FlagshipAZ
Topic Author
Posts: 3192
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2001 12:40 am

Bombers Of The Strategic Air Command

Tue Jan 28, 2003 2:42 pm

Hi folks...
Just curious as to when the Strategic Air Command of the USAF was formed, and which heavy bombers have served over the years since it creation. I think we can honestly say the B-29 was the first bomber to serve since it was the aircraft to dropped the first & only nuclear bombs. So if we could make a list here, we have...

B-29 Superfortress
B-36 Peacemaker
B-47 Stratojet
B-50 ???
B-52 Stratofortress
B-58 Hustler

If I've left out any significant bombers, please feel free to add to the list. All opinions & replies appreciated. Regards.
"Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy." --Ben Franklin
 
Lt-AWACS
Posts: 2120
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2002 2:40 am

RE: Bombers Of The Strategic Air Command

Tue Jan 28, 2003 3:07 pm

Technically SAC owned the B-1 as well up to the ACC merge in 91-92 AF Reorg.

I think the B-50 would be there also?
Where are my old heads....  Wink/being sarcastic with the answers



Ciao, and Hook 'em Horns,
Lt-AWACS, Yankee Air Pirate
Io voglio fica ogni giorni da mia bella moglie!
 
skymaster
Posts: 227
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2001 4:59 am

RE: Bombers Of The Strategic Air Command

Tue Jan 28, 2003 4:31 pm

Yes, the B-50 was operational with the 43rd BW, Davis-Monthan AFB from February 22 1948 and was phased out in 1954.
Another lesser known SAC bomber was the FB-111A, which was operational in September 1971 with the 509th BW, Pease AFB, N.H. and the 380th BW, Plattsburgh AFB, N.Y.
 
2912n
Posts: 1978
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2001 2:12 pm

RE: Bombers Of The Strategic Air Command

Wed Jan 29, 2003 2:05 am

How about a breakdown of the fighter a/c that were assigned to SAC as opposed to those in TAC? Were all the interceptor forces SAC? IF so I would assume the F-102/106, F-104? and what else?
 
TomH
Posts: 950
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 4:13 am

RE: Bombers Of The Strategic Air Command

Wed Jan 29, 2003 2:05 am

Flagship,

SAC was formed in March, 1946.

You have asked for heavy bombers, which would rule out the B-36, (Very heavy bomber) B-47 and B-58 (medium bombers) and I think SAC stretched the definition a bit and included the FB-111A in the medium bomber category. When the B-36 entered service, I believe the B-29s were classified downward as medium bombers.

How would SAC have classified the B-70 Valkyrie if it had entered service? Heavy and HOT! The YB-60 would have been a heavy, I suppose. Digressing a bit, but SAC operated many VB-25s. I remember seeing them all shined up, curtains in the waist gunner windows and general's stars on them.

 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Bombers Of The Strategic Air Command

Wed Jan 29, 2003 4:49 am

The B-50 was the Tornado.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
Spacepope
Posts: 3140
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 1999 11:10 am

RE: Bombers Of The Strategic Air Command

Wed Jan 29, 2003 5:47 am

Are you sure? I thought the North American B/RB-45 was the Tornado.

T.J.
The last of the famous international playboys
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Bombers Of The Strategic Air Command

Wed Jan 29, 2003 5:49 am

Ahhh. crap!!!!


I guess I shouldn't have had those two beers before typing that in...my bad.

While on the subject.

Did SAC ever end up with the B-45?
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
Spacepope
Posts: 3140
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 1999 11:10 am

RE: Bombers Of The Strategic Air Command

Wed Jan 29, 2003 10:24 am

All the resources that I came up with show that the B-50 was still called the Superfortress, even though only 25% of the parts were interchangable between it and the B-29. Just in case you were wondering.

T.J.
The last of the famous international playboys
 
IMissPiedmont
Posts: 6200
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 12:58 pm

RE: Bombers Of The Strategic Air Command

Wed Jan 29, 2003 1:31 pm

I might just suggest a book somewhat along the line of the topic. It is titled "Point of no return". Sorry but I do not remember the author and am just not inclined to search through all my books just now, (I really need to update my database), it deals indirectly with the formation of SAC.
The day you stop learning is the day you should die.
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Bombers Of The Strategic Air Command

Wed Jan 29, 2003 5:26 pm

Your right spacepope.


I just have to lay off the Mexican beer.


BTW: I belive the B-50 was originallly suposed to be called either the B-29C or the B-29D.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
TomH
Posts: 950
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 4:13 am

2912n

Wed Jan 29, 2003 9:30 pm

None of the fighters you listed served with SAC, as they were all interceptors assigned to ADC.

SAC spent about 10 years looking for an escort fighter. The F-82 Twin Mustang was perhaps the best of their prop-driven fighters, though they had many F-51D/H Mustangs. The straight and swept wing versions of the F-84 served with SAC. Finally, with the advent of the McDonnel F-101A, they had a fighter with the legs necessary for the escort job. But, just as they were about to equip with the type, the SAC fighter program ended. I believe it was felt that ECM, decoys, and the Hound Dog missile would suppress enemy interception better than the fighters.
 
TomH
Posts: 950
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 4:13 am

RE: Bombers Of The Strategic Air Command

Thu Jan 30, 2003 9:59 am

If you are interested in SAC fighters, you may find the following page of interest. I just posted it on my site. Enjoy.

http://www.vermontel.net/~tomh/82FG.html
 
flight152
Posts: 3211
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2000 8:04 am

RE: Bombers Of The Strategic Air Command

Thu Jan 30, 2003 12:42 pm

You can't forget the bomber which held SAC toughter during the 1950's before the B-52 and B-47 was around.

Convair B-36
 
2912n
Posts: 1978
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2001 2:12 pm

RE: Bombers Of The Strategic Air Command

Thu Jan 30, 2003 1:06 pm

Tom--Thanks for that link/page!!! Great photos of post war Mustangs!!!

I assume that ADC was its own command then? Totally seperate from SAC/TAC? Was it on a equal footing with them?

Tony
 
FlagshipAZ
Topic Author
Posts: 3192
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2001 12:40 am

RE: Bombers Of The Strategic Air Command

Thu Jan 30, 2003 4:02 pm

Hi folks...
Thanks for all the replys. I should clarify that I'm looking for any & all bombers that served with SAC since 1946, not just 'heavy bombers' as I quoted before. I just assumed that only 'heavy bombers' would served with SAC. Again, many thanks.  Wink/being sarcastic Regards.
"Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy." --Ben Franklin
 
TomH
Posts: 950
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 4:13 am

2912n

Thu Jan 30, 2003 11:12 pm

Yes, ADC (Air Defence Command) was on the org chart at the same level as SAC/TAC. I believe if we looked at ADC manpower/aircraft figures, we would see that it peaked in the late 1950s, and declined until some point in the 1980s when the last active duty interceptor squadron inactivated. At that point, 100% of the interceptor forces were ANG.

I should point out that an earlier statement of mine needs clarifying. The F-104A served with ADC, while the F-104C served with TAC.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: dlednicer and 11 guests