"8.4cm (84mm)" gun in German use?

[Christian W.]

Hello,

I would ike to invite community members who have sources on artillery guns used by Germany - captured or not - to help me with an issue. I took interest in the German cruiser Niobe (please note that this is about a type of gun that the ship carried, and not the actual ship as such; so should belong to the forum's artillery section), and noticed something weird about the armament that the ship supposedly had in German service. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMS_Niobe The article - which otherwise seems very detailed - talks about some "8.4cm" gun. Now, I am quite certain that this is simply the 8.35cm Skoda, and took steps to correct this in the article: however, a certain user quite adamantly insists that I am wrong and simply goes around in circles about how this supposed "8.4cm" gun existed because his secondary source by some Gröner apparently lists Niobe's armament as having this gun (and even if this Gröner does list such a gun, it would seem to me that this actually refers to the 8.35cm Skoda gun, as no such "8.4cm" gun seems to have existed)- this is at odds with Kriegsmarine Admiral Adria's accounts in his war diary, which cites the guns as being the 8.35cm Skoda guns. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:SMS_Niobe

So, could our good community members with sourcing on artillery guns used by Germany help me to clear this up. Did some "8.4cm" gun exist that was used by Germany - or is this simply a case of the 8.35cm Skoda gun being referred to as "8.4cm" as I am quire certain that it is? All information that could be used to clear this is welcome to be posted in this thread.

Sincerely hoping for replies,
Christian

[jopaerya]

Hello Christian

Here some information on the twin 8.35 Skoda viewtopic.php?f=70&t=157514

Regards Jos

[Christian W.]

Thank you: I would welcome any more replies - preferably with sources on German artillery. I'd like clear confirmation that there is no such "8.4cm" gun - and it is just the 8.35cm Skoda gun.

[MarkN]

Thank you: I would welcome any more replies -

1) Why do wiki warriors get so upset when other people refuse to believe them?

preferably with sources on German artillery.

2) How will that help? The guns were installed by the Yugoslavs when the ship belonged to Yugoslavia. That would suggest you need Yugoslav sources. And if the guns were Skoda, then surely you need Czechoslovak sources.

I'd like clear confirmation that there is no such "8.4cm" gun -

3) How do you prove that something didn't exist if it didn't exist?

and it is just the 8.35cm Skoda gun.

4) The Yugoslavs acquired the ship without armament. The ordered the guns separately: 6 x Škoda 83.5mm (D55 according to some sources, Type 27 according to others) and 4 x 47.mm (L44 perhaps) in 1926 and these were fitted in Tivat dockyard during 1927-28. Some sources note the guns as 83mm, some as 83.5mm and some as 84mm.

[jopaerya]

Found these in the NARA files of the Adm. Adria , a 8.4 cm (i)

[Christian W.]

Thank you: I would welcome any more replies -

1) Why do wiki warriors get so upset when other people refuse to believe them?

preferably with sources on German artillery.

2) How will that help? The guns were installed by the Yugoslavs when the ship belonged to Yugoslavia. That would suggest you need Yugoslav sources. And if the guns were Skoda, then surely you need Czechoslovak sources.

I'd like clear confirmation that there is no such "8.4cm" gun -

3) How do you prove that something didn't exist if it didn't exist?

and it is just the 8.35cm Skoda gun.

4) The Yugoslavs acquired the ship without armament. The ordered the guns separately: 6 x Škoda 83.5mm (D55 according to some sources, Type 27 according to others) and 4 x 47.mm (L44 perhaps) in 1926 and these were fitted in Tivat dockyard during 1927-28. Some sources note the guns as 83mm, some as 83.5mm and some as 84mm.

I am not "upset" or a "wiki warrior" for that matter; there's no need to make such remarks - if anything I only want to get this sorted out.

"How will that (sources on German artillery) help?" - I was referring to both domestic artillery and captured artillery used by Germany.

It is exactly this disparity on how the guns are referred to as that I'd like clear sorted out, and clarification that there is indeed just the 8.35cm (it's actual diamater) the gun.

[MarkN]

It is exactly this disparity on how the guns are referred to as that I'd like clear sorted out, and clarification that there is indeed just the 8.35cm (it's actual diamater) the gun.

What disparity?
The Yugoslavs bought the 83.5mm Skoda AA gun from Czechoslovakia. Germany had nothing to do with the purchase. Yugoslav documentation refers to it sometimes as 83, sometimes 83.5 but most often as 84. It seems the Germans, after they took the boat from the Italians, also used both 83.5 and 84.
So where's the problem?
It was an 83.5mm gun but usually refered to as an 84mm gun.

Whether you are "upset" or suffering some other emotional stress bothers me not. But, whatever it is, it is obviously severe enough for you not to let it go on wiki until you get your own way and even to the extent of roping in other people on AHF to help you out.

Perhaps it would be better just to walk away. Who cares what wiki says? It's hardly the place for a serious person to obtain information or do their research. And who wants to be associated with, or get into an argument with, somebody who uses this as his/her guiding principle...

I'm afraid we don't generally use primary sources for articles.

wiki is a home for attention seekers and regurgitated agendas and opinions. It's a bit of what Chomsky calls an "academic cult".

Noam Chomsky said:

If you really feel, look, it's too hard to deal with real problems, there are lots of ways to avoid doing so. One of them is to go off on wild goose chases that don't matter, Another is to get involved in academic cults that are very divorced from any reality and that provide a defence against dealing with the real world as it is. There's plenty of that going on ...

Parsecboy has joined the wiki academic cult, you seem to be off on a wild goose chase!

[jopaerya]

Found a other NARA document same batterie's and same location , but different gun name .
Facts

(1) Naval coast batterie Hvar- Mitte/Ost and Mljet-Ost? Slano
(2) guns from ex B. Mrcevag-Cattaro
(3) 6 guns in the documents
(4) 8.4 cm L/55 and 8.35 cm L/55 on documents

[Christian W.]

Thanks for all the material jopaerya.

[Christian Ankerstjerne]

Christian
Bear in mind, that German equipment names were very irregular and largely illogical. The caliber part of a weapon name did not indicate the caliber of the weapon; for example, the 10 cm s K 18 was in fact a 105 mm gun. In order to know the caliber, you have to refer to the gun's technical specifications.

[MarkN]

Bear in mind, that German equipment names were very irregular and largely illogical. The caliber part of a weapon name did not indicate the caliber of the weapon; for example, the 10 cm s K 18 was in fact a 105 mm gun. In order to know the caliber, you have to refer to the gun's technical specifications.

Indeed. And it wasn't just the Germans. Skoda themselves came up with some 'interesting' nomenaclature and the Yugoslavs were no better.

In jopaerya's documents above, there is frequent reference to a 7,6cm gun. This is a picture of it that I took a few years ago - so copyright MarkN.


Note it's designation in Yugoslav service...


Edited...
Above I wrote that my picture was the guns mentionned in jopaerya's documents. In hindsight, I may have 'jumped the gun' - pun intended. Yugoslavia had a good few 7,5cm and 7,65cm Czech guns which they called 8cm and and classed as 80mm. However, there is some debate as to whether the gun in my picture remained a 7,5cm or 7,65cm caliber weapon or whether it was 'converted' locally and rebored to 80mm. Not exactly my topic of expertise or real interest. What was the original bore of a Skoda 8cm PL vz.33? Moreover, it is not stated whether the guns in jopaerya's documents are AA guns or field arty in an anti-shipping role.

[David Thompson]

An off-topic post from MarkN, containing his thoughts about "wiki warriors" and wiki administrators, was removed.