Since the days of President Eisenhower, the B-52 Stratofortress has been a continuing testament to American airpower—a bomber longer-lived than generations, that has flown into nearly every major war since Vietnam, and become legendary for its unreliability and durability. And today, the Air Force is attempting to keep this legend aloft deep into its second century, thanks to a modernization program at once ambitious and bitterly divisive.
Central to this revamp for the B-52J are two major programs: the Radar Modernization Program (RMP) and the Commercial Engine Replacement Program (CERP). The concept is to replace the old 1960s-era TF33 engines with Rolls-Royce F130 turbofans, which are promised to be more efficient on fuel, have reduced maintenance needs, and be more reliable. At the same time, the aging radar system is receiving a new advanced active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar—based on technology developed for the Navy Super Hornet and the F-15—and new avionics, displays, communications equipment, and support for future weapons, including hypersonic rounds.
The upgrades are designed to keep the B-52J a pillar of US airpower well into the future. Carrying as many as 35 tons of bombs and missiles, the bomber is still a mighty strike instrument. Coupled with new engines and electronics, it will be capable of firing standoff cruise missiles, precision-guided bombs, and even command drones—all beyond enemy defenses. But it is difficult to upgrade a Cold War-era plane. The B-52J program has already slipped three years and is now expected to be fully operational by 2033.
The Government Accountability Office has highlighted the issue: putting today’s advanced engines and radars into a design that was created when black-and-white TV sets were cutting-edge is far harder than anticipated. Small things—such as maintenance panels and structural adjustments—have contributed to slippages, and budget gaps have added more challenges.
The radar upgrade, in particular, has been costly. The price tag grew by 17% above initial estimates, inviting a Nunn-McCurdy examination and congressional questioning. Although the new system holds the potential for greatly enhanced targeting and reliability, its $2.6 billion price tag has been controversial. Concurrency—concurrent development and deployment—also brings worries. Pentagon officials caution that deploying the fleet prior to completion of testing may require expensive retrofits in the event problems are found down the road.
These fears have fueled an argument on a greater scale. Supporters of the B-52J argue it is less time-consuming and far less expensive to upgrade existing bombers compared to designing an entirely new aircraft. They point out the B-52’s rugged airframe and modularity, arguing that decades of service render it an accessible and versatile asset.
Opponents argue that in spite of its updates, the B-52 remains an airplane from the Cold War era, and it is more vulnerable to emerging defenses. They suggest the funds could be spent on ramping up production of the B-21 Raider, the Air Force’s next-generation stealth bomber already in flight testing.
The current plan envisions a two-fleet bomber: 76 B-52Js for standoff and, at least, 100 B-21s for deep-penetration stealth bombing. With B-52J upgrades lagging, officials have gone so far as to suggest increasing B-21 production to 145 aircraft, depending on the course of modernization.
In spite of this, the B-52J is being prepared for high-risk missions. It is set to be at the center of Bomber Task Force operations, launching precision and hypersonic missiles beyond enemy territory and even serving as a mothership for drones. Operational readiness is a concern. Less than 54% of B-52s are mission-ready at any given time, and maintainers are having a difficult time procuring antiquated parts.
Most sorties are flown with non-mission-critical systems reduced or unavailable, and structural fatigue is a continuous concern—predicting the problems that came with the C-5 Galaxy after its engine modernizations.
The B-52’s dual-capable mission also has strategic costs. Standoff missions can be misconstrued as nuclear signaling during crises, a nd therefore, heighten tensions in unstable regions. Ultimately, whether the B-52J proves a wise investment or a cautionary tale will depend on the Air Force’s ability to manage integration, keep costs in check, and make the plane compatible with the demands of 21st-century warfare. In the interim, the “BUFF”—Big Ugly Fat Fellow, as fondly referred to—is still aloft, carrying with it both the weight of history as well as the high expectations of the 21st century.