I’m pretty sure that’s a Suffren class, and there’s both diesel and nuclear powered versions. Dunno how I’d tell from the outside, and don’t think the caption is necessarily all that trustworthy.
I think it’s because many nations with subs have nuclear-powered vs diesel-powered. Diesel doesn’t have the vast capabilities to stay underwater for months like nuclear does.
I don’t know if that’s a mistake. It might not be a nuclear sub, just a sub which has nuclear weapons capabilities ( though obviously not this particular sub because it’s still in the hands of a defence contractor ( I hope ) ).
Weird that they specify “conventionally powered” in the Canadian article since this is a nuclear powered sub.
I’m pretty sure that’s a Suffren class, and there’s both diesel and nuclear powered versions. Dunno how I’d tell from the outside, and don’t think the caption is necessarily all that trustworthy.
I think it’s because many nations with subs have nuclear-powered vs diesel-powered. Diesel doesn’t have the vast capabilities to stay underwater for months like nuclear does.
I don’t know if that’s a mistake. It might not be a nuclear sub, just a sub which has nuclear weapons capabilities ( though obviously not this particular sub because it’s still in the hands of a defence contractor ( I hope ) ).