Eli5 why does the US still use a bomber from the 1950s when they have built two newer ones since then?
In: 7
B-52 just does it’s mission-set so well. There is no need to R&D a whole new heavy bomber fleet… wasted money, when we can just iterate and upgrade the internals/tech on the reliable workhorse.
We’ve made plenty other, much newer bombers. So many, actually. But just on the short list, we’ve since made the B-1, fast strategic bomber. We’ve made the B-2 Spirit stealth bomber. But both of those are for a different mission set entirely. They don’t do what the B-52 does, at the same scale. And the B-52 can’t fly as fast and is the opposite of stealthy.
Then you get into the plethora of fighter/bombers and strike craft and CAS….
The B-52 fits into the whole toolbox of aircraft. Why burn money needlessly functionally the same type of craft and oldschool Cold War era mission set? That money is DESPARATELY needed for the new NGAD, stealth drones to wingman the F-35, and hypersonics…
Once the B-52 mission set is obsolete, they’ll retire it, or more likely they’ll repurpose it. I could see them tossing a “rapid dragon” type system into the B-52 and making them drone or missile carriers for dozens or hundreds of assets.
Latest Answers