Talk:Japanese submarine I-52 (1942)

message: The link to Rear Admiral Kojima Hideo points to the famous game developer Hideo Kojima, who was born in 1964. I don't know if they're related, but they're definitely not the same person. I'm removing this link. --Djakdarippa 14:39, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kojima Hideo disambiguation 

message: OK,  It's May 2006.  Any word on the salvage operations, mentioned in the last paragraph?
Good question. I have found nothing on it. My suspicion is until they (investors) actually see some salvage gold, in advance, it would be hard to get backing for this effort. May 2007...Engr105th 20:28, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Any word on the salvage? 

message: I'm uncertain of the veracity of a statement in the paragraph "Type C-3 subs"...It says "They were the largest submarines ever built at that time, and were known as the most advanced submarines of their time."
They were most definitely the largest. But they were basically cargo vessels. One could easily say the German Elektroboots (e.g. Type 21 & 23's?) were the most advanced at least as far as technology - which is what most people mean by "advanced"...The Elektroboots were a bit later, but were under development about that time. Even if they weren't concurrent with the C-3 subs, the C-3's certainly were not "advanced" weapons... 
Anybody else have thoughts on it? Engr105th 20:23, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Folks, not having had any response to my post above of 24 May 2007, I took the liberty of adding "Japanese" to the sentence about it being the most advanced sub of its time. Seems to me that might even be questionable. Engr105th 03:49, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Most advanced sub of WW2 ?? 

message: The article mentions sonobuoy and cockpit recordings. Does anyone know if these are available online? 75.75.110.235 17:26, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recording? 

message: Aren't there more submarines who undertook the same mission? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unterseeboot_859  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.93.20.86 (talk) 09:46, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Take a look at the paragraph on the Yanagi Missions, on this article. You'll see several subs that attempted or made the Japan to Europe mission. Of course, the payoff for these risky and expensive attempts was nil, taking into account the whole war. Engr105th (talk) 20:53, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  more submarines? 

message: Under the paragraph VALUABLE CARGO stands the sentence: <<there is no evidence of the Japanese government being interested in peace proposals or negotiated settlements at this early stage of the war, prior to summer of 1945...>>
While this concept was part of the official stance of the US government (and perhaps still holds in US history books), this is far from the truth.
After declassification processes in the 90's and the public availability of documents from various actors of the time, it is a fact that Japan had instigated overtures as early as spring 1944.
The path was by short wave radio cables to their Ambassador (Sato) in Moscow, whom was forwarding them to the Soviet government  for further despatch to their US ally. At least once they proceeded through diplomatic channels in Stockholm.
On Feb 2nd, 1945 (2 days before Yalta's conference), Franklin Roosevelt received a 40-page memo from Mac Arthur outlining five separate SURRENDER overtures from highly placed Japanese officials (cf. Admiral Leahy - Chief of Staff of FDR - 19 Aug 45 in The Washington Times and The Tribune).
Reading related documents and especially the diaries of US major figures (Truman, Stimson, Byrnes, Grew, Forrestal, etc...) should bring some light into this old misconception of "no surrender".
94.67.158.1 (talk) 20:52, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Your points are well-taken, but they probably belong in the article discussing the Japanese surrender (which can be accessed thru the Wiki WW2 article, or under History of Japan, etc). The point here is that I-52 almost certainly had nothing to do w/ Japanese overtures to the USA regarding a peace proposal.  Engr105th (talk) 13:53, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Japanese_submarine_I-52_(1943) 

message: So if Taylor dropped first, and they believe that he sank the I-52 with his FIDO, and Gordon arrived later and dropped a FIDO after hearing a German sub 20 miles away, then how come the recordings from Gordons plane contain the sound of a torpedo exploding and metal twisting? He didn't hit the German sub, so he must have hit something. If the I-52 was already sunk by Taylor, then what did Gordon hit and what is in that recording?.45Colt 00:51, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recordings 

message: Hi, the infobox says 94 crew and 18 civilians perished, but the section on the accident says only 14 'passengers', and later an addition two non-civilian radar operators boarded, for a total of 94+16. I couldn't readily find a source to clarify, if anyone has either of the book references on hand. Also it would be good to clarify whether or not the 14 technicians were in fact civilians, as written it seems like its possible they were military (ie., if they were studying the technology, wouldn't they likely be engineers instead of technicians?) Strangerpete (talk) 12:14, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crew/passenger counts