described as "unsteady." Which quality (steady vs stable) a nation chooses prioritise tends to represent it's expectations of the ships service life & the nature of likely combat. Obviously ship design does not exist in such mutatis mutandis terms, plain "better" design occurs, achieving high stability while still producing good gunnery ships. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.75.48.5 ( talk) 15:42, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Bayern class used 38 cm L/45 guns. The link 38 cm (15 in) SK L/45 (4 × 2) refers to the railway gun, which was developed from the naval gun. There seems to be no article on the naval version. The railway version is two hops from Bayern class ships (Bayern -> 38 cm naval gun -> 38 cm raiway gun). Should there be a short article on on naval gun, which would be linked to its railway modification?
Turret roofs were 120 mm, not 200 mm thick (G. Staff, German Battleships 1914-18(2): Kaiser, König and Bayern classes, 2009 Osprey Publishing p. 41). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.205.137.14 ( talk) 13:47, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
Please verify the initial coal bunker design capacity of just 900 tonnes - seems way to small. Or is it a typo and should read 2900 tonnes ? -- Denniss ( talk) 12:19, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
What were the reasons to use two different types of fuel for the main propulsion? It would seem to needlessly complicate logistics, and wasn't the writing on the wall already seen for coal firing by the time these ships were built?-- Cancun771 ( talk) 06:36, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
The article refers to "the naval force that drove the Imperial Russian Navy from the Gulf of Riga during Operation Albion in October 1917". Russian Republic says that that entity was proclaimed on 1 September 1917. Should the article refer to "the Navy of the Russian Republic"? Alekksandr ( talk) 15:27, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
The dates for the ships in the article intro don't match the dates in the "Construction" section. I don't know which is correct. Dans530 ( talk) 16:18, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Bayern-class battleship 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 |
![]() | Bayern-class battleship is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() | Bayern-class battleship is part of the Battleships of Germany series, a featured topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on September 15, 2018. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
"That the basic design of the Bayern class was carried over into the Bismarck class twenty years later is just a legend. The only similarity between the Bayern and Bismarck class is the arrangement of the main artillery in 4 turrets with 2 barrels."
There is another opinion about the similarity of those ships: http://www.avalanchepress.com/Baden.php —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.114.153.102 ( talk • contribs)
My only comment is that I'd like to see conversions into non-metric measurements to cater to our American readers. Other than that it's up to your usual standards. Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 04:31, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
Why is it SMS Baden (1915) if it was launched in 1916 and completed in 1917? Likewise SMS Württemberg (1915) is a redlink, but SMS Württemberg (1918) redirects to the ship class article. There might be other oddities, but these are the ones that struck me. Headbomb { talk / contribs / physics / books} 15:56, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Needs a more balanced approach; the article seems to suggest that a high MH is an unreserved advantage, when it is one of many design compromises. Highly stable designs, though resistant to list, are more affected by wave action and consequently tend relatively poorer gun platforms & seaboats, described as "unsteady." Which quality (steady vs stable) a nation chooses prioritise tends to represent it's expectations of the ships service life & the nature of likely combat. Obviously ship design does not exist in such mutatis mutandis terms, plain "better" design occurs, achieving high stability while still producing good gunnery ships. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.75.48.5 ( talk) 15:42, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Bayern class used 38 cm L/45 guns. The link 38 cm (15 in) SK L/45 (4 × 2) refers to the railway gun, which was developed from the naval gun. There seems to be no article on the naval version. The railway version is two hops from Bayern class ships (Bayern -> 38 cm naval gun -> 38 cm raiway gun). Should there be a short article on on naval gun, which would be linked to its railway modification?
Turret roofs were 120 mm, not 200 mm thick (G. Staff, German Battleships 1914-18(2): Kaiser, König and Bayern classes, 2009 Osprey Publishing p. 41). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.205.137.14 ( talk) 13:47, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
Please verify the initial coal bunker design capacity of just 900 tonnes - seems way to small. Or is it a typo and should read 2900 tonnes ? -- Denniss ( talk) 12:19, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
What were the reasons to use two different types of fuel for the main propulsion? It would seem to needlessly complicate logistics, and wasn't the writing on the wall already seen for coal firing by the time these ships were built?-- Cancun771 ( talk) 06:36, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
The article refers to "the naval force that drove the Imperial Russian Navy from the Gulf of Riga during Operation Albion in October 1917". Russian Republic says that that entity was proclaimed on 1 September 1917. Should the article refer to "the Navy of the Russian Republic"? Alekksandr ( talk) 15:27, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
The dates for the ships in the article intro don't match the dates in the "Construction" section. I don't know which is correct. Dans530 ( talk) 16:18, 15 September 2018 (UTC)