Talk:Type UB I submarine

message: The existing ocean-going U-boats were considered too large to operate efficiently in the confined waters of the English Channel and it was decided that a new, smaller type of submarine was needed which could be built quickly and transported overland bases in Flanders. At the same time, in October of 1914 a small stock of Daimler marine diesel engines was set aside for submarine use. These engines were quickly combined with two 450mm torpedo tubes to form the basis of the UB I design.
The Reichsmarineamt (Imperial Naval Office) established specifications for a coastal submarine design,  and which could be built in only four months. The submarine which was developed by Hans Techel at Krupp's Germaniawerft yard was originally conceived as a single-hulled boat of approximately 125 tons displacement.  and a requirement for quick and simple construction which resulted in a functional design without compound curves or complex assemblies.
 On 25 November, two additional boats, UB 16 and UB 17, were ordered from AG Weser after the decision to transfer UB 1 and UB 15 to the Austro-Hungarian Navy for use in the Mediterranean; these boats became U-10 and U-11 respectively, and the Austro-Hungarian Navy also ordered three further examples.
The submarines were constructed remarkably fast, with  All the boats of the type had been constructed by 21 April 1915.
===Description===
 the few available  kerosene engines originally intended for small motor vessels.
</blockquote>
Thanks. — Bellhalla (talk) 23:24, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Design and development

message: the few available  kerosene engines originally intended for small motor vessels.
</blockquote>
Thanks. — Bellhalla (talk) 23:24, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Description

message: How many crew did the UB I class require/carry?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.185.113.36 (talk) 20:32, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: They typically had a complement of 14—1 officer and 13 enlisted; later in the war several were lost with as many as seventeen men on board. — Bellhalla (talk) 03:21, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: How many crew

message: To be clear: I raise these hoping it will be corrected, not merely answered here.
#33 sec dive time? Is that typical, minimum, or what? A well-drilled crew could make pretty quick dives. 
#What was her battery capacity? I.e., how many cells?
#"exhausting their batteries after little over an hour's running" At what speed? Max udw, or "crawl"? And how long was dived endurance? Could they stay down, say, 12h before needing to surface to replenish air?  
TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura  02:58, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Department of correctness?

message: There was debate during the FAC discussion of the reliance on uboat.net, and its suitability as a high quality reliable source. There were also questions raised about the comprehensiveness of the literature survey. Without wishing to revisit all of that, I thought I would make a comment about reducing the reliance on the web site. I have now swapped out the website in favour of Conway's All the world's fighting ships in all locations where that seemed possible. Looking over the remaining uses of uboat.net, it seems the only purpose that it fulfills that Conway's cannot, is the supply of launching and commissioning dates, numbers of ships sunk, damaged or taken as prizes, and the UB-1's height. Conway's only has date ranges for the launch of UB-1 to UB-14 amd individual launch dates for 15 to 17, and no commissioning dates. Conway's can be used in most if not all cases as the source for the ships' ultimate fate (though it isn't currently explicitly cited in this way at present). Perhaps someone could look at whether those dates and attack info exist in one of the German books (or another source), or write to Gudmundur Helgason and ask where he got the dates. hamiltonstone (talk) 23:47, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uboat.net 

message: Just found a 1:144 scale model of UB-1 here: http://www.mikro-mir.com/ua/277.html Worth mentioning in the article?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.185.189.42 (talk) 08:37, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Unless it's the first time the sub was kitted, or there's something unusual about the kit in ref UB-1, I'd say not.  TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 13:03, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Model kit(s) 

message: Just want to point out that all the boats listed as "disappeared" have since been found. Too apathetic to revise myself. So tired...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:6582:8580:C00:D936:D41B:C0ED:956C (talk) 17:46, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fates outdated