[Home]History of B-52 Stratofortress/Talk

HomePage | Recent Changes | Preferences

Revision 8 . . November 15, 2001 12:56 pm by (logged).144.199.xxx [comments on npov]
Revision 7 . . November 14, 2001 3:50 pm by (logged).9.128.xxx
  

Difference (from prior major revision) (no other diffs)

Changed: 17c17,19
:I think you miss my point. I was giving an example of why I thought USAF text should be taken with a grain of salt in general.
:I think you miss my point. I was giving an example of why I thought USAF text should be taken with a grain of salt in general.

::As a vet, I agree that USAF materials may need to be taken with a large grain of salt. However, for this particular article on the B52, its seems pretty accurate. It is pushing 50 years of service, which is pretty amazing. I would be much more suspicious of such material on the F117, B1, B2, etc. But not the buf. There probably were performance problems and crashes in its early years, 19502,60s, which would be very interesting to add to this page.

HomePage | Recent Changes | Preferences
Search: