The fact that the DOGE Pentagon budget review has yet to fully take place and announce results has generated a massive flurry of speculation about the potential scope and impact of budget cuts upon the US military.
The “unknown” elements of this likely introduce a measure of concern, trepidation, and even panic about the kinds of systems that will be cut or reduced.
Will the F-35 be curtailed? Will the NGAD be cut? What about the massively upgraded B-52J?
It seems that examining the evidence and actions taken during President Trump’s first term would lead one to surmise that the military will likely be massively strengthened.
Are making large budget cuts and expanding and strengthening the military incompatible?
Perhaps not. There are likely many inefficiencies to identify and methods of reducing spending that do not compromise the Pentagon’s significant and crucial modernization efforts.
However, as former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld famously said, there are “unknown unknowns” and “known unknowns.”
The upcoming Pentagon budget cuts would seem to fall within the realm of “known unknowns.”
B-52J: Will DOGE End This Program?
Looking at the US military’s capabilities and the fast-changing threat environment, it would make no sense to cut the upgraded B-52, now known as the B-52J bomber.
If such an action unexpectedly comes to fruition, it would arguably be hazardous for the US military.
The first and most critical element of this is quite simple because the US military intensely needs a B-52-like capability, and it would make little to no sense to design and build a new large bomber.
An entirely new effort to engineer, prototype, select, and build a sizeable air-attack platform would not only be extremely expensive but simply take too long.
The “current” threat environment needs the US Air Force to operate with a credible, highly-capable B-52 platform.
Why?
There are likely far too many reasons why cutting or divesting the B-52 would be highly ill-advised.
Years ago, a senior US Air Force weapons developer told me that airframes can still be highly “viable” after decades of service.
This is particularly true when airframes are reinforced and given maintenance and structural support over years.
Although B-52s have been airborne since before the Vietnam era, today’s B-52 is almost an entirely different aircraft than it was years ago.
The aircraft has a new, much more capable engine and has received new electronics, weapons, communications technology, and sensing and mission systems.
The B-52 Bomber Keeps Innovating
One such innovation is a communications system called CONECT, which enables crews to receive new intelligence information and targeting detail while “in flight.”
The B-52s weapons-carrying capacity has also been wholly redefined as the service has expanded its internal weapons bay to cover much more ordnance and newer, more modern bombs as well.
This Bomber Can’t Be Cut by DOGE
There is a great need for a larger, non-stealthy aircraft such as the B-52, as it is crucial for drone controls and weapons delivery in areas where the US has established air superiority and nuclear deterrence.
New concepts of operation in recent years are emerging due to the rapid arrival of air-launched drone technology. A B-52 could launch groups of recoverable drones or even drone swarms from safer stand-off distances to test and destroy enemy air defenses, blanket an area with surveillance, or even conduct precision-strikes when directed by a human.
Nuclear Deterrence and B-52J
The B-52 also is, and has been, a critical part of the Pentagon’s air leg of the nuclear triad, as it can drop atomic bombs and also fire the well-known nuclear-capable Air Launched Cruise Missile (ALCM).
Moving into future years, the B-52 will fire the emerging Long Range Stand-Off weapon, a nuclear-capable cruise missile designed to hold enemies at risk from well beyond the reach or enemy air defenses. The ability to hold targets at risk of nuclear retaliation from the air, without needing to fly close to enemy ground fire and radar, strengthens the air-leg of the nuclear triad in place to prevent nuclear war.
Lasers for B-52?
For many years, the Air Force Research Laboratory has been developing exportable sources of electrical power sufficient to support laser weapons, aiming to arming fighter jets with lasers.
As part of this developmental effort, the AFRL has been conducting ground tests and is beginning to configure larger frame aircraft with an ability to fire lasers. Larger aircraft are more likely to accommodate the hardware needed to power up lasers.
In coming years, laser-generating mobile power sources will likely be “miniaturized” to travel on and fire from fighter jets. That could mean, someday, a B-52 armed with laser weapons.
About the Author: Kris Osborn
Kris Osborn is the Military Technology Editor of 19FortyFive and President of Warrior Maven – Center for Military Modernization. Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a highly qualified expert in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army—Acquisition, Logistics & Technology. Osborn has also worked as an anchor and on-air military specialist at national TV networks. He has appeared as a guest military expert on Fox News, MSNBC, The Military Channel, and The History Channel. He also has a Masters Degree in Comparative Literature from Columbia University.
BRIAN. S
March 3, 2025 at 5:02 pm
Those aircraft bring memories of the airshow when I was growing up..
Daniel Joseph Hoy
March 4, 2025 at 1:36 pm
Doge is cutting military waste not military spending what is this false ad? Trump will increase military spending guaranteed the problem with the plane is the manufacturing is too slow at producing them of which America’s enemies will out produce us
David
March 4, 2025 at 6:02 pm
All four B 52s I saw at Fairford last week were built in 1960
Charles B. Good
March 5, 2025 at 12:48 pm
The U.S. navy has long since sent to the scrap yard all of the aircraft carriers that were built when the B-52H models were built and have in fact scrapped every aircraft carrier prior to the Nimitz class carriers and will very soon begin scrapping the Nimitz class ships. Why? Because the Navy accepts that ships wear out and it becomes cheaper to built new ships then continue to try to upgrade 60 plus year old ships. No one loves the BUFFs more then I do, but several years ago I came to the conclusion that their radar signature made them unsurvivable in even a medium hostile threat environment, plus the fuel cost and maintenance cost of eight engines is unsustainable. Put the 600 Billion dollars that the J model will cost into buying more B-21 stealth bombers.
Victor J Marshall
March 6, 2025 at 11:18 am
There are a couple flaws in your logic.
1. The Essex class carriers in the fleet when B-52s entered service were not big enough to handle F-14s, so they were retired.
2. With age, carriers become more expensive to operate, and overhauls become cost prohibitive.
3. The main reason the non-nuclear super carriers were retired was that they weren’t nuclear and thus had more operational constraints and limitations.
4. B-52s never relied on stealth, so lacking stealth is not an issue.
5. The economics of the B-52 are compelling: it can loiter high over the battlefield until ground forces call for fire support, at which time a JDAM can be quickly delivered.
6. The B-52 only operates in low risk environments. In such an environment, paying for a Spirit or Bone is much less cost effective.