Talk:Boeing C-135 Stratolifter

message: I'm proposing the merger of Speckled Trout into this article, since there's information overlap already, and little evidence of the need for a seperate article. Once the program receives a KC-135R, info on this can also be added to the KC-135 article. Akradecki 01:19, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger

message: Akradecki, good work on revamping the variants of the C/KC-135. When I fisrt saw that you took out the KC-135 lead pic, I was prepared to not like it. I put chose that pic myself when I added the Infobox to the article about 6 weeks ago as the article had no pics at that tiem, and I felt it was a awesome view. I saw that the article was set up as a "gateway" to other -135 models (I copied that format when I set up the C-137 page - actually, I copied the whole page!), and felt that including it would go along with that. Then I saw the pic you replaced it with! Wow! So anyway, I have no problem with the pic that's there now, especially if we meger the Trout article in. - BillCJ 06:04, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! In a way, that pic is a tribute to the airmen who most likely worked through the night before getting that bird polished to such a high shine for the show. I had tried to take it earlier, but there were just too many people around, so my son and I walked all the way back down the flightline after the show was over just to get it with no one standing in front. Fortunately, she's going to be preserved at the EDW flight test museum. Akradecki 06:14, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: C-135 revamp

message: Are all these variants articles really needed? 
*Boeing NC-135
*WC-135 Constant Phoenix
*OC-135B Open Skies
Just looks like some could be combined or listed here.  Thoughts?  -Fnlayson (talk) 03:58, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I did some work a few months ago, adding coverage of the NKC-135s from other articles, so I think that one is OK. The OC-135s are modified WC-135s, so it's possible they could be covered on the same page, although I wouldn't know what to call it! They both need alot of text-work as it is, but I think they can stand alone too. But I'd support a good plan to merge them somewhere or together, provided I wasn't doing the merging! It wuld be a doozy! :) - BillCJ (talk) 04:20, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Variant articles 

message: The variants section of this article appears very unfinished... is there anyone who is expert enough to fill this out? -SidewinderX (talk) 15:28, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Variants

message: Number built 803 ? are we talking about the cargo model here ? --Jor70 (talk) 02:14, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: infobox

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Boeing C-135 Stratolifter. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120309180216/http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123016232 to http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123016232
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:28, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: "About three dozen KC-135 Stratotankers have crashed." This sentence seem unworthy as it tells the reader nothing, unless suggesting there is a flaw with the aircraft such as that on the 707 or Comet.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.151.35.181 (talk) 07:51, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accidents and Incidents 

message: (Cross-posted to Talk:Boeing KC-135 Stratotanker)
I've come across a source that cites an FAA aircraft as an (or the only?) example of a civil 717.  There is a photo of the nose and open cargo door of a KC-135/717 with an FAA logo, at LAX in 1960.  The caption reads,
The FAA displayed a very rare type, in the form of a civil Boeing 717-148. The 717 was the equivalent of the military KC-135, and its large forward cargo door is seen open here. The aircraft had only been delivered to the FAA a month earlier, originally bearing a USAF serial number.
So I guess it was built as a military plane, just not originally delivered as such. A second caption says,
N98 was a civil USAF Boeing 717-148, KC-135 (registered 59-1481), delivered to the FAA on May 20, 1960.
Source: Archer, Robert D. Airliners at LAX – Los Angeles International Airport 1956–1976. Miami: World Transport Press. Page 58. (ISBN 0962673064)
There is some more information on that N98 registration number here but the details (e.g. dates) do not correspond with the book I've quoted. I wonder if the plane might've been built as a C-135 (figuring the FAA, and later NASA, might've had more use for that than a KC-135) but as the photo only shows the forward section, I can't tell whether it has the tail boom or not. -- Gyrofrog  (talk) 19:08, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Civil 717 

message: Rather than start a bunch of back-and-forth editing, I'd suggest that the C-135F information shouldn't be included in this article. While it is used as a multi-mission transport, so is the KC-135, and its fundamental mission is closer to the tanker than the remaining variants here. Though France chose not to add the 'K' prefix to its aircraft, that doesn't really make them variants of the basic transport version covered in this article. Etingram (talk) 22:46, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  C-135F inclusion