Talk:Katyusha rocket launcher
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] translation of Boyevaya Mashina
I think BM / Boyevaya Mashina should be translated "combat vehicle" or "fighting vehicle" rather than "battle machine". Bukvoed 10:26, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
I don't know. "Battle Machine" has a nice ring to it.
-G
-
- Sounds like a history channel special: "Modern Marvels: Battle Machines!! CynicalMe 19:19, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Organ tubes?
"The weapon was also known as a "Stalin Organ" (or Stalinorgel in German), so named by German troops due to the sound of its rockets, and its organ-like appearance (the missile tubes were arranged in parallel along its back, just as organ tubes are arranged)." (emphasis added)
The usual wording is "organ pipes". It's no big deal, but I'll change it. (OTOH, I see from today's paper that it was a big deal for Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) when, advocating his telecommunications bill, he spoke of "Internet tubes" instead of pipes.) --ChrisWinter 22:26, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
- I've removed the reference to its appearance altogether. Zaloga (1984) and others only refer to the sound. Early in the war the Katyushas were kept very secret, and it's possible that the name Stalinorgel was coined by Germans who had never even seen one. —Michael Z. 2006-08-07 21:39 Z
I seem to recall that it was the Russian nickname that resulted from the sound they made. The multi-faceted noise the rockets made upon launching sort of sounded like: "kut-YOOSH-ah." I can't remember where I read or heard this and could not find a confirmation on the 'net.--Hezekiah-1812 19:15, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
- Several sources are clear that the nickname comes from the song, which was a big hit at the time, although I'm not sure why it was associated with the rocket launcher. —Michael Z. 2006-08-08 20:48 Z
No doubt the song inspired. But why that song and not another? And why nickname that weapon and not another with that song. I think the nexus is onomatopoeia--which I can barely spell, let alone prove. Is there a Russian source I might query?Hezekiah-1812 19:44, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Disputing Range
There is no evidence that Katyushas reach a whopping ~150 kilometers. This is completely unfounded. At least not in the hands of the Hizbollah.
Could be referring to Zelzal missiles (see IDF concerned missiles could hit central Israel) -- 131.6.84.67 13:15, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
- The Iranian Fajr-5 Katyusha-type MRL rocket has a range of ~75 km. Perhaps there are larger such rockets or a version of it with still longer range. I have heard the Zelzal mentioned in news reports too. Lots of this is speculative, but from what I've seen, nothing so big has been used yet. —Michael Z. 2006-07-19 19:32 Z
[edit] Langemak designed the rockets, not the launcher
Langemak was arrested and executed in 1937, but Katyusha launcher development was authorized in 1938 and completed in August 1939. I presume that Langemak designed the RS-132 rockets, so I will move this information to that article. —Michael Z. 2006-08-04 02:09 Z
I'm removing the following text again:
- The Katyusha was designed by Georgy Langemak, directing a development team including Vladimir Artemiev, Boris Petropavlovsky, Yuriy Pobedonostsev, and others. During the Great Purge in 1937, Langemak was imprisoned, tortured, tried on what are commonly viewed as trumped-up charges and then executed.
They did not design the Katyusha: as the article states, it was designed after Langemak was dead. I assume they designed the RS-132 aircraft rocket, so I already moved this text to that article. The Katyusha is a series self-propelled multiple rocket launchers, which fire the M-13 and other rockets, which are a modified design based on Langemak's aircraft rockets. —Michael Z. 2006-08-05 13:41 Z
[edit] Response to Nebelwerfer?
- The development of the Katyusha rocket launcher was a response to Nazi Germany's development of the six-barreled Nebelwerfer rocket mortar in 1936.
This statement needs a reference. —Michael Z. 2006-08-04 02:22 Z
-
- Particularly since the Nebelwerfer was fielded for the first time well after the katyushas. DMorpheus 15:50, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- "Particularly since the Nebelwerfer was fielded for the first time well after the katyushas." That's irrelevant as the Nebelwerfer was developed years before Katyusha. --Kurt Leyman 17:41, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
-
I find this statement highly doubtful. Since reference does not seem forthcoming, I propose deletion. Asgrrr 01:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Descriptive name
Should this be moved to a name which makes the subject of the article self-evident? Suggestions:
- Katyusha rocket launcher
- Katyusha multiple rocket launcher
- Katyusha rocket artillery
I like no. 1. —Michael Z. 2006-08-04 05:59 Z
[edit] Current conflicts
Do we need some mention of the weapons current role in the Israel Lebanon conflict? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.108.152.163 (talk • contribs) .
- It is mentioned at the end of Katyusha#Katyushas since World War II—feel free to expand, but please try to include references to support specific facts. —Michael Z. 2006-08-09 18:31 Z
[edit] Nyquist quotation
The following was added by an anonymous contributor:
"The fact that Katyusha Rockets are a Russian weapon has been lost in a maze of Islamist and Arab enemies, each assisting the other behind the scenes. Russia’s role is usually omitted, or chalked up to the economics of arms sales instead of strategic malice." - Is there a Secret Syrian-Iranian-Russian Alliance?, by J. R. Nyquist
All this says is "Russia's role is omitted", and doesn't describe that role, or even unambiguously say there is one. I haven't seen any information that the Katyusha weapons being used by Hezbollah (if indeed those are the ones this quote is alluding to) or their ammunition is manufactured in Russia. Perhaps the source has more information, but as it is inserted into this article, this quotation seems to constitute innuendo and nothing more. I'm removing it, barring some justification or the replacement with a quotation which actually says something. —Michael Z. 2006-09-01 18:04 Z
- Having read the linked article, I see it is an editorial which mentions some evidence that Russia is somehow politically involved with Iran and Syria's role in arming Hezbollah, but the mention of Katyushas being "Russian" is completely unsupported (or rather a fallacious argument: that historically the class of weapons called Katyushas originates in the Soviet Union is in no way evidence that the Russian Federation has something to do with Iran and Syria arming Hezbollah). Poor rhetoric, in my opinion. —Michael Z. 2006-09-01 18:18 Z
[edit] Photo of damaged building
I don't really see how the photo of a partially wrecked apartment building in Haifa contributes to this article. It's a current event documentary photo, and doesn't say anything about Katyusha rocket launchers. Is there a good reason not to remove it? —Michael Z. 2006-09-15 00:40 Z
- These are weapons and weapons are intended to cause death and destruction. Showing some of the destructive power of a weapon is part of explaining it and explanation is what an encyclopedia is about. The article has two launch photos and no target photos — seems biased to me. I'm not partial to this particular one (
which seems to be unsourcedThe annotation does not explicitly say that the destruction was caused by a Katyusha.) — some from WWII would do fine. --Jtir 00:41, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Crescendo requires a citation
, due to the similarity of the pitch of the rocket firing sound and the pitch of the crecendo of the beginning of the third line of each stanza of the song.
This is so specific that it really needs to be confirmed by a reference. —Michael Z. 2006-10-11 17:21 Z
[edit] Move to "Katyusha rocket launcher"
Any objection to moving this article to Katyusha rocket launcher? This would make the title self-explanatory and disambiguating when it appears in lists and search results. Optimized for general-audience readers, as recommended by Wikipedia:Naming conventions . —Michael Z. 2006-12-14 06:36 Z
[edit] Hezbollah Katyushas
There's a general problem with the article because the name suggests that Hezbollah and at other conflict areas in the world milicias are using the WW-II-rocket-launchers. Why and who made the errorousely merging from Kayusha (rocket) into this article? Try a Google search for Katyusha and 99+ percent of the hits link to the Hezbollah used rocket, not to the launcher called Stalinorgel by German soldiers in WW2. In strongly recommend to revert this measure. --213.155.224.232 11:49, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
- The news media use the term "Katyusha rocket" almost exclusively for Hezbollah's rockets, but this is just an informal, and technically meaningless usage. These rocket launchers were nicknamed Katyusha by the Soviets during WWII, and the first page-full of Google hits don't contradict that. It shows up in Google because Hezbollah has been in the news a lot more than the WWII Red Army. But Google search results aren't the English language.
- What do you mean by erroneously merging into this article? What you see is what was written. I don't understand what "revert this measure" means. —Michael Z. 2006-12-15 17:04 Z
[edit] Russian
According to the article RS-82 rocket RS doesn't mean Raketny Snaryad but Reaktivny Snaryad. – Ilse@ 00:35, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Copying by other countries
I'd expect Katyusha's would be copied by other countries, including Germany in WWII and Western Allies. This should be described.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 16:12, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
- The German Nebelwerfer is already mentioned here, and the allied Land Mattress is linked from See also. I haven't seen any documentation as to who copied whom, but it appears that the Nebelwerfer appeared first, and the Katyusha may have been developed independently. —Michael Z. 2007-07-30 17:35 Z
- That's true, I am just suprised that such 'easy to produce' and effective design wasn't mass copied during WWII itself.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 12:41, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- It was kept extremely secret for the first while.
-
-
-
- But even after that, I suspect that German, British and American strategists simply would choose not to perceive anything of value in the east. The same surprise might be expressed over the Nazis' decision to build and send a complicated 45-tonne Panther supertank into battle without adequate testing, rather than produce a 30-tonne copy of the simple but well-designed T-34. —Michael Z. 2007-07-31 15:20 Z
-
[edit] Katyushas since World War II
Section "Katyushas since World War II" contain information about stereotypes.--Berserkerus 14:15, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
- its article must be about BM-13 with right specification--Berserkerus 14:27, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
- Which statements are stereotyped? I don't understand what you mean about the BM-13. —Michael Z. 2007-08-03 19:41 Z
A mention could be made of the Katyushas use at Dien Bien Phu during the First Indochina War: "From about 4pm on 6 May [1954]. . . saw the unleashing of a wholly new weapon in Heavy Division 351's armoury: the 'Stalin organs'. These six tube banks of Chinese rocket projectors announced their presence with a monstrous screeching" - Windrow, Martin, The Last Valley pg 600-601 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.156.90.233 (talk) 16:06, August 29, 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Reaktivnyy snaryad
"Jet shell" is not a perfect translation for reaktivnyy snaryad, because jet propulsion usually refers to something which is not a rocket. Perhaps it could be translated directly as "reactive shell", or perhaps "impulse shell", in reference to the propulsion method. —Michael Z. 2007-08-03 19:46 Z
- see "Jet pack" for example. Of course for average man, word "Jet" mean "passenger plane" or "air liner":(--Berserkerus 11:49, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
-
- I just meant that yes, a rocket engine produces a jet of reactive material, but it doesn't operate under the same principal of propulsion as a jet engine. So a different word choice would be clearer. Another translation might be "reaction shell". —Michael Z. 2007-08-04 17:32 Z
- See jet engine. quotation - "This broad definition of jet engines includes turbojets, turbofans, rockets, ramjets, pulse jets and pump-jets". Word "Reactivnyy" in russian is not from "reactive material", but from from 3-th Newton's law- "Opposite direction force" is called "force of reaction".
- I just meant that yes, a rocket engine produces a jet of reactive material, but it doesn't operate under the same principal of propulsion as a jet engine. So a different word choice would be clearer. Another translation might be "reaction shell". —Michael Z. 2007-08-04 17:32 Z
-
-
-
- Yes, I realize that. But jet is ambiguous, because it can imply a jet engine which is not a rocket engine, and come to think of it, so is reactive, because it can imply a chemical or physical reaction. Perhaps a better translation is "inertial shell" or "impulse shell". —Michael Z. 2007-08-29 19:30 Z
-
-
[edit] Operators
The section Katyusha#Operators makes no sense in this article. This is about a series of obsolete models. The references are flaky, too:
- According to globalsecurity.org, Belarus has one 130mm BM-13 in service (it's actually 132mm, but whatever). A single museum piece? I'd like to find out more about it, but it doesn't sound like Belarus is actively operating the BM-13 in its armed forces.
- Also per globalsecurity.org: Russia has 50 140mm "BM-13/-14/-16" in service—BM-13 is not 140mm, BM-14 is covered by another article, and what is a BM-16?
- Hezbollah's "Katyushas" are 122mm BM-21 ammunition, and newer rockets, used on various launchers. Wrong article.
Maybe the operators section can be written as a historical survey (although the article already is that), but the current state is useless. I'm removing it. —Michael Z. 2007-10-25 02:42 Z