Although I spoke about a current workaround with altering the thrust value before, I have to revert this statement.
First, like said by some other guys too, the main value to change still remains the drag factor of that bird, so the altered thrust value is a more than dirty solution and therefor not recommended.

Second, if I look at the Wikipedia data, especially on the climb rates, I get the impression of a very, very powerful bird.
Rate of climb: 6,270 ft/min (31.85 m/s) achieved with way over two hundred metric tons represents some power on the throttles.

So the huge amount of "backthrottling" after takeoff seems normal to me (I'm a sim pilot only, so don't weight my assumptions as realistic though). But the huge acceleration after TO and with flaps retracting is a big too much "fun" in my eyes. Hard to catch the 250 knots mark under 10000 there, you just pass it way too fast.
Sure, you can try to correct that with pitch and even more throttle back but this isn't a Concorde with close to 20 degrees pitch after takeoff or so. It takes a while to rectract the flaps but you will be out of every safe operating speed (for flaps extended) within seconds.

Thrust/weight is mentioned at 0.31, so B-52 only gets outperformed by a 757-200 (which is known as a very good climber) or so while even an A320 struggles to keep the pace there. So again, no problem with the good climb rates here.


As for the drag component, this still looks like the big tuning value on this bird to me. We might get rid of that too fast acceleration and the FF might also rise to more realistic values.
I will give the fuel flow scalar from HvyEng a try, looks good and makes this 8 engine bird what it is, a fuel eater with large tanks.