Talk:Admiral Hipper-class cruiser

message: AFAIK the 105mm guns were only used as AA guns. Though it may have been theoretically possible to fire anti-ship-shells from them, their mounts and fire-control were designed only for AA-targets and only such ammunition was aboard. Same for all other german capital ships. Only the twelve German Torpedoboats used the 105mm against surface-targets. Nevfennas 10:19, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Secondary armament

message: Ships in class section has been restored.  It should not be eliminated in its entirety, as it allows an at-a-glance look at the ships of the class with brief notes on when ships served, etc.  Such a broad overview is a very appropriate inclusion in the class article.  It was completely deleted about a month ago, and it became hard to even find a link to the ships of the class--not a good plan for a class article. Josh 00:46, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Amazed to find that there's no consolidated list of ships in the class. Shocked to see that this is being removed with no attempt to establish a consensus either way. No wonder this is still a "start" class, we should concentrate on being constructive and cooperative. IMO some sort of ship list is essential, the details can be discussed. Folks at 137 18:43, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Was Lützow not a deutchland class Panzershiff? 94.44.101.131 (talk) 09:09, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: There were two; this Lützow, which was sold to the Soviet Union, and Deutschland, which was renamed Lützow in 1940. Parsecboy (talk) 10:31, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ships in class 

message: Regarding the article's claim that Lützov did not see action during WW2 (if I understood it correctly): She was a part of the Blücher invasion (operation Weserübung) force heading for Oslo april 9th 1940 and was fired upon by Norwegian coastal batteries.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.22.226.201 (talk) 05:15, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: That was the Lützow (ex-Deutschland) but not the Hipper-class ship. --Denniss (talk) 10:07, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lützow 

message: This article contributes to confusion I am seeing in discussions outside Wikepedia that refer back to the article; people are getting a false impression that the class is considerably larger than for example the Baltimore class. The article refers to the "10,000 ton displacement limit" but never mentions that this refers to the Washington Treaty standard displacement. Then the lower displacements are given as "Design displacements" which refer to having a large percentage of fuel and feedwater aboard, i.e. corresponding to the "normal" displacements seen before the Washington Treaty. Fuel and reserve feed water weights are by definition omitted from standard displacements. I would recommend the addition of standard displacement tonnages to the data sidebar and the text, as well, and definitions added to the text to clarify this. Note that there is a typographical error in Koop and Schmolke of labeling the design displacement as standard but they provide weight breakdowns for all three completed ships which allows one to back calculate the standard displacements. 
Brooksindy (talk) 12:56, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Displacement 

message: Had to be expensive. What do the RS's say? 50.111.8.86 (talk) 22:53, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: costs of these cruisers?