Talk:Boeing B-52 Stratofortress

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Boeing B-52 Stratofortress 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

Archives: 1, 2: 3 months

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Boeing B-52 Stratofortress. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Boeing B-52 Stratofortress at the Reference desk.

Boeing B-52 Stratofortress has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
October 17, 2007	Peer review	Reviewed
November 14, 2007	WikiProject peer review	Reviewed
January 30, 2009	Peer review	Reviewed
July 25, 2010	Good article nominee	Listed
September 3, 2010	WikiProject A-class review	Approved
Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on April 15, 2010, April 15, 2012, April 15, 2019, and April 15, 2022.
Current status: Good article

Military history: Aviation / Cold War

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

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	Cold War task force (c. 1945 – c. 1989)

Additional information:
/
	This article has passed an A-Class review.

Aviation: Aircraft

	Aviation portal This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles
	This article is supported by the aircraft project.
	This article was a past Collaboration of the Month.
	This article has had a peer review which is now archived.

Cold War High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cold War, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Cold War on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Cold WarWikipedia:WikiProject Cold WarTemplate:WikiProject Cold WarCold War articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[terrain mask#Terrain masking|terrain masking]]

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Armament

The article implies that all B-52 models prior to the B-52H were armed with .50 caliber machine guns and expressly states this was the armament for the B-52A. Through the first half-dozen B-52Bs, the planes were armed with two 20mm guns, which used an entirely different fire control system than was installed for the quad 50s. --Lineagegeek (talk) 21:38, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

So fix it with reliable sources. - BilCat (talk) 21:47, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Now there's no mention of the guns under the armament section at all … 93.145.221.210 (talk) 16:49, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Understandable, as the currently-flying models no longer possess them. Maabonnet (talk) 23:01, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Remove ARRW references from the Armament section

The ARRW program was recently canceled. Maabonnet (talk) 23:01, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 26 May 2023

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The number in inventory says 72, but the contingent numbers after add up to 98. My request is for clarification. 2600:1700:3130:AE10:542C:B6B2:B104:D923 (talk) 13:05, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: As far as I understand, those are separate categories. Inventory, active service, long term storage are all separate from one another. However, this isn't my topic of expertise. If you have specific research questions, you can always ask at the reference desk (WP:RD). Actualcpscm (talk) 14:37, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

android app display problems

This article seems to be displaying incorrectly for me on the Android app, and I've done the usual cache clear and app updates: Contents list is blank, cannot scroll through entire article, cannot search for text in article.

The problem is *only* with this article (so far), and only on the app - displays fine via web browser. Mr kitehead (talk) 20:36, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This could be some issue with table(s) or maybe image(s). Your description does not have enough detail to know where to begin looking. Everything seems to be showing on PC and my IPhone. -Fnlayson (talk) 21:06, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I installed the Wikipedia app on android to check. I'm also getting an issue. In the app, infoboxes are turned into a "quick facts" dropdown, which doesn't work for this article, and I can't scroll beyond the lead. the General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon article is fine though. I can't see an obvious problem in this article's lead though. (Hohum ^@) 21:49, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the deprecated? unrecognised "unit cost" parameter, and a couple of empty ones from the infobox. It seems to be working in the android app correctly now. (Hohum ^@) 22:07, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hohum THANK YOU yes it's good now! Mr kitehead (talk) 22:09, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Number of units extant?

Currently the article reads

"There are 72 aircraft in inventory as of 2022; 58 operated by active forces (2nd Bomb Wing and 5th Bomb Wing), 18 by reserve forces (307th Bomb Wing), and about 12 in long-term storage at the Davis-Monthan AFB Boneyard"

58 + 18 is already more than 72 (it's 76). Add 12 in mothballs and that's 88. None of these numbers play well together to create an "interpretation" that is arithmetically useful.

We either need clarification or correction, I think?

Huw Powell (talk) 01:22, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is this article 1 that states, there are 76 B-52s in service, so i think the 72 is false, i've gone ahead and made the change Synonimany (talk) 11:02, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that edit. I did read somewhere about a year ago that they have moved several of the 12 in storage to be scrapped. I will have to see if I can find that again. --Picard's Facepalm • ^{Made It So} _Engage! • 14:12, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]