Talk:Boeing C-97 Stratofreighter/Archive 1

Developed from ?
Was the C-97 based on the B-29 (as stated in the opening paragraph), or on the B-50 (as stated in the info box)? 194.237.142.7 11:19, 9 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Both, actually. The prototype was based on the early-model B-29, but the production models used the improved engines and tail developed for the B-29D (B-50). That might need to be clarified in the text. B-29 or B-50 would be OK in the infobox, and we could possibly put both. - BillCJ 15:46, 9 October 2007 (UTC)


 * ☑ Done --Uli Elch (talk) 16:21, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

The XC-97 and YC-97s were based on the B-29. All other C-97s and B377s were developed from the much improved B-50.

Though the basic design of the B-29 and B-50 were similar, their structures were quite different. The wings, engines, and engine nacelles were totally different. The vertical stabilizers and rudder were totally different. The intermediate design, the XB-44, had the structure of a B-29A modified to accept R-4360 engines instead of R-3350s. It is simply wrong to say that the C-97 (B367) and B377 were derived from the B-29. Mark Lincoln (talk) 21:13, 26 October 2015 (UTC)


 * "The XC-97 and YC-97s were based on the B-29." That's all that needs to be said, as these are also C-97s. I've no problem including both in the Developed from field, as both are true. - BilCat (talk) 21:20, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I'd say "developed from" the B-29, since "based on" implies fewer changes. I'd also include mention of the XB-44 & B-50 as the intermediate steps to the C-97.  TREKphiler   any time you're ready, Uhura  21:36, 26 October 2015 (UTC)


 * I've no problem mentioning the XB-44 in the main text. The development section certainly could use some fleshing out. - BilCat (talk) 21:58, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I was going to add the XB-44, but the link goes to B-50, so it seemed a bit silly. Add it if you like it. :)  TREKphiler   any time you're ready, Uhura  22:09, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Article update
I noticed the following at the top of the article: I decided to work on an update. As a first step, I did some research on the topic, and found some good, relevant external links. As the External links section was empty, I added them to this section. As I update the article, I'll move those used references within the article, so the net list of external links will be a bit shorter than it is right now. --4wajzkd02 (talk) 00:17, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * ☑ Done --4wajzkd02 (talk) 16:27, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Changed cruise speed discrepancy
The previous cruise speed figures of "212 knots (300 mph, 393 km/h)" do not match up across units. From my research, the 300mph figure is accurate, so the values for other units were changed so they corresponded: 260 knots (300 mph, 482 km/h) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.158.1.166 (talk) 21:05, 8 April 2010 (UTC)