09III/09IV (093/094) Nuclear Submarine Thread

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Nobody officially from DoD has come forward to support this story, the article is just him and "unnamed" source from the DoD and you know what "unname" means? Is bullshit, is all made up.

This isn't correct.

Sources being "unnamed" or anonymous is not uncommon when disclosing information if a sensitive nature that a source doesn't want their name attached to.

However, the credibility of what an anonymous/unnamed source says, depends on the exact text and quote which is stated, as well as the credibility of the author in terms of their competency and trustworthiness.
 

Temstar

Brigadier
Registered Member
Just to be sure how weird would be to navigate a big 20 meter tall submarine who by definition would navigate blind in a river where sediment banks just move from one place to another, this is close to the coast where the Yangtze is suppose to have 40 meters, you can see the hazards everywhere.

View attachment 136532
Someone has found some more accurate hydrographic data for Wuhan:
1727476503302.png

汉口 is the river port for Wuhan, you can see for 2023 it had low water mark of 0.31m occurring on 18th of March and high water mark of 8.89m occurring on 7th of October. Average of 6m sounds about right to me.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
For now I think we should keep the discussion about this story in this thread, considering we don't know the full details of what has or hasn't happened nor the identity of the submarine in question (if there was one to begin with).
Moving discussion to a different thread and then having to re-move it, is not ideal.
 
Top