B-1's leaving ACC

Freefalling said:
Weren't all tankers formerly under SAC or did SAC have dedicated Wings while the rest of the AF have their own?
Click to expand...
YES!
SAC had the initial tanker force, then gave TAC the KC-97's when the 135 came in.
KC-97's went Guard, and were eventually replaced by KC-135's.

This (and CSAF's comments) actually show breaking SAC up was another bad move by Tony the Tiger (I'm GREAT!)
 
DA SWO said:
YES!
SAC had the initial tanker force, then gave TAC the KC-97's when the 135 came in.
KC-97's went Guard, and were eventually replaced by KC-135's.

This (and CSAF's comments) actually show breaking SAC up was another bad move by Tony the Tiger (I'm GREAT!)
Click to expand...

The lunacy of it all. Madness.

"The Cold War's over, we need to change our organizations. SAC is no more, we'll reassign those assets into ACC and call the leftovers the Global Strike Command. Airlift will add tankers and become Air Mobility Command, and the remaining combat aircraft will form the Air Combat Command. Awesome idea!"

Fast forward a decade or so...and they are more or less back to SAC, TAC, and MAC only with different names?!?!?!

Madness.
 
Freefalling said:
The lunacy of it all. Madness.

"The Cold War's over, we need to change our organizations. SAC is no more, we'll reassign those assets into ACC and call the leftovers the Global Strike Command. Airlift will add tankers and become Air Mobility Command, and the remaining combat aircraft will form the Air Combat Command. Awesome idea!"

Fast forward a decade or so...and they are more or less back to SAC, TAC, and MAC only with different names?!?!?!

Madness.
Click to expand...
Actually SAC lost in the breakup.
Recce/Bombers/Missiles went to ACC and tankers went to AMC.
ACC really wasn't (isn't) interested in the nuke mission, so we had to create a 2, then 3, and now 4-star command to do nukes. I just wonder if the B-1 is going back into the nuclear role?
 
Back
Top