Talk:Nuclear submarine

Untitled

It is Certain China does not have nuclear powered submarines. Research indicates that all data circulating on this is a hoax. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.88.88.153 (talk) 18:02, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

In 1955 the USA president was Dwight D. Eisenhower, not Harry S. Truman. So I guess it must have been Dwight D. Eisenhower who broke the champagne bottle.

Nuclear-armed submarine

China claims to have nuclear powered submarines but experts believe these claims are false. They show Xia submarines (in reality a Diesal one) from far and claim it is nuclear. In addition also stuff placed on the net on China's nuclear submarines is false and planted.

I would agree China can not till make miniature contained nuclear power plants. Ghosh —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.39.124.4 (talk) 21:16, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

I suspect many will be looking for this subject when coming here, not finding what they are looking for. I propose that an article titled for instance Nuclear-armed submarine be created and the current page title turned into a disambiguation page between the two different articles. __meco (talk) 10:57, 20 September 2008 (UTC) China claims to have nuclear powered submarines but experts believe these claims are false. They show Xia submarines (in reality a Diesal one) from far and claim it is nuclear. In addition also stuff placed on the net on China's nuclear submarines is false and planted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.103.243.226 (talk) 20:17, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

China has nuclear armed submarines but nuclear powered submarines are still in the design phase. It all hinges on weather PRC can buy plans (or even complete units) for early Russian naval nuclear reactors Jenga3 (talk) 05:56, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Lineage

Several lineage designations are wrong, they are not based on the time when the sub was made but the capabilities (silence, depth, top speed/silent speed, ordinance, sensors etc). The Indian Arihant submarine is third generation, the Astute is a fourth generation sub (technology and performance is superb), the Graney (Ash) class submarine is 4.5 generation, possibly 5th generation considering the current level of technology (unless some revolutionary technology crops up somewhere else). Keep in mind speed of fourth generation submarines is 25-40 knots, range must be only limited by food supplies, modern silencing methods must be used (top silent running speed) etc. They don't have to be nuclear and I think Norway has a non-nuclear sub which fits into the 4th generation category but I could be wrong Jenga3 (talk) 05:56, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

List of Countries with Nuclear Subrmarines

What about making a list of Countries which employ nuclear submarines and include the various classes, number of subs, names of subs etc. This article seems very short... 84.226.83.207 (talk) 20:56, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

China claims to have nuclear powered submarines but experts believe these claims are false. They show Xia submarines (in reality a Diesal one) from far and claim it is nuclear. In addition also stuff placed on the net on China's nuclear submarines is false and planted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.103.243.226 (talk) 20:11, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

List of nuke sub classes?

Is there a list of nuclear submarine classes ? 70.29.215.25 (talk) 23:21, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Accidents

The list of accidents doesn't appear to be in any particular order -- not by date, not be vessel name. I'd suggest ordering it by date.AAAS employee (talk) 14:20, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Another note: the "K-129" listed does not appear to have actually been a nuclear sub. The one that was the subject of a salvage attempt by the CIA was a diesel-electric sub. inclusivedisjunction (talk) 21:40, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Why is it necassary to have the reference to what a CND activist thought of the incident? It's not neutral information on the subject at hand (and based on a single photo is not adequate grounds for making certifiable claims) and I'm sure they and others had a few things to say on the other incidents, which have not been given here. It seems to be giving undue prominence to one particular political viewpoint (and one outside the political mainstream of the two involved nations). --WarpGhost (talk) 19:19, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Most of the accidents listed here could happen to any kind of submarine, not necessarily a nuclear one. Indeed, most of the controversy around nuclear power regards its safety. Why not separate the accidents into those caused by failures in the nuclear propulsion system, and, separately, those caused by everything else (accidents that could happen to any kind of submarine). Heck, I'd argue that we should only list on this page accidents related to the nuclear propulsion system. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.111.84.45 (talk) 01:18, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

The accidents section looks fine to me. It is not too long. No need for trimming or separating out different types of accidents. Johnfos (talk) 01:04, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Generation

The classification of subs based on Generation will be misleading. Since it may be considered to be on comparative basis. So it's better to classify them in terms of years like from this year to that year etc. That will present a neutral viewpoint.Bcs09 (talk) 03:16, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

The classification is the generation of submarine for that country. It is POV for users to decide what generation a submarine is compared to others. For instance, the Charlie class submarine, which you listed as second generation, is most certainly not in the same league as the Triomphant class submarine or French Barracuda class submarine, both of which you listed as second generation. Space25689 (talk) 01:01, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Absolutely it's a POV to decide which generation of one sub is comparable to the other. So I will remove generation to sort out the issues of POV.Bcs09 (talk) 02:12, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

I would also like to point out that the Charlie class submarines were Soviet not Indian. Space25689 (talk) 17:35, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

This page specifies the nuclear submarines operated by the nations and Indian navy operated the soviet built Charlie class submarine.Bcs09 (talk) 02:12, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Your recent change has made some improvements and seems rather neutral. The generation classes were pretty pointless. Space25689 (talk) 03:38, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Include the under development?

There is a list of under development submarines but they are all of countries that already have other nuclear ones. I am not sure if it would be relevant here, but it is possible to include countries that currently operate no Nuclear sub but have already oredered one. e.g. Brazil will have exactly the same Barracuda class mentioned to France in the article. Should we include Brazil?201.58.169.29 (talk) 10:31, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

No. David (talk) 21:01, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

• http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/astute/

  Triggered by \bnaval-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 11:13, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

 Resolved This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 19:45, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Nuclear submarine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/5hO7gbe9a?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.iaea.org%2FPublications%2FMagazines%2FBulletin%2FBull413%2Farticle1.pdf to http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Magazines/Bulletin/Bull413/article1.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:20, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Nuclear submarine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://nti.org/db/submarines/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.wmdinsights.com/I23/I23_LA1_BrazilPursuit.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151207022035/http://idrw.org/india-to-build-6-nuclear-powered-submarines-navy-chief/ to http://idrw.org/india-to-build-6-nuclear-powered-submarines-navy-chief/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Magazines/Bulletin/Bull413/article1.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:52, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Submarine reactor refueling

The claim that current generation submarines do not need refueling is obviously wrong. While current British Astute & US Virginia classes do not need refueling (due to being powered by reactors using weapons grade fuel), other modern designs still need refueling. The soon to be launched French Baracuda class needs refueling every 10 years (reactor uses commercial grade fuel). The reference given seems to be in regard to British Astute submarines only. From that you can only claim that current generation British submarines don't need refueling. 144.139.103.173 (talk) 13:50, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

OK, so what edit do you propose? This could say that some current submarines don't need refueling, or it could identify which ones (U.S., UK, I don't know about Russia). NPguy (talk) 02:16, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Australia

I think it is premature to list Australia. It will be many years before Australia gets nuclear subs, if it does at all.--Jack Upland (talk) 04:57, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

I've just made some minor stylistic changes. However, I've just read the above comment, and I think this is a valid point. Technically, at the moment, there is only a proposal that Australia gains nuclear-powered submarines. 58.171.239.100 (talk) 23:45, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Map of operators

I believe a world map of operators may be useful for the article. Maybe a colour for active users and then for countries with them under construction?

Unfortunately I Wiki through my phone so this is beyond me! Lankyant (talk) 00:44, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

How exactly would you like the map to display? Are you asking for countries that have nuclear subs or nuclear subs under construction? I am a bit unclear what you are requesting. Perhaps with a bit more detail we can get the type of map you would like. Jurisdicta (talk) 22:56, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Apologies for being unclear. I would like a map of all operators. But obviously some nation's don't operate but only have them under construction so the map would have to be two colours - one for operators and one for nations which have them under construction.

But for simplicity sake a simple map of current operators would be perfect too. Lankyant (talk) 00:34, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Brazil

Brazil is now operating a nuclear submarine, as of january 15th 2024. Semduvidas1 (talk) 16:20, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

No, it doesn't. NPguy (talk) 20:33, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

MSN check this then, lol Semduvidas1 (talk) 22:48, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

I don't think so. I don't read Portuguese, but a google translation of that source includes this: "and the manufacture of the first Brazilian nuclear-powered submarine, scheduled for completion in 2029 and launch in 2033."

—Trappist the monk (talk) 22:58, 15 January 2024 (UTC)