Jump to content

Talk:Rockwell B-1 Lancer

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:B-1 Lancer)
Good articleRockwell B-1 Lancer 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
DateProcessResult
August 17, 2010Good article nomineeListed

Missing combat loss

[edit]

According to this Wikipedia page - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_combat_losses_of_United_States_military_aircraft_since_the_Vietnam_War

a B1 was shot down in Afghanistan.

This should be added here. 109.144.29.220 (talk) 02:05, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia cannot cite itself, so we need a reliable published source for the claim. There is a cited source in that article for the claim, but it's behind a paywall. Since I can't verify the claim, I won't add it. It does seem odd that an event that supposedly happened over 20 years ago is already the article, and I certainly don't remember hearing about it in 2001. BilCat (talk) 03:06, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
According to https://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/systems/b-1b-loss.htm there were two losses near Afghanistan, but neither were due to combat. Mysticdan (talk) 13:56, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Overkill F-111

[edit]

Seperating from the standard notion of flying fast and high, the F-14 on steroids instead flies low and very fast. the small murican' Tu-160 has a top speed around mach 1.8 or, one bajillion miles per century. the actually useful murican' MiG-23 is one of the 3 American strategic bombers. the oversized Tu-22m is far more useful and overall better than the Tu-22m.

I will delete this if required Taffy boeing b 17 (talk) 16:57, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Missing incident May 2006

[edit]

https://www.zianet.com/tedmorris/dg/bombers4.html

May 8 2006 B1-B landed gear up at Diego Garcia. Conclusion of investigation was that the crew never lowered the gear and took numerous steps to silence the alarms. 49.224.13.227 (talk) 05:20, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's essentially a person's web site and not a reliable source, see WP:RELIABLE. -Fnlayson (talk) 02:36, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]