‘New’ B-52J Bomber Afflicted with Delays and Extra Costs for Its Engine and Radar Modernization Plan: This is not what the U.S. Air Force wanted.
I am talking about the future B-52J and its annoying schedule slips and cost overruns. The historic bomber’s upgrade will not be ready until 2033, three years later than the Air Force planned.
The radar update is not going well, and the engine replacement plan has encountered difficulties, too. These problems have a government watchdog agency concerned that the B-52J has become a money pit.
Let’s look closer to see if all the trouble is worth it.
Government Watchdog Has Its Set on the B-52 Program
For the last 22 years, the U.S. Government Accountability Office has reviewed military acquisition programs annually with a fine-tooth comb. The agency looks for expensive systems that do not live up to their promise and new military hardware that is not worth the cost and effort. The B-52J has appeared on the GAO’s radar as a program causing headaches.
Expensive Engine Replacements Are Not Happening Fast Enough
The first problem area identified is the B-52J’s Commercial Engine Replacement Program. It consists of eight Pratt & Whitney TF33 engines on each of its B-52Hs traded in one for one with new Rolls-Royce F130s.
This effort will “replace associated subsystems such as engine struts, the electrical power generation system, and cockpit displays for the B-52H fleet.”
Unfortunately, this program has shown up on the GAO naughty list. Not only is it behind schedule, but there are also no formal cost or schedule estimates as of FY24, and there were none for FY23 either. It is not considered a major defense acquisition program.
The engine replacement program is plainly in trouble, according to the GAO. The watchdog explained that “the proposal cost exceeded the program’s available funding, and that they [program officials] asked Boeing to slow its level of work to align with available funding. They also noted that an associated materials contract could not be awarded, causing additional delays.”
B-52J Radar Swap Is Facing Issues
Next on the problem report is the radar modernization program. The Air Force wants to trade the old mechanically-scanned AN/APQ-166 radars in each of its 76 B-52Hs for new active electronically-scanned array (AESA) versions. This is going to cost a whopping $34 million each.
But worse than the high cost is the schedule slip. In FY21, it was estimated that the radar swaps would take 63 months. By FY23 that estimated schedule grew to 73 months. That is a schedule slip of 16 percent longer in duration for the upgrade.
This delay should not be happening. The GAO pointed out that the new radar is based on off-the-shelf parts, and it has no critical technologies. The radar prototype will not be ready until 2025 and then the rest of the installation delays and costs are unknown.
Are the Upgrades Worth the Time and Cost?
These two upgrade programs are not mission critical in my mind. Yes, it would be nice to have new engines and radars. But is this worth the cost and extra time to install, especially if they are not ready for another nine years? The B-52 has enjoyed a sterling combat record and is a key part of the Air Force fleet and the U.S. nuclear triad. Unfortunately, it is too late to turn back now. All that money and time wasted has been baked into the cake.
Just Upgrade Half the B-52 Fleet as a Compromise to Save Time and Money
Now, I could be wrong, and the Air Force is right. Let’s take another look and assume the new engines and radars are critical and that the schedule slips and cost overruns are normal obstacles that major air platforms must endure. Then perhaps the upgrades are worth it, but the GAO thinks these programs are problem children that the Air Force should fix as soon as possible. Congress could also scrap the engine and radar replacement efforts, and perhaps the entire fleet will not be upgraded, and only half the airplanes would get the upgrades.
That may be a way to cut the cost and keep the program on schedule and under budget. My solution would be to compromise and designate only half the B-52Hs to become B-52Js. There would still be ample time to upgrade the other B-52Hs later when the replacement programs have a better handle on their cost and schedule estimates.
About the Author: Dr. Brent M. Eastwood
Brent M. Eastwood, PhD, is the author of Don’t Turn Your Back On the World: a Conservative Foreign Policy and Humans, Machines, and Data: Future Trends in Warfare, plus two other books. Brent was the founder and CEO of a tech firm that predicted world events using artificial intelligence. He served as a legislative fellow for U.S. Senator Tim Scott and advised the senator on defense and foreign policy issues. He has taught at American University, George Washington University, and George Mason University. Brent is a former U.S. Army Infantry officer. He can be followed on X @BMEastwood.
Sferrin
August 21, 2024 at 7:55 am
This is just stupid. All they’re doing is sticking existing components on the thing. “Radar prototype”? It’s an APG-79 from the Super Hornet. What need for a “prototype” when it’s already in service? God help them if they’d had to create new. Is Boeing running this?
James Drouin
August 21, 2024 at 10:17 am
Because APG-79 isn’t a stand-alone installation, it has to be integrated into an existing electronics suite and perform with those.
Roy G
August 21, 2024 at 1:32 pm
The B52J is an advanced stable weapon system that can be modified for multiple types of missions. The expenses are minuscule for the Air Force bubget. This BUFF is the biggest can of Whoop Ass in the Air Force arsenal. Dr. Eastwood has no expertise on the B52 and is recommending that cost overruns should stop the modernization program. He is delusional at best and so are you. How about if I fly a B52 over your residence and see what you can’t do against my flying beast. Get out of academia and get onto the battlefield. Please continue the upgrades because we need them. Cut all the social welfare programs and you will have plenty of money.
Doyle
August 21, 2024 at 8:39 am
My solution is to fire the Air Force program managers but continue with the program. Your opinion of what is mission critical is irrelevant. Your do half now half later is also not very smart it’s not like this is done in bulk batches. Doing the math it’s about 8 per year, maybe use that as your goal.
James Drouin
August 21, 2024 at 10:20 am
Pretty short-sighted article, conflating various non-conflatable dates with each other.
Oh, and replacing the engines isn’t a “nice-to-have”, it’s a “critical-to-have”.
Jeffrey Smidt
August 21, 2024 at 4:56 pm
This is what passes for scholarly research these days?
EVERY complex program in recent decades has ‘caught the eye of watchdogs’. Every program currently in work is overdue and overcost. But then so is every cheese burger. Inflation is killing us, and then add the stupidity of the never ending shut down for Covid, and it is no wonder. Delaying a program drives up cost dramatically and designing by change orders even worse. Shrinking the program in half, might save you 20-30% at best.
Russ Fiore
August 21, 2024 at 6:43 pm
If a remember correctly the original B-52s cost a whopping 4 million dollars each.
Term Limits
August 22, 2024 at 1:03 am
Improving the B-52 DOG and retiring the MUCH superior B-1 is why the federal government should NEVER be entrusted with our taxpayer dollars!
The B-1’s performance EXCEEDS EVERY metric compared to the B-52.
It’s 1/100th the radar signature of the B-52, flies higher, faster, carries a greater bomb load, has modern engines and a modern electronic flight deck.
After the abuse it had flying top cover loitering in Afghanistan, its ONE problem is the longitudinal fuselage beams were over stressed. The USAF has repaired several of these found to have the problem and they cost a low of $10mm to a high of $30mm and it took only a matter of months to complete the repairs!
Last I read the B-52 mistake is estimated to cost more than $250MILLION each and is many years, in the 2030’s, to complete!!!