Talk:Mark 45 torpedo

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Mark 45 torpedo article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Military history: Maritime / Technology / Weaponry / North America / United States

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion not met Grammar and style: criterion not met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

posible image

See here.Geni 14:32, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox?

The correct infobox for this article is {{Infobox Weapon}} -MBK₀₀₄ 06:38, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kill Probability

A sourced statement about the Kill Probability of this weapon was removed and replaced with an unsourced statement that it was a joke in the edits on October 26th. Can we get a source for one of those statements and eliminate the other? Wevets (talk) 23:34, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I added the line "When fitted with the W34 warhead, ASTOR was considered to have a kill probability of 2 (or "Him and Me"), because the underwater blast radius was greater than the standard range of the torpedo" back in May 2011, with a cite to Submarine Warfare: an illustrated history by Anthony Preston, a respected naval historian. The "Him and Me" bit may be a joke, but Preston seemed to take the info on blast radius vs. range seriously. This is supported by an information plaque at Pearl Harbor (attached to the torpedo photographed in the article), which claims "The Mark 45 was a controversial weapon because, even at maximum range, the exploding nuclear warhead could cause damage not only to the submarine's target, but also to the launching submarine." -- saberwyn 12:49, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Info missing on nuclear capability

The article says the MK-45 is nuclear-capable, and replaced by the Mk-48. But it does not say if the MK-45 has been decommissioned or whether the MK-48 is also nuclear-capable (MK-48 wiki article says nothing about its nuclear capability). Nor any treaties regarding the use of nuclear-weaponized torpedoes.--71.10.145.225 (talk) 00:36, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]