This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The facility operated by United Nuclear Corporation (UNC) in Pawling, NY was not a military facility, which can be seen in their original application for a special nuclear material license. [1] There is no evidence that military research was the principal reason for the Pawling site, and according to the documents in the aforementioned application UNC acted only as a sub-contractor for companies that were conducting such research. According to the original license application, UNC at Pawling's purpose was that 'Pu and u235 bearing material will be handled in the 55 general operations of fabrication, characterization, and property measurements.' [2] The work at this facility had to do with the development and processing of reactor fuel and doesn't meet the third criteria for this article:
3. To qualify as "military", the nuclear operation/material must be principally for military purposes.
Therefore, this incident should not be listed here and should be removed.
Aklap ( talk) 23:43, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
References
From the incident occurring on June 7, 1960
Someone mind explaining this one for me, especially considering helium is not a flammable substance...
Re: Feb 13 1950 B-36 incident
"...carrying one weapon containing a dummy warhead. The warhead contained uranium instead of plutonium."
I didn't know replacing the plutonium with uranium in a warhead transformed it into a dummy. But then such mix-ups happen in real life, e.g. some B-52 out of Minot AFB that went flapping round the skies with misloaded nuclear cruise missiles not too long ago. --Arthur Borges 22:02, 4 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arthurborges ( talk • contribs)
All the plane crashes and sub collisions and satellites and so forth need to be removed, and if no one else has anything to say about it in a week I'm going to do so. jtrainor
Because in a lot of cases there's just stuff like submarines colliding or bombs falling/being lost where no release of radioactivity occured. Heck, there's a number of entries that specifically say no radiological contamination occured. Stuff just plain being lost and accidents that do not involve radiation release do not really warrant being included in the article. Apologies in advance for my crappy formatting, I'm not really good at editing stuff yet so all these entries are just copy/pasted from the main article.
Basically, I want to remove the following entries:
March 10, 1956 – Somewhere en route to a rendezvous with an United States Air Force tanker flying over the Mediterranean Sea, a B-47 from MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa, Florida, disappeared without a trace. The plane was carrying two nuclear capsules at the time of the incident.
October, 1959 – One killed and 3 seriously burned in explosion and fire of prototype reactor for the USS Triton (SSRN/SSN-586) at the United States Navy's training center in West Milton, New York. The Navy stated, "The explosion was completely unrelated to the reactor or any of its principal auxiliary systems," but sources familiar with the operation claim that the high-pressure air flask that exploded was to feed a crucial reactor-problem backup system.
January 24, 1961 – A B-52 bomber suffered a fire caused by a major leak in a wing fuel cell and exploded in mid-air 12 miles (20 km) north of Seymour Johnson Air Force Base, Goldsboro, North Carolina. The incident released the bomber's two Mark 39 hydrogen bombs. Five crewmen parachuted to safety, but three died—two in the aircraft and one on landing. Three of the four arming devices on one of the bombs activated, causing it to carry out many of the steps needed to arm itself, such as the charging of the firing capacitors and critically the deployment of a 100-foot (30 m) diameter retardation parachute. The parachute allowed the bomb to hit the ground with little damage. The fourth arming device — the pilot's safe/arm switch — was not activated and so the weapon did not detonate. The other bomb plunged into a muddy field at around 700 miles per hour (300 m/s) and disintegrated. Its tail was discovered about 20 feet (7 m) down and much of the bomb recovered, including the tritium bottle and the plutonium. However, excavation was abandoned because of uncontrollable flooding by ground water, and most of the thermonuclear stage, containing uranium, was left in situ. It was estimated to lie at around 180 feet (55 m). The Air Force purchased the land and fenced it off to prevent its disturbance, and it is tested regularly for contamination, although none has so far been found. See: [Broken Arrow: Goldsboro, NC http://www.ibiblio.org/bomb/].
April 10, 1963 – The nuclear submarine USS Thresher (SSN-593) sinks east of Boston, Massachusetts, with 129 men onboard. A year earlier, just before the end of its refit interval, the boat had been abused in a munitions test where it literally tried to approach explosions as closely as possible. The boat was refitted afterward, and sank during its sea trials. In a show of poor planning, the sea trial was conducted where the bottom was below the hull's crush depth. In the yard, destructive tests of a few silver-soldered pipe connections had failed. At the time, nondestructive testing was unknown, and no test records were available. The investigators believed that the sinking was caused by the failure of a major through-hull silver-soldered connection, such as a tertiary-loop cooling inlet, and that the reactor and its design were not responsible. The reactor was not recovered.
December 5, 1964 – A Minuteman 1B missile was on strategic alert at Launch Facility (LF) L-02, Ellsworth AFB, South Dakota. Two airmen were dispatched to the LF to repair inner zone (IZ) security system. In the midst of their checkout of the IZ system, one retrorocket in the spacer below the Reentry Vehicle (RV) fired, causing the RV/nuclear warhead to fall about 75 feet (23 m) to the floor of the silo. When the RV/nuclear warhead struck the bottom of the silo, the arming and fusing/altitude control subsystem containing the batteries was torn loose, thus removing all sources of power from the RV/nuclear warhead. The RV structure received considerable damage. All safety devices operated properly in that they did not sense the proper sequence of events to allow arming the warhead. There was no detonation or radioactive contamination.
December 5, 1965 – An A-4E Skyhawk airplane with one B43_nuclear_bomb onboard falls off the USS Ticonderoga into 16,200 feet (4.9 km) of water off the coast of Japan. The ship was traveling from Vietnam to Yokosuka, Japan. The plane, pilot, and weapon are never recovered. There is dispute over exactly where the incident took place—the US Defense Department originally stated it took place 500 miles (800 km) off the coast of Japan, but US Navy documents later show it happened about 80 miles (130 km) from the Ryukyu Islands and 200 miles (320 km) from Okinawa. [18]
April 11, 1968 – A Soviet Golf-class submarine sinks in about 16,000 ft (4900 m) of water, approximately 750 miles (1200 km) northwest of Hawaii's Oahu island. 80 sailors are killed in the incident. Several nuclear torpedoes and three nuclear ballistic missiles were onboard. (Parts of this vessel were later raised by the CIA and Howard Hughes' Glomar Explorer in 1974.) [19]
May 21, 1968 – The USS Scorpion (SSN-589), a nuclear-powered attack submarine carrying two Mark 45 ASTOR torpedoes with nuclear warheads, is lost with 99 sailors onboard. The nuclear material has not been recovered. The submarine has been photographed at the ocean bottom, and the U.S. Navy periodically monitors the location for radioactivity. Supposedly there has been no plutonium leakage to date.
May 16, 1969 – In San Francisco, California, the nuclear submarine USS Guitarro sinks while being fitted because a forward compartment flooded.
November 15 or 16, 1969 – The USS Gato (SSN-615) reportedly collides with a Soviet submarine in the White Sea. A former crewmember later states that the Gato was struck in the protective plating around the vessel's reactor. No serious damage resulted, although the ship went on alert and prepared to arm a nuclear-tipped anti-submarine missile and nuclear torpedoes. [22]
June 20, 1970 – In the northern Pacific Ocean, a Soviet Echo-class submarine collides with the USS Tautog after making a 180° crazy Ivan maneuver. American sailors believe the ship sank after the incident, but Russian Navy officers state in 1992 that the ship did not sink. [24]
1977 – The Soviet K-171 accidentally releases a nuclear warhead while off the coast of Kamchatka. After a frantic search involving dozens of ships and aircraft, the warhead is recovered. [26]
November 2, 1981 – At the US Submarine Pens in Scotland, a fully armed Poseidon missile is accidentally dropped 17 feet (5 m) from a crane while being transferred from a submarine to its tender.
January 3, 1983 – The Russian Kosmos-1402 nuclear-powered spy satellite burns up over the South Atlantic.
October 3, 1986 – 480 miles (770 km) east of Bermuda, a Soviet Yankee I-class submarine experienced an explosion in one of its nuclear missile tubes and at least three crew members were killed. Thirty-four nuclear missiles and two reactors were on board. Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev privately communicated news of the disaster to U.S. President Ronald Reagan before publicly acknowledging the incident on October 4. Two days later, on October 6, the ship sank in the Atlantic Ocean while under tow in 18,000 feet (5.5 km) of water. [31]
April 7, 1989 – The Soviet Komsomolets attack submarine catches fire about 300 miles (480 km) off the coast of Norway. 27 crew members escape, but the remaining 42 do not survive as the ship sinks. Two nuclear-armed torpedoes were on-board along with the vessel's nuclear reactor. [33]
February 11, 1992 – The Commonwealth of Independent States Sierra-class attack submarine K-239 (Barracuda) collides with the USS Baton Rouge (SSN-689) in the Barents Sea. No apparent damage results, although the incident causes the Russians to complain that the Baton Rouge was inside CIS territorial waters. American naval officers maintain that the ship was in international waters at the time. [35]
March 20, 1993 – The American submarine USS Grayling (SSN-646) collides with the Novomoskovsk, a Russian Delta III-class submarine, in the Barents Sea, 105 nautical miles (120 miles, 195 km) north of the Kola Peninsula. [36]
November 17, 1996 – The Russian probe Mars 96 fails during launch and crashes back to Earth with an RTG on board. The location of the crash is disputed - either in the Pacific Ocean or in the mountains of Chile.
That's about it. How do I do that signature thing with my username like you do? jtrainor
This article definitely need a lot of work, perhaps more than the civilian one did. I'll be gradually working my way through this one, much as I did there, adding references, editing and removing out-of-scope entries.-- DocS 04:21, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
Why is there a picture of SL-1, but NO mention of it in the article? Bayerischermann 01:41, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
In case anyone wants to put together a list of minor incidents in the future, [1] is a list of UK nuclear incidents known to the MoD; about twenty, mostly "someone dropped a warhead six inches whilst handling it" or "lorry transporting nuclear weapons rear-ends car, paint scratched". None are significant enough, at a quick look, to be on this list; they explicitly note "There has never been a Category 2 accident involving a British nuclear weapon." [2] notes none have ever been lost. Shimgray | talk | 14:29, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
oh my, the paragraph about the leipzig accident links to a book written by the infamous David Irving. We should definitely replace this reference by a more serious one. --thoralf Unsigned edit by 83.221.68.92 23:06, January 22, 2006
If there was no core, where'd the plutonium come from? It looks to me like someone has gone through a lot of these items and, without citations of course, added a claim that the core wasn't present that was needed for the nuclear explosion. Tempshill 23:15, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
I've belatedly gotten around to removing a whole bunch of the garbage entries. Jtrainor 19:04, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
Can someone confirm that Werner Heisenberg and Robert Dopel had an explosion in the Leipzig L-IV atomic pile, which resulted in a major fire? David Irving wrote about it in [3] but is there any other source available? David Irving was indeed sentenced to three years imprisonment in Austria for denying the Holocaust.-- Enr-v 17:08, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Confirmation: During a series of experiments two major accidents occurred. The first accident occurred when the master of mechanics Paschen poured the powder of uran using a spoon in the bottleneck of the gadget. This led to a bang and a explosive flame which injured Paschen. The second accident occurred during the L-IV experiment. When opening the rubber-sealed-aluminium-closure a explosive flame appeared. A temporary water cooling was of no use. Attempts of extinction with foam and water remaint unsuccessful. Not until two days later the reactor came to rest. (Translated from the secound link see below) Also uranium gas leaked from the so called "Uranmaschine" which had been on fire due to the melting process. Therefore it is assumed that alpha radiation had to contaminate lungs of people who had been in place, although there were not enough documents left after 1945 to check on this fact. [4] [5] [6] [7]
Curious why B-36B 44-92075 is not in this list. Pete.Hurd 02:49, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
Breaking news. A diver allegedly found the lost bomb. -- Kissg ( talk) 19:16, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
The event of February 13, 1950, fails the first two points of the "scope of this article" test. Even the link it gives as a citation calls the event a "high explosive detonation with no spread of fissile material".
The event of April 11, 1950, fails the first two points of the "scope of this article" test. Even the link it gives as a citation calls the event an "accident resulting in fatalities not involving fissile material". It was a plane crash in which a disassembled nuclear weapon was on board, which was later recovered.
The event of November 10, 1950, fails the first two points of the "scope of this article" test. The description given is also totally wrong. The weapon was disassembled, and contained only high explosive. And indeed it did explode. There was no DU, there was no uranium at all, only 2,200 kg of chemical charge. The story that the device contained 100 lbs of DU was invented by Greenpeace. Why would there be DU in a nuclear bomb, when it's unsuitable for fission? You will find no US or Canadian government documents that claim any radioactive contamination from this event.
The event of November 29, 1955, fails all three points of the "scope of this article" test. There was no substantial contamination, health or property damage, and the reactor was not "principally for military purposes".
The event of July 27, 1956, fails the first two points of the "scope of this article" test. The event is noteworthy specifically because a nuclear accident was avoided, but that doesn't mean it belongs in this article.
The event of January 31, 1958, fails the first point of the "scope of this article" test. There was no "substantial health damage, property damage or contamination." Contamination of the wreckage itself was high, but that of the surrounding area was low. There were no casualties attributable to nuclear weapons. The description given is also partially wrong. There is no evidence that this event occurred in Morocco, and that is purely a guess on the part of CDI. The military has never identified the location of this event.
The event of February 5, 1958, fails the first two points of the "scope of this article" test. The weapon was disassembled and contained no nuclear material, and never had since its construction.
The event of March 11, 1958, fails the first two points of the "scope of this article" test. The weapon was disassembled, and contained only high explosive. And indeed it did explode. The notion that "radioactive substances were flung across the area" is pure fiction. Six civilians were injured, their house was destroyed, but there was no radioactive exposure.
The event of June 16, 1958, fails the third point of the "scope of this article" test. ORNL was not a military facility in 1958, but rather under the Atomic Energy Commission.
The event of December 30, 1958, fails the third point of the "scope of this article" test. LANL was not a military facility in 1958, but rather under the Atomic Energy Commission.
The even of November 20, 1959, fails all three points of the "scope of this article" test. There was no substantial contamination, health or property damage, and ORNL was not a military facility in 1959. No National Laboratory has been run by the military since the Manhattan Project ended.
-- 76.224.88.36 20:15, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
I would like to propose a format change for the entries. I recently reformatted the List of civilian nuclear accidents and I think it works well. Proposed format:
Instead of a wall of text the reader sees discreet entries with the most pertinent information presented up front. I am making a identical proposal for the List of civilian radiation accidents since these articles are all on a very similar subject. Nailedtooth 00:28, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Just wondering why this isn't included. One can easily find numerous articles about this incident where a B-36 bomber lost it's cargo, a 10 megaton Mark 17, while being on landing approach to Kirtland AF base just about 4 miles south of Kirtland AF base. Fortunately only the conventional explosives detonated when the bomb hit the ground and only part of Plutonium load was spread. Still I think this incident definitely should be listed here. Hadoriel 20:17, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Can someone find a more NPOV source, rather than quoting a Holocaust denial website?-- Lastexpofan ( talk) 23:32, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
There've been a few Nevada Test Site accidents where radionuclides have been released and carried offsite by the wind. Where would such accidents be listed? Here or at List of civilian nuclear accidents? And what about the non-accidental release of radioactive contaminants such as during an atmospheric bomb test? Binksternet ( talk) 18:33, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
maybe add this one also? Palomares_hydrogen_bombs_incident two nuclear bombers crashed on the spanish coast and some radioactive materials were released. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.38.197.84 ( talk) 17:12, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
These entries should not be on the list and I would like Eiland to stop readding them. The referenced article mentions specifically that tests found there was no contamination in the 2008 leak, and provides no information on the amount of tritium in the 1985 leak so there's no way to judge if it qualifies as 'significant contamination'. A single molecule of tritium would qualify this water as 'contaminated' even though the level would be far from 'significant' as the criteria requires. We can't add it based purely on speculation and given that the 1985 leak is from the same or similar submarines, the amount of contamination is likely to be similar to the leak in 2008 (that is, none). Nailedtooth ( talk) 15:01, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Stop adding entries that involve no verified radioactive contamination. Jtrainor ( talk) 19:31, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
To be included, an entry has to conform to the listed criteria, the USS Thresher slinking fails on criteria 2. To review, the criteria reads "The damage must be related directly to radioactive material, not merely (for example) at a nuclear power plant." What this sentence means is that any health effects, damage or contamination that resulted from the incident must be due to the properties or presence of nuclear material. The health effect, contamination or damage cannot simply happen in close proximity to nuclear material. In the case of the USS Thresher, the sinking was caused by a burst pipe that shorted out electrical systems causing a loss of power. This kind of accident has happened to many other submarines and is not unique to nuclear subs. This means, to put it in similar words to the criteria, that the accident happened merely on a nuclear sub. The reactor was affected by virtue of being connected electrically to the sub, but it responded by functioning as it had been designed to, by shutting down. This means the causality flows in the wrong way for this to be a nuclear accident; along with the crew and rest of the ship, the reactor is a victim of the accident, not the cause. Surveys since the accident have found the reactor to be intact and the ocean floor life unaffected. The Thresher is not a nuclear accident, despite it's notability as being a lost nuclear sub. Nailedtooth ( talk) 17:38, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
<==Wikipedia is all about official sources. The US Navy is the one source here, and they say it is not a nuclear accident. All the reliable sources quote the Navy in saying that the event was not nuclear in nature. We here can't use logic to overwhelm the sources—we have to report what is found in the literature. If there is some reliable source for listing the submarine, we can put it in. If another organization goes down there to make new tests, and discovers contamination, then we will quote them and return the Thresher to this list. As well, if an organization goes out there and steals the nuclear core, we will list Thresher and cite the news reports. Until then, the nuclear material sitting on the ocean floor is a potential accident, not an actual accident. Binksternet ( talk) 17:16, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Does the K-129 accident qualify for the list (3 SS-N-5 SERB and several torpedoes with nuclear warheads on board)? Of course, the contamination with Plutonium only occured aboard the Hughes Glomar Explorer after the (partial) recovery, which was a civilian (CIA) operation. Thus it might be more in the December 5, 1965 – coast of Japan – Loss of a nuclear bomb type of category. -- Enemenemu ( talk) 22:57, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
I also was surprised that the loss of the K-129 with its nukes was not here. It seems it is essentially the same kind of incident as the USS Scorpion loss. BeadleB ( talk) 08:31, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
The Article says, that there has been an acident in Heisenbergs Laboratory in Leipzig, probably a metall fire. The problem is, that Irving seems to be the only one who has written about this incident. This causes a second problem: Irving is just one of the worst historicans. He has published fairytales about the third reich for many years, this came to an end when a british court allowed calling Irving Nazi, Antisemite or Racist and an austrian court sentenced him for breaking the Verbotsgesetz 1947 which prevents the revival of Nacism. A serious historican would be allowed to enter Autralia, Austria, Canada, Germany, Italy, New Zealand or South Africa. I guess everyone will agree with me about the fact, that Irving is not a serios source at all.
I have found another publication, Der Erste Feuerwehreinsatz an einer Uranmaschine by Reinhard Steffler, a firefighter with the responding Leipzig Fire Department. There is a short Interview with him on Youtube, wich does not really make things clear. In the end of this Interview, he says that all the reports by the fire Departement are lost, which makes it likely, that his source has been Irving although he mentions notes of one of the involved scientists, I will try to find someone who owns this book.
If the book does not contain any other sources than Irving we can estimate, that this story is one of Irvings fairytales about the Wunderwaffen of the Third Reich. -- Liberaler Humanist ( talk) 20:25, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
Why no mention of the 1997 and 1963 incerdents at Arzamas-16?
© Geni 23:04, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
Nothing since 2003? Really? I want to say a Soviet nuclear class submarine disappeared (blew up) somewhere in the Pacific and was never found.. but my memory on it is a bit shady... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.0.101.195 ( talk) 14:01, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
FYI - A new section has just been added to specify that nothing is listed for the current decade. Until such time that something warrants being listed in this new section, specifying that there are none will help to make it clear that the lack of incidents since 2003 is intentional.
This current 14-year span appears to be the longest since the dawning of the nuclear age in the 1940s.-- Tdadamemd sioz ( talk) 00:23, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
Chernobyl was a both a military and a power producing reactor. The RBMK was selected for its ability to produce plutonium and it was administered partly by the Soviet military, not by the ministry that dealt with power plants like coal plants or (principally exclusively) power producing nuclear plants. It should be on both the civilian and military lists. Ottawakismet ( talk) 18:18, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
I removed " *February 13, 1950 – British Columbia, Canada – 1950 British Columbia B-36 crash—non-nuclear detonation of a simulated atomic bomb" as it does not meet the first and second criteria in the scope of this article. Mrs269 ( talk) 08:09, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
Also "*July, 1959 – Simi Valley, California, USA – Explosion
Copy-pasting my earlier (now corrected) entry now that I've found the appropriate article: There is another case of fatal radiation sickness reported in Rainer Karscht's book, Hitlers Bombe, p. 133-137. According to Karscht, German nuclear scientist and member of the Uranverein, Dr. Walter Trinks was successful in initiating a nuclear chain reaction in an experimental nuclear reactor at the laboratories of de:Heeresversuchsanstalt Kummersdorf near Berlin, in late 1944 or early 1945. As Trinks was not using a moderator, the reactor reached critical mass and exploded within hours after he had left the site, destroying most of Trinks's lab. Master craftsman Willi Hennig came to inspect the ruins immediately after the explosion, and soon showed signs of fatigue and illness and had to be brought home.
In 2005, Karscht interviewed Hennig's daughter and she told him her father had never recovered, remaining bedridden for a year. In early 1946, he asked his wife and daughter to move him to the explosion site on a trolley so he could recover materials. Half a year later, he died on 12 September 1946. Following the interview, Karlsch then had teams of nuclear scientists of the University of Giessen (led by scientist Dirk Schalch), the University of Marburg (led by nuclear chemistry professor Reinhard Brandt) and Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (led by Prof. Dr. Uwe Keyser) take and analyze soil samples at Kummersdorf who found high levels of uranium, plutonium, and cobalt-60 contamination only at the reported explosion site and, while clearly ruling them out to be due to the Chernobyl disaster or a primitive "dirty bomb", the reports of all three teams independently reached the conclusion that a prior nuclear explosion at the site was highly likely. Combining all the aforementioned evidence, Karscht came to the conclusion that Willi Hennig in 1945/46 was probably the first victim of a lethal dose of radiation in the history of the German nuclear project.
Sources (all German, unfortunately):
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 3 external links on
List of military nuclear accidents. 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.
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.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 01:40, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 9 external links on List of military nuclear accidents. 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, 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:00, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of military nuclear accidents. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/NC/nh4_1.gifWhen 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:10, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
As of 2018-01-28, this section includes, "The weapon's high explosives detonated upon impact with a bright flash visible. ... The Pentagon's summary report does not mention whether the weapon was later recovered." I deleted the last sentence, because if the high explosives detonated in the ocean, it would be next to impossible to recover any fragments. DavidMCEddy ( talk) 06:51, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
I'm not sure why there are two differing accounts of the B-36 crash in the table - seems there still may be some controversy on the actual account of the incident. Also, the table lists British Columbia as the location. It could clarify that it is British Columbia, Canada, similar to all other location references in the table. SquashEngineer ( talk) 19:43, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
This entry has the wrong location. According to /info/en/?search=VP-50, the loss was not in Puget Sound near Whidbey Island, but in the Pacific Ocean, 110 miles west of "the Washington-Oregon border" (i.e. the Columbia River). The aircraft was only based at Whidbey Island. Another reference is https://www.vpnavy.com/vp50_mishap.html, which includes an undated copy of a news clipping confirming the offshore location. -- 174.127.176.33 ( talk) 01:04, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
Please add this Soviet submarine K-320-- SXe 92 ( talk) 19:57, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
List should include 1968 loss of Soviet sub k-129, which carried ballistic missiles and which led to Project Azorian. 2601:143:C501:F6A0:D1FA:9490:6152:993D ( talk) 04:27, 25 June 2023 (UTC)