Talk:Kilo-class submarine

italicized?
Is this class named after a sub called the Kilo? Don't know whether it should be italicized. — kwami (talk) 21:31, 30 March 2011 (UTC)


 * There's no sub named "Kilo". "Kilo" is a NATO code-word. Neither the Soviets nor the Russians ever called this class "Kilo". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.238.144.218 (talk) 13:56, 28 May 2011 {UTC }


 * Since this "class" was given a name by NATO, which is sufficient enough for this article to also be named as such, is not then also sufficient enough for it to be italicized like all other similar article? - the WOLF  child  21:45, 11 December 2017 (UTC)


 * No. Per Naming conventions (ships), only the names of actual ships are italicized in class names. - BilCat (talk) 22:20, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Kilo-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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070223074353/http://sinodefence.com/navy/sub/kilo.asp to http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/sub/kilo.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070223074353/http://sinodefence.com/navy/sub/kilo.asp to http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/sub/kilo.asp
 * Added tag to http://www.alrosa.net/photos/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 09:00, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:08, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Submarine of Myanmar Navy. jpg.jpg

Why is the "Project" column so wide in the "877" table?
This may seem simple, but with most entries in the "877" Table only being 3-5 letters/numbers wide, why is the column so wide? I see no reason for this extra width!

This has the effect of compressing the final "Comments" section of the Table, where there are some very long entries, making them hard to read.

If you look at the two Tables which follow ("636" and "636.3"), the "Project" columns there are quite narrow, so this adjustment is possible.

(Is this because two of the entries in the column have added: "Citation needed", is this why the column is expanded wider? If so, I am sure there is a work-around, like a Break, or something.)

In any case, I suggest that someone who understands how these Tables work take a look at this and pare-down the size of this column to add width to the last column where it is sorely needed.

James 202.44.198.105 (talk) 05:55, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

The Novorossiysk is not active anymore. "On July 29, a fire broke out in the territorial waters of Russia aboard the submarine B-261 "Novorossiysk" " — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.21.111.255 (talk) 06:52, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Black Sea subs moved (mostly) to Novorossiysk in 2022; but Black Sea drydock facilities only available at Sevastopol on Crimea
Current article text is: "In September 2022, after the early 2022 Crimea attacks, the UK MoD said that the Kilo-class submarines were moved from Sevastopol to the Port of Novorossiysk in Krasnodar Krai. On 13 September 2023, B-237 Rostov-on-Don was damaged by a Ukrainian missile strike while it was docked in Sevastopol."

News coverage has said that the in-water port for the boats moved to Novorossiysk in late 2022, but that there are no drydock facilities in Novorossiysk, so drydock refurbishment and repairs still have to be done in Sevastopol on the occupied territory of Ukraine; unless the Russian Navy were to send the boat out of the Black Sea where current treaty arrangements would not allow any military vessel to re-enter the Black Sea while the hostilities are active. Ukraine can now reach Sevastopol by long-range missile, and in some cases, get by air defences. But I cannot locate that source just now. If someone can locate it, either put it here please, or just update the article and cite the source. Cheers. N2e (talk) 19:32, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Number of subs don't add up
The number of subs built is less than the number of subs active, plus lost, retired and preserved. 47.144.131.139 (talk) 20:02, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
 * This is also my comment. 151.29.137.229 (talk) 11:38, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, that likely means that the numbers in the cited sources do not add up. Feel free to find better sources, but we have to report what our sources say. Sucks sometimes. --OuroborosCobra (talk) 14:58, 21 October 2023 (UTC)