Talk:B-50 Superfortress
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In response to the suggestion that the XB-44 article stub be merged into the B-50 Superfortress article, I would weigh in on the question with the opinion that the XB-44 should be allowed to stand alone in the designation order. Other derivative types such as the YF-95 variant of the F-86 and the YF-97 variant of the F-94 have their own articles with appropriate links to the primary model. It follows that the XB-44 ought to stand alone, as well. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mark Sublette (talk • contribs) August 6, 2006 03:35:37 GMT.
- The articles clearly state that XB-44 was a designation for an aircraft later redesignated as the B-50. It's not even a different product specification. —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 04:16, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
Ahh - but the XB-44 was NOT redesignated the B-50 - that would actually be the B-29D variant... And I quote:
NEW DESIGNATION December 1945
The B-29D became the B-50 in December 1945. Officially, the aircraft's new designation was justified by the changes separating the B-29D from its predecessors. However, according to Peter M. Bowers, a well-known authority on Boeing aircraft, "the redesignation was an outright military ruse to win appropriations for the procurement of an aeroplane that by its designation appeared to be merely a later version of an existing model that was being canceled wholesale, with many existing examples being put into dead storage."
- Marcelle Size Knaack, "Post-World War II Bombers", Office of Air Force History, Washington, D.C., 1988, ISBN 0-912799-59-5, page 163.
The XB-44 was a singular modification unto itself. I think we should maintain the experimental model's own page, with links to the later designations...
Mark Sublette 04:17, 17 August 2006 (UTC)Mark SubletteMark Sublette 04:17, 17 August 2006 (UTC)