Talk:R-21 (missile)

Military history: Technology / Weaponry / Russian & Soviet

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

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force
	Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force

Rewrite

I started off just correcting the swapped-round chemical formulae in the fuel mix, and it turned into a total rewrite..... If you combine the Jane's reference to two variants with the NIG comments about the range being extended during the lifetime, it looks like the R-21A is an extended range variant, but I've not got WP:RS that say that - anyone? Also I removed this because I couldn't find written confirmation of it, but might be useful to incorporate if we can get hard enough sources : The D-4 launch complex with R-21 missile entered service by a Decision of Ministry Soviet of the USSR of 15 May 1963. Retired in 1989. There were 21 submarines with D-4 complex aboard, 63 missiles on combat duty, 228 launches (193 successful, 19 failed due to hardware bugs, 11 failed due to personnel errors and faults of supplementary systems) Le Deluge (talk) 16:14, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strange co-ordinates

This article on the R-21 missile is located in Google Earth at N38d05' and E178d57', in the middle of the North Pacific Ocean.. Of itself, this would be of no importance except that these are precisely the co-ordinates of the sunken soviet submarine K-129 which was the subject of the CIA's salvage attempt via the Glomar Explorer vessel. Strange.222.88.24.247 (talk) 02:06, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The indication that R-21 explosions were the cause of the K-129 sinking is in a letter to the editor in the Washington Times, not in an actual article ... On one hand this may be a reason to discount the validity of this information. On the other hand, like the implicit accuracy of the Lon/Lat info above, it may be from a source that has more insight than current publications. JimInNH (talk) 17:32, 22 October 2012 (UTC) Letter to Editor is from Bruce Rule who is one of the experts in the area of acoustical analysis, so more credible than most. WhyUSS Scorpion was Lost; Bruce Rule JimInNH (talk) 17:23, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on R-21 (missile). 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/20060108161459/http://www.aviation.ru/missile/ to http://www.aviation.ru/missile/

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).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:35, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nato designation

It is called Sark/Serb, but is this correct? The SS-N-4 article calls that missile Sark and the SS-N-6 article calls that missile Serb. 150.227.15.253 (talk) 14:46, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]