Talk:North American B-45 Tornado

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Military history (Rated C-Class)
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
C This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality assessment scale.
WikiProject Aviation / Aircraft (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the aircraft project.


Needs inline citations to complete the requirements. --Colputt 01:16, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

  • There are still several sections without inline refs. -Fnlayson 04:22, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Agree with above, more photos would be nice. Could the war sections be placed under an 'Operational history' header? Cheers. Nimbus227 (talk) 19:41, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
  • The word 'Backbreaker' appears three times, perhaps an explanation of this program could be added along with a design section explaining the aircraft technical details. I believe the B-45 was used as an airborne test bed for the J79 engine, I have a reference to it somewhere if you need it. Nimbus227 (talk) 14:00, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Could add an Operators section. Other than the 91st, what other wings or squadrons were assigned 45s and what base in Japan was the tdy deployment? And what squadrons in the UK were assigned 45s? ... with number of units assigned and assignment dates too. LanceBarber (talk) 01:23, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

UK assignment[edit]

  • RAF Sculthorpe with B-45A and RB-45 from 47th Bomb Group (Light) 86th Bomb Squadron. No number or dates. Recon missions of radar mapping of IP-to-target runs to Russia.
REF: Bishop, Chris, 2001, The Encyclopedia of 20th Century Air Warfare, "Cold War" Chapter, p.264, Barnes & Nobles, Inc., and Aerospace Publishing Ltd., ISBN 0-7607-2770-8.
Add the above to the new section. (Note: Pic had an RB-45C with a "Square I" or "Square 1" on it's tail.) LanceBarber (talk) 01:57, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
The USAF and RAF flew a number of reconnaissance overflights of the Soviet Union using RB-45s flying from Sculthorpe. After the US flights were banned by the President, the RAF carried them out using US RB-45s in temporary RAF markings. See here for these and other overflights: [1] and [2]. The H2S-type target mapping flights were carried out under the code name Operation Ju-Jitsu.
Clip from a recent TV programme about Ju-Jitsu and later British-piloted U-2 operations over Russia here: [3]


I doing a report on the B-45 Tornado and I can't find the specific date when the B-45 Tornado retired so it can make my report more appropriate. I went to Wikipedia and it just said 1959. Anyone out there have an answer? (talk) 21:38, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Our work is never over. The B-45 will not retire but will continue to appear at air shows with the Blue Angels to demonstrate America's commitment to bombing those who threaten to erase our history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:36, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

B-45C and in-flight refuelling[edit]

This article made the claim that:

"The B-45C was the first jet aircraft capable of aerial refueling."


(ref 2 in the article) states of the B-45C "The addition of the refueling probe made the Tornado the first multi-jet engined bomber in the world to be refueled in mid-air."

states that the first in-flight refuelling of a Gloster Meteor jet fighter took place on 24th April 1949.

Given that this Wikipedia article states: "The first B-45C was flown on May 3, 1949", clearly the B-45C was not the first jet aircraft capable of aerial refuelling - and the claim to that end at (reference 3) is mistaken.

I've amended the article in line with on-line reference sources, cited above. (talk) 18:10, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Who wrote this?[edit]

Well, that's a common comment for wiki as it seems, well, rather curiously written in general, but this article includes the following very interesting section: "in mid-1948 the Air Staff actually began to question the B-45's value. Soon afterwards, President Truman's budget restraints reduced Air Force expenditure and B-45 production was reduced to total of 142 airframes. Further budget cuts in the FY 1950 forced the Aircraft and Weapons Board to cancel 51 of the 190 aircraft on order. It was later replaced by the supersonic Convair B-58 Hustler." To start, "actually began"? This sounds like the writer is almost incredulus that the Air Staff would question buying an airplane that was rapidly being made obsolete by aviation progress. Then the reader is treated by the rather clarvoyant observation that the production was reduced to 142 aircraft before the decision was made to reduce the orders for 190 aircraft by 51. Finally, the real interesting observation is that the B-45 was replaced by the B-58 - really? The B-45 left SAC service some 7 or 8 years before the B-58 entered. Seems like SAC was waiting an awfully long time... — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:21, 8 July 2014 (UTC)


Please ponder the following:

96 aircraft (47-001 – 47-097)
B-45A-1 47-001 – 47-022 (21 aircraft)
B-45A-5 47-023 – 47-096 (73 Aircraft)
B-45A 47-097 static test airframe

If the first one of anything is "1" then "97" would be the 97th. I merely question the first line that states "96 aircraft (47-001 - 47-097)." If 47-097 isn't considered an "aircraft" because it was a "static test airframe," then I think including it in that first line is confusing. It is to me, anyway, because the numbers are sequential with no break or skip. 47-001 to 47-097 equals 97 built. Or am I missing something? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:07, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Okay, I'm back and logged in now. I'd just like to further state that if you add the totals given for the A-1 and A-5 variants, you get 94. I think that should be 22 for the A-1 and 74 for the A-5. At least that gets you to the 96 stated on the first line. It still leaves the question of 47-097 open, though. This is simple math here. Or, again, am I missing something?Jororo05 (talk) 23:26, 16 December 2014 (UTC)