|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Redirect from Akademik Mstislav Keldysh
Please don't create incorrect redirects. This article contains virtually no informatiuon about the vessel. You are effectively hiding that there is a missing article. `'mikka (t) 21:05, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
- You are welcome to split the article and create Akademik Mstislav Keldysh. -- Petri Krohn 21:22, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Up to 98% of the world’s oceans are under 6000 km deep. < I can't believe that is accurate, it should surely be 6000m? Also, that only 2% of the ocean is over 6000m deep, is that really relevant?
MIR and CIA
Some information about MIR and CIA. original article translated to english Former CEO says CIA responsible for bringing down Rauma-Repola Oceanics submarine technology firm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk • contribs)
The 'Movie career' does not make sense. How could filming for a 1997 film be made in the early 2000s? -- Ferdyshenko 22:55, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
Nevertheless, the section is still nonsensical; it should state that he used the Mir. on several movies rather than just one which was released at least three years before the later filming. --Ferdyshenko 18:12, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
- Ferdyshenko is right. The statement is nonsensical.-- Episcopal 19:09, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Where were they when the Kursk sank? Had the Russians mothballed them prior to the incident? I'm curious because it would have made more sense to use a Russian designed DSRV being that it should work with Russian submarines. Anynobody 09:34, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
- The MIRs are not submarine rescue vessels, the Russian Navy has special vessels for this task. E.g. the Priz class was involved in the failed attempt to rescue the crew of Kursk. --MoRsE 09:41, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Sounds plausible, but the article says: "The vessels are designed to be used for scientific research and for submarine rescue operations." I'd remove it myself, however I can understand the logic in creating a vehicle that could do both, and the references appear to be in Russian which I can't read to confirm myself. Anynobody 21:22, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
- I believe they were doing commercial work in the USA during that time (they were rented to a private entity at that time, if I not mistaken). It was mentioned during the Kursk saga. Alex Bakharev 23:31, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
That makes sense, if they were really far away it's not like the subs could be airlifted since their mothership has the equipment needed to run them. Any rescue would be limited to how soon it could get there. Anynobody 08:34, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
- They could possibly be used to cut wires, provide video coverage and similar tasks in Kursk-scenarios, but they do not have space to rescue submarine crews. However, I believe that they can provide assistance to each other if one is in trouble. --MoRsE 08:45, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Can anybody throw any light on the "Russing television network"? Should this be "Russian television network"?
A number of the references no longer link to anything. Perhaps the original contributor(s) could update?
Underwater communications cannot be VHF, actually are SLF (30--300 Hz)
See Wikipedia article "Communication with submarines" explaining that it's on SLF not ELF and definitely not VHF. Americans used 76 Hz, Russians 82 Hz radio to reach submerged craft anywhere in the world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 07:55, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Deepstar 20000 lacks citations
A submarine called "Deepstar 20000" is referenced in the article, but not cited. There is no wikipedia article corresponding to this a cursory internet search shows few hits. What's going on here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 08:14, 14 April 2012 (UTC)