Talk:Wirbelwind

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Germany Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no

	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 lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Associated task forces (general topics): Military aviation task force Military technology and engineering task force Weaponry task force Associated task forces (nations and regions): German military history task force Associated task forces (periods and conflicts): World War II task force

[edit] Number produced

I've read articles that state 87 Wirbelwinds were produced and others that state 105. To make things worse Achtung Panzer! states "Overall from May to November of 1944, only 87(105) Wirbelwinds were made", which doesn't really help. Anyone have an explanation? Oberiko 16:38, 12 May 2004 (UTC)

Acording to this site (German text), there was some discrepancy between Ostbau Werke's recorded production numbers and the numbers actually being accepted by the Wehrmacht - I haven't found been able to find out if production numbers were higehr or lower than numbers in Wehrmacht service records, but I suppose that's where the two different numbers on Achtung Panzer come from. Shall we follow Achtung Panzer and just put both numbers in the article?

And as a side note, do we really need a separate article for the Ostwind? I think it would contain pretty much the same text as the Wirbelwind article...redirect Ostwind to Wirbelwind and add a little note? Ferkelparade 18:21, 12 May 2004 (UTC)

I wouldn't mind giving each article it's own page (it's not like it'll save space to keep them on one) and then provide a two-way link. It'll also help with external links, as we won't have to specify which vehicle it's referring to. I'm not adamant about that though.

As for the numbers, I agree we should follow their lead and put perhaps (87-105) and then a footnote to explain it. Oberiko 18:59, 12 May 2004 (UTC)

Alright, I've added a short disclaimer on the numbers and created a new article for the Ostwind (pretty much just a copy&paste of the WIrbelwind article, with some minor tweaks) Ferkelparade 21:07, 12 May 2004 (UTC)

It is entirely likely that 105 were produced and that the German Army accepted only 87 of them. Someone may want to put that into the article. 72.227.230.250 (talk) 17:43, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that is a possible explanation, but it is only a guess. The language as it is now is fine. The fact is we don't know, and may never know. Regards, DMorpheus (talk) 20:00, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Flakvierling

The wiki article on the 20mm flak 30 and 38 does a good job explaining the notion that the Flak 38 was a gun, mounted in various ways including the 4-gun flakvierling mount. "Vier" being German for "four", I would think it is pretty obvious. The Flakvierling is NOT a four-barrelled gun; each flak 38 had its own full mechanisms and each gun fired on its own. So it is analogous to a US quad fifty caliber MG mount, but not to, say, a true multibarrel gun such as a minigun. The current edit makes sense. Regards, DMorpheus (talk) 16:12, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Exactly, it is similar to the Maxson Mount, which is also not a "single gun with four barrels." Graff977 (talk) 21:15, 20 February 2008 (UTC)