Talk:Equipment losses in World War II

message: Germany had only 2 Battleships, the Bismarck and the Tirpiz
The Scharenhorts and Gneisenau were rather battlecruisers and even the so-called "pocket battleships" were reclassified as "schwere Kreuzer", (heavy cruisers).
not to speak about the pre-dreadnoughts which are definetly not battleships, not even by 1906 standards. the official german classification was "Linienschiff" (ship of the line).
:I know very little about this myself, but I've seen that what to classify Scharnhorst and Gneinsenau as is somewhat disputed. There was a long discussion over this on Talk:Gneisenau class battlecruiser. Do you suggest moving 7 of the listed sinked battleships to the cruiser collumn? Or maybe a footnote stating the disputed classification is suficient. 
:But this article (or stub, rather) could do with a lot of expanding and explanations. Not to say missing references we should cite for the various figures. It would be great if someone with sources and expertise on this subject could work on it. Shanes 13:24, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

message: For some things this appears useful namely battleships and carriers. But in fact it is meaningless because virtually no equipment at the start of the war was of any use at the end because of technical change. Different things are being measured e.g. I take it that V-1's are not counted as aircraft. What about gliders? Then there is the problem of naval vessels sunk, salvaged and recommissioned. Did not some U.S. ships sunk at Pearl harbour reappear? What about the French Navy?
In addition vast amounts of material were only built for a special war purpose e.g. LST's so that it was effectively lost when peace occurred i.e. summing up losses through the war has no value. Almost by definition every aircraft the Germans ever produced will have been destroyed while on VJ day the allied aircraft were just as useless even if in perfect condition. If anything along this line is useful it ought to be subdivided by year.Sheredot (talk) 18:05, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Utility of this page?

message: Any chance someone could compile a list of ground vehicle losses to include here? (tanks, tank destroyers, armored cars, etc.)  Although such numbers would be difficult to verify, estimates would suffice, at least for the time being. Antimatter 01:28, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vehicle Losses 

message: * http://www.naval-history.net/NAVAL1939-45RNLoss.htm
* http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/battle_of_britain_statistics.htm
* http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq82-1.htm
* http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq82-1.htm
* http://www.taphilo.com/history/WWII/Loss-Figures-WWII.shtml
--John Lunney 12:48, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Potentially Useful Sources 

message: === German ===
The sum of the losses by type is less than 30,000, but total losses are listed as 116,875. How does this inconsistency explain?
193.46.41.12 (talk) 16:19, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aircraft losses 

message: The sum of the losses by type is less than 30,000, but total losses are listed as 116,875. How does this inconsistency explain?
193.46.41.12 (talk) 16:19, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  German 

message: As far as I know Italy lost about 10,800 planes during the war. That number includes post-armistice losses of the ANR and the ICBAF. - Mobius89 (talk) 14:55, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Italian 

message: Just Updated the Sea Section. Two remarks, from some reason Uboat.net have a wrong numbers on Soviet vessels, the claim 136 vessels lost but only name 132(I used this latter number since could be easily corroborated). Also The Russian Battleship Marat is not considered sunk despite it was struck by a bomb and become beached until it was scrapped, well its a little ambigous. It was used as a battery by the Soviets, i have considered it sunk. Also added the French Navy and the Free French Navy, The first one details their losses suffered fighting the Germans plus all its Vessels scuttled in Toulon and those sunk by Allies. Another important remark, there still a lot more to do, for example in the case of the U.S Navy since I have  not included the U.S Coast Guard losses, yeah i know its a different branch but later with more time i will add them.Mr.User200 (talk) 15:19, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sea Section. 

message: I'm going to remove the figures claimed to be from P. Chamberlain, yet it cites "German Tank Strength and Loss Statistics by Hermann Burkhart Mueller–Hillebrand" in one of the two objectionable tables. Also, Guderian did not provide the other loss rate in question, it was however, suggested by "Q.M.G of the General Staff of the Army".
Why we should stick with unreliable loss rates that are being described as "undoubtedly much too low"? 83.143.240.19 (talk) 22:29, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing odds 

message: Any volunteer to create a page, I have some infor regarding Aircraft Losses and some Capital Ships Sunk.Mr.User200 (talk) 13:05, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Go ahead and create the page and add some information, just click here and start editing: Equipment losses in World War I. I do suggest that you start with some cited material (and include the references). Hilmar (talk) 13:50, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Equipment Losses in World War I.