Why does the military keep aircraft that they have had since the 50s like the B-52? Why not replace them with?

Question

why dosen't the military get a newer aircraft to substitute, like a more new more efficent boeing 747 modified for the military?

The instruments in the flight deck aren't even LCD screen...they are those really old only green screens for radadr. Things in commercial aircraft these days are made with this equipment, why dosent the military get a new one?

but just because its not broken dosen't mean its not outdated and inefficent to run! It costs them more money than a newer more efficent aircraft would cost. Fuel is not something that we can burn spairingly at these times..and I would think the government would be the first to respond to these needs.

Okay but you can tell that a boeing 747 could carry an even larger payload by just looking at the size of it, and the size of those tiny engines! Rolls royce trents can burn much less fuel and be more efficent than those tiny engines on the B-52

The upgrades were only upgrades of ordinance. You can't upgrade the systems that an entire aircraft runs on.

And they may have saved your butts but that still is not a reason why anyone should keep around an old inefficent aircraft when there are cleaner more efficent ones available.

Stone K Just so you know, not all Boeing 747s are 40 years old. The original design its self is 40 years old, but since then it has been modified and upgraded over the years. The newest series of the 747 are the Boeing 747-400s They are still being produced, and the 747-8 is in the design process.

So, not all 747's are 40 years old, most of them are under 10 years old. Most major airlines have retired their 747-100s and 747-200s – the same ones that were made when the B-52 was made.

Answer 1

Today, 94 B-52H's are all that remain of 744 Stratofortresses built in the '50s and '60s. The B-1 and stealth B-2 are the strategic bombers of the future, well at least the B-2s.

You ask why it hasn't been replaced? The answer is its unique characteristics have allowed it to achieve different objectives, in different circumstances, against different adversaries. Through this adaptive process, the capabilities of the B-52 have been broadened to provide firepower across the spectrum of conflict. Even though technology has advanced tenfold since the advent of the B-52, it still remains the mainstay of the bomber force.

Answer 2

It would cost huge amounts of money to replace aircraft that are still perfectly suitable for the job.

the 747 is not designed for military rolls, i know it is just an example but that plane is not designed for the rigors of constant duty like the older aircraft are.

the 747 is a 40 year old aircraft, it is equally as inefficient as the b-52.

Just because the systems in the plane are not "modern" does not make the aircraft less efficient. the crews on board don't seem to have a general problem with the functions on board the aircraft.

My guess is there are models being upgraded as we speak, Obviously over the years things like the engines have been upgraded as well as the radar technology on board, so eventually modernization will happen for the controls.

Buying new planes to replace the old ones is too expensive. It would take literally billions of dollars for an unproven aircraft and as it is, most people do not want to pay for the military so pushing a new global bomber would be a hard sell.

The old aircraft are still more reliable than efficient than anything else being produced by America.

the planes have a long history of durability and reliability

and even newer aircraft like the Stealth bomber have not proved to be suitable replacements for the old war birds.

Newer does not always mean better, it sometimes just means a more flashy paint job.

Answer 3

At 2B$, (the average cost for the B-2 Spirit), it would be expensive to replace. Since there is very little to be concerned about in the way of Air Superiority these days, the B-52 is still a valid tool for the military. Besides the fact that it would require two B-2 or 3 B-1 bombers to carry the payload that a B-52 can carry, why do you need a new plane?

Answer 4

The B-52 is an aircraft with a superior record of service and can be unpdated to be as efficent as is required to deliver the payload anywhere on Earth. We have 50+ or more (I'm not even in touch with the actual dollar amounts any more but you can look them up) B-52s updated beyond the point where any other country can stop them flying against their defenses in service for the price of one modern stealth bomber.

Answer 5

Yep, the military's old rule like the guy before me: If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

Honestly, they don't need any more planes to deliver massive amounts of payload. They have F-117s, B-2s, the new F/A-22, and various other planes that can be used as bombers. This is the age of precision guided munitions. What's the point in throwing a bunch of rocks at a target a hundred feet away hoping to hit it, when you can get a BB gun with a scope? Its also more cost effective. A single JDAM from a B-2 is more economic, and reasonable than a hundred un-guided five-hundred pound bombs.

Unles of course, it's 'Nam again, and they're doing another Operation Rolling Thunder. (I believe that's what it was called.)

Answer 6

Maybe this is why;
Let me introduce you to an ole friend.
This is EN-770 Spooky
This plane was originally built in 1940. Because it was not sent to the scrap heap in 1945 when WW II ended, it was converted into the first of a completely new class of aircraft. The gunship has evolved from this what some would say was a modest beginning to one of the deadliest platforms the world has ever known.
Without Spooky it would never have happened.

"In the 1960s, The Douglas AC-47, a World War II Douglas C-47D conversion gunship, was nicknamed Puff the Magic Dragon, Puff or Spooky during the Vietnam War. The plane's row of three SUU-11A 7.62mm mini-guns fired 6,000 round per minute. These mini-guns protected American ground troops with an awesome display of fire power as it rained deadly shower of gunfire onto the enemy below."

http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0Je5mz9uBVGXDYBHSCjzbkF;_ylu=X3oDMTA4NDgyNWN0BHNlYwNwcm9m/SIG=128ctlg41/EXP=1175915133/**http%3A//aerostories.free.fr/appareils/spooky/img3.jpg


http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0Je5qgWuBVGHE8AcgSjzbkF;_ylu=X3oDMTA4NDgyNWN0BHNlYwNwcm9m/SIG=120ua5m5n/EXP=1175914902/**http%3A//www.douglasdc3.com/spooky/spooky3.jpg

The C-47 wasn't the only one, we also modified A-26es, T-28s, and even some old Navy Bearcats.

Answer 7

Yes, many updates have been made, not only to the ordinance, but to many of the systems on the aircraft. yes kid, it IS possible to upgrade the systems used by an aircraft. They work, they aren't as un-efficient as you seem to think, and they get the job done. Over the years, the military has looked at possible replacements, and testing and practice runs on prototypes have proven none measure up to the Good 'ol B-52's.

So why don't you do this, go to bed, since its getting late for you kiddo, and let the grown ups talk about the sophisticated military weapon systems that you obviously have no comprehension of.

Answer 8

The B52 is still in service because it works, it's cheaper to keep than replace, and the current technology allows the B52 to accomplish the missions it's assigned.

Probably four major factors are involved:

1. Precision guided weaponry that doesn't require the plane to be radically upgraded.

2. The US Military's ability to gain and maintain Air Supremacy allows older and slower aircraft to safely operate in combat zones.

3. Stand off weapons allow the B52 to engage beyond a range it can easily be threatened.

4. US ability to handle enemy anti-aircraft radar networks reduces ground threats to the bomber.

Answer 9

Aircraft costs are enormous, regardless of the type. Only Ships come in with such a high price tag. The Armed services have to operate with the money given them by our civilian leadership. It is really that simple. As long as our current inventory has a use, we keep it in service through upgrades as best we can. Heck, the T-38 I got supersonic training in was over twenty years old when I flew it, and it is still in service!

Answer 10

Old Reliable!!! I served at KheSanh during the siege of 1968 and the 52's pounded the enemy around us for 77 days day and night. When it's 6000 against 35000 those 52's sure helped to save our butts.