![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 17:12, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
I am becoming tired of reverting edits here calling the article propaganda, so I'll leave a message here - unless you have reliable sources that the submarine is operational, don't whine about the article saying that it's still incomplete. Kotiwalo ( talk) 17:24, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
All know the submarine is complete with a nuclear power plant. Even Jane's mentions this, so best of luck keep dreaming. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.88.88.175 ( talk) 21:33, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
I don't think there is much point in reasoning with By78, he seems to do as he pleases. However Bcs09, even if By78 is biased and engages in pushing his POV, the claim that Arihant is reactorless seems credible as Indian sources have also reported on this (see : http://www.expressbuzz.com/edition/story.aspx?title=Arihant%20does%20not%20have%20working%20reactor%20yet&artid=Wf2A1NFGj1g=&type=). Just so that it is absolutely clear, I am not supporting By78 on his quest to "quash Indian triumphalism" and I certainly think he promotes his hateful ideas off Wikipedia but I am defending the claim that Arihant is reactorless. Unless we have it from verifiable sources that Arihant has a nuclear reactor onboard, I think the article should remain as is. The reports on launch day should not be considered 100% reliable since the Indian government was particularly ambiguous with regards to the reactor being installed or not and the Indian media has a tendency to embellish and distort certain facts. Then again I suppose its better to have free media as opposed to state-controlled propaganda-spewing media that almost always distort and manipulate facts. Vedant ( talk) 23:23, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
Another report about the submarine has this to say Just last month, an 80MW nuclear reactor, smaller than a bus, was pushed into the hull of the submarine and successfully integrated—a milestone in the project approved by the then prime minister Indira Gandhi in 1970. By April 2009, the submarine will be launched and will begin sea trials before it is inducted into the navy. . So this clearly states the nuclear reactor was installed into the submarine prior to its launch. Bcs09 ( talk) 15:52, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
The only problem is that report is from January of last year and it also stated in that report that the submarine would be launched in April of 2009 when it was infact launched only in July. While I'd more than happily delete By78's edits if they were invalid, it appears that this one is (a rarity I must admit). Vedant ( talk) 22:07, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
Cptnono ( talk) 00:00, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Recent reports suggest the sub is undergoing sea trials. It astonishes me that the Indians are conducting the submarine's sea trial without any reactor installed in the sub. So it seems the India today article is indeed correct and other ones about "without nuclear reactors" are all wrong. Bcs09 ( talk) 01:44, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
The reports especially by the ones like Defpro is pure stupidity. Look at the report from Hindu which was published just before the launch of the ship. It clearly states that the reactor is installed [7]. Here is the quotes from that report "The submarine is already fitted with a miniaturised nuclear-powered reactor developed by BARC at Kalpakkam, 60 km from Chennai." and also "The mini-nuclear reactor that will power the submarine has been fitted into its hull.". Now its time to remove those idiotic things from defrop to be purged off the page. We are lucky enough that Defpro did not come up with a report stating "Nuclear submarine undergoing sea trials without a Nuclear reactor fitted into it" kind of stupidity. May be they will comeup with something like "Indian nuclear submarine commissioned without nuclear reactor".lol. Bcs09 ( talk) 05:10, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
Could someone please provide some ACTUAL photos of the INS Arihant? I have looked all over the internet for actual images of the Arihant, but all I got was a bunch of computer renderings and artist conceptions. A search for videos of the launch ceremony proved equally elusive, except for this video ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNgUhyEYhsc&feature=PlayList&p=AD10AEC9ECF1F032&index=0). However, the video appears to depict a Soviet Foxtrot class submarine; but I am not 100% sure. Could someone clarify if the video indeed shows the real Arihant? If the Arihant has already been "launched" and revealed to the public, why is it so difficult to get some real photos? By78 ( talk) 21:00, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
There is no need for merging. Those two are two different submarines. The follow on class to be nearly double the size of the present one. The Follow on to the Arihant class need to be updated with more sources and more information. Bcs09 ( talk) 02:33, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
Please see the link below:
http://idrw.org/?m=201201&paged=13
Scroll down to view the pic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.79.17.5 ( talk) 01:55, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Information about the nuclear reactor used in the Arihant is incorrect. Zircronium is not used as a neutron absorber for controlling reactivity in the reactor. The neutron absorption cross section of zircronium is very low (a few barnes) while actual neutron control materials have neutron cross sections (boron, cadmium, hafnium, samarium, etc.) at least 3 orders of magnitude higher. It is possible that the control rod materials in this reactor are placed inside Zircronium-alloyed tubes, which have other desirable properties including low corrosion in a pressurized water reactor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nucphysics ( talk • contribs) 14:26, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
file:INS Arihant.png has been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.79.6 ( talk) 04:11, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
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:
\bnaval-technology\.com\b
on the local blacklist\bnaval-technology\.com\b
on the local blacklistIf 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 NotifyOnline 11:03, 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
NotifyOnline
20:55, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
how many submarines are they planning to have in arihant class? it is 3 or 4? within this page itself I found some conflicting information like in infobox planned is 3 while down in ships in class it is 4. as the project is still classified unlike other projects like Vikrant-class and MOD might not reveal much information about planned subs for now. so lets decide what we should add in planned is it going to 3 or 4 or nothing for now. Nicky mathew ( talk) 19:54, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
@ Nicky Mathew: ( http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/indigenous-nuclear-powered-submarine-ins-arihant-sea-trials-navy-ballistic-missile/1/406718.html) states 5 SSBNS(Not exactly Arihant Class leading to a possibility to that 'hoax' page) ( http://thediplomat.com/2015/01/can-india-accommodate-the-ins-arihant/) states 4 ( http://www.deccanherald.com/content/385060/indias-first-indigenous-n-submarine.html) states 3 or 4 (?) It seems that the news media is itself confused with exact numbers due to the secrecy of the project. M.srihari ( talk) 18:16, 14 May 2015 (UTC)Srihari
@ Nicky Mathew:I have no issue. M.srihari ( talk) 07:23, 15 May 2015 (UTC)Srihari
Navy Ship Building Centre is under Director-General Naval Projects (Visakhapatnam) and not under Hindustan Shipyard Limited Proof as mentioned in this "The Hindu" article http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Visakhapatnam/contract-worker-killed-in-accident-at-navy-ship-building-centre/article5764589.ece standardengineer ( talk) 11:45, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
The nuclear submarines are built in an entirely different facility called the Navy Ship Building Centre adjacent to HSL neither owned nor operated by HSL. standardengineer ( talk) 11:48, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Arihant-class submarine. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 01:15, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
I noticed a vandalism attempt on this page by IP 46.235.152.212 on February 2, 2016. This was rectified immediately by another user and is now fixed. Should we consider asking for semi-protected status for this page? -- Adamgerber90 22:43, 3 Februray 2016 (UTC)
As far as I know SP status is only given when there is a lot of repeated vandalism from specific users or brigading, few occasions only will only warrant a very short-term SP(in days) and will make no difference on low traffic pages. standardengineer ( talk) 23:51, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Arihant-class 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:
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 20:12, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Defense Professionals Daily 2009-07-28
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 17:12, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
I am becoming tired of reverting edits here calling the article propaganda, so I'll leave a message here - unless you have reliable sources that the submarine is operational, don't whine about the article saying that it's still incomplete. Kotiwalo ( talk) 17:24, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
All know the submarine is complete with a nuclear power plant. Even Jane's mentions this, so best of luck keep dreaming. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.88.88.175 ( talk) 21:33, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
I don't think there is much point in reasoning with By78, he seems to do as he pleases. However Bcs09, even if By78 is biased and engages in pushing his POV, the claim that Arihant is reactorless seems credible as Indian sources have also reported on this (see : http://www.expressbuzz.com/edition/story.aspx?title=Arihant%20does%20not%20have%20working%20reactor%20yet&artid=Wf2A1NFGj1g=&type=). Just so that it is absolutely clear, I am not supporting By78 on his quest to "quash Indian triumphalism" and I certainly think he promotes his hateful ideas off Wikipedia but I am defending the claim that Arihant is reactorless. Unless we have it from verifiable sources that Arihant has a nuclear reactor onboard, I think the article should remain as is. The reports on launch day should not be considered 100% reliable since the Indian government was particularly ambiguous with regards to the reactor being installed or not and the Indian media has a tendency to embellish and distort certain facts. Then again I suppose its better to have free media as opposed to state-controlled propaganda-spewing media that almost always distort and manipulate facts. Vedant ( talk) 23:23, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
Another report about the submarine has this to say Just last month, an 80MW nuclear reactor, smaller than a bus, was pushed into the hull of the submarine and successfully integrated—a milestone in the project approved by the then prime minister Indira Gandhi in 1970. By April 2009, the submarine will be launched and will begin sea trials before it is inducted into the navy. . So this clearly states the nuclear reactor was installed into the submarine prior to its launch. Bcs09 ( talk) 15:52, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
The only problem is that report is from January of last year and it also stated in that report that the submarine would be launched in April of 2009 when it was infact launched only in July. While I'd more than happily delete By78's edits if they were invalid, it appears that this one is (a rarity I must admit). Vedant ( talk) 22:07, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
Cptnono ( talk) 00:00, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Recent reports suggest the sub is undergoing sea trials. It astonishes me that the Indians are conducting the submarine's sea trial without any reactor installed in the sub. So it seems the India today article is indeed correct and other ones about "without nuclear reactors" are all wrong. Bcs09 ( talk) 01:44, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
The reports especially by the ones like Defpro is pure stupidity. Look at the report from Hindu which was published just before the launch of the ship. It clearly states that the reactor is installed [7]. Here is the quotes from that report "The submarine is already fitted with a miniaturised nuclear-powered reactor developed by BARC at Kalpakkam, 60 km from Chennai." and also "The mini-nuclear reactor that will power the submarine has been fitted into its hull.". Now its time to remove those idiotic things from defrop to be purged off the page. We are lucky enough that Defpro did not come up with a report stating "Nuclear submarine undergoing sea trials without a Nuclear reactor fitted into it" kind of stupidity. May be they will comeup with something like "Indian nuclear submarine commissioned without nuclear reactor".lol. Bcs09 ( talk) 05:10, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
Could someone please provide some ACTUAL photos of the INS Arihant? I have looked all over the internet for actual images of the Arihant, but all I got was a bunch of computer renderings and artist conceptions. A search for videos of the launch ceremony proved equally elusive, except for this video ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNgUhyEYhsc&feature=PlayList&p=AD10AEC9ECF1F032&index=0). However, the video appears to depict a Soviet Foxtrot class submarine; but I am not 100% sure. Could someone clarify if the video indeed shows the real Arihant? If the Arihant has already been "launched" and revealed to the public, why is it so difficult to get some real photos? By78 ( talk) 21:00, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
There is no need for merging. Those two are two different submarines. The follow on class to be nearly double the size of the present one. The Follow on to the Arihant class need to be updated with more sources and more information. Bcs09 ( talk) 02:33, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
Please see the link below:
http://idrw.org/?m=201201&paged=13
Scroll down to view the pic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.79.17.5 ( talk) 01:55, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Information about the nuclear reactor used in the Arihant is incorrect. Zircronium is not used as a neutron absorber for controlling reactivity in the reactor. The neutron absorption cross section of zircronium is very low (a few barnes) while actual neutron control materials have neutron cross sections (boron, cadmium, hafnium, samarium, etc.) at least 3 orders of magnitude higher. It is possible that the control rod materials in this reactor are placed inside Zircronium-alloyed tubes, which have other desirable properties including low corrosion in a pressurized water reactor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nucphysics ( talk • contribs) 14:26, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
file:INS Arihant.png has been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.79.6 ( talk) 04:11, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
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:
\bnaval-technology\.com\b
on the local blacklist\bnaval-technology\.com\b
on the local blacklistIf 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 NotifyOnline 11:03, 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
NotifyOnline
20:55, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
how many submarines are they planning to have in arihant class? it is 3 or 4? within this page itself I found some conflicting information like in infobox planned is 3 while down in ships in class it is 4. as the project is still classified unlike other projects like Vikrant-class and MOD might not reveal much information about planned subs for now. so lets decide what we should add in planned is it going to 3 or 4 or nothing for now. Nicky mathew ( talk) 19:54, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
@ Nicky Mathew: ( http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/indigenous-nuclear-powered-submarine-ins-arihant-sea-trials-navy-ballistic-missile/1/406718.html) states 5 SSBNS(Not exactly Arihant Class leading to a possibility to that 'hoax' page) ( http://thediplomat.com/2015/01/can-india-accommodate-the-ins-arihant/) states 4 ( http://www.deccanherald.com/content/385060/indias-first-indigenous-n-submarine.html) states 3 or 4 (?) It seems that the news media is itself confused with exact numbers due to the secrecy of the project. M.srihari ( talk) 18:16, 14 May 2015 (UTC)Srihari
@ Nicky Mathew:I have no issue. M.srihari ( talk) 07:23, 15 May 2015 (UTC)Srihari
Navy Ship Building Centre is under Director-General Naval Projects (Visakhapatnam) and not under Hindustan Shipyard Limited Proof as mentioned in this "The Hindu" article http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Visakhapatnam/contract-worker-killed-in-accident-at-navy-ship-building-centre/article5764589.ece standardengineer ( talk) 11:45, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
The nuclear submarines are built in an entirely different facility called the Navy Ship Building Centre adjacent to HSL neither owned nor operated by HSL. standardengineer ( talk) 11:48, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Arihant-class submarine. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 01:15, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
I noticed a vandalism attempt on this page by IP 46.235.152.212 on February 2, 2016. This was rectified immediately by another user and is now fixed. Should we consider asking for semi-protected status for this page? -- Adamgerber90 22:43, 3 Februray 2016 (UTC)
As far as I know SP status is only given when there is a lot of repeated vandalism from specific users or brigading, few occasions only will only warrant a very short-term SP(in days) and will make no difference on low traffic pages. standardengineer ( talk) 23:51, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Arihant-class 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:
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 20:12, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Defense Professionals Daily 2009-07-28
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).