This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Military history: Maritime / Asian / Japanese / World War II Start‑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 Start This article has been rated as Start-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 not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces: /  Maritime warfare task force Asian military history task force Japanese military history task force World War II task force Japan: Military history 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: 10:19, February 7, 2025 (JST, Reiwa 7) (Refresh)JapanWikipedia:WikiProject JapanTemplate:WikiProject JapanJapan-related 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: edit history watch purge Peer review: None A-class review: None Featured content candidates –  Articles: None Pictures: None Lists: None Good article nominations: Vinland Saga (TV series), 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 Ships This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips

Article reassessed and graded as start class. --dashiellx (talk) 19:23, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Long Lance torpedo had an effective range of 22k meters (according to its article) - the longest range hits scored by a battleship are Scharnhorst against Glorious off Norway and Warspite against Giulio Cesare at Calabria, both at approximately 24k meters. Even if one assumes the maximum effective range of 40k meters for the Long Lance (and good luck getting a hit that far away), the 16"/45 caliber Mark 6 gun could fire the same distance, as could the 38 cm SK C/34 naval gun and the 380 mm/45 Modèle 1935 gun. Parsecboy (talk) 20:56, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

From http://pwencycl.kgbudge.com/F/i/Fire_Control.htm one has:

"The race between long-range gunnery and torpedoes reached its end point with the U.S. 16"/50 gun and the "Long Lance" torpedo; the 16" gun could theoretically hit a target at 42,000 yards (38,000 m) under perfect conditions, while the Long Lance had a maximum range of 48,000 yards (44,000 m) at its slowest speed setting (though this was rarely used.)"

Neither the torpedo nor the gun was likely to score many hits at their maximum ranges. But the point is that the Japanese wanted, and got, a torpedo with a theoretical range exceeding that of contemporary battleship guns -- and "contemporary" for the Type 93 is mid-1930s.

I am, however, reluctant to use PWOL as a cite, since it's a self-published tertiary source. I will look through the published sources cited there to get something better, but in the meanwhile, will you consent to take down the dubious flag? --Yaush (talk) 21:15, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Navweaps gives a maximum range of 40k meters at 36-38 knots, and his site is usually pretty reliable even if he's self-published. CombinedFleet gives the same range figure, and they qualify as a WP:RS. 44k meters sounds a bit of a stretch.

In any case, the French gun I mentioned above was designed in 1935, the German was designed in 1934, and the American gun was designed in 1939. They all are certainly contemporary designs, and all matched or in the case of the French gun, exceeded the Long Lance's range. Parsecboy (talk) 21:26, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Long Lance went into production in 1933. And while the Japanese, like everyone else, were working on better guns at the time, they assumed only their own would be that good.

But I'll dredge up the reliable source that states that the Japanese were, in fact, intending Long Lance to outrange battleship guns, which is the real point, whether or not they were clearly successful. --Yaush (talk) 21:36, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The German 28 cm SK C/34 naval gun (which had a range of nearly 41k meters) went into production in 1934 - a year's difference is splitting hairs. And really, using the maximum possible range rather than the practical range is nonsense - neither weapon could be reliably used at those ranges. The practical range of the type 93 in 1941 (which is what actually matters, since that was when they were used in combat, and that was when the two cruisers in question were converted into torpedo cruisers) was well within the maximum practical range of large-caliber guns.

If the Japanese intention is what matters, then the sentence needs to be rewritten, as it currently presents their hope as fact. Parsecboy (talk) 21:45, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]