In the golden October of 2022, Boeing proudly announced the successful completion of the comprehensive upgrade of the B52 bomber. After a rigorous performance evaluation by the U.S. military, this aerial monster that has endured vicissitudes is expected to remain on the front line until 2050. By then, the B52 will have a staggering 95 years of service. Even if the U.S. military intentionally removed it from the active duty list, it would take years to gradually replace it, which means that the B52 will be in service for 100 years is almost a foregone conclusion. In contrast, the B2 bomber, which has higher performance and stealth technology, has been mandated by Congress to be retired by 2032. So, today we will take a deep look at why the US military would rather abandon the technologically advanced B2 and keep the B52 that has accompanied them for more than half a century?
The development of the B52 bomber has been full of twists and turns, and even faced abandonment by the US military for a time. To trace the beginning of all this, we need to return our eyes to the war-torn June of 1945. At that time, the smoke of World War II had not yet dissipated, and Japan was still stubbornly resisting in the Pacific theater, vowing to fight the Allies to the last soldier. At that time, the aircraft relied on by the US military were already showing a state of exhaustion, and it was difficult to fully meet the harsh needs of the battlefield. Against this backdrop, the U.S. Air Supplies Command felt the need for change, began to seriously assess the urgent need for a new type of strategic bomber in the war, and began to plan a research and development program for a new generation of strategic bombers.
In the smoke of World War II, when the US military carried out strategic bombing missions against Germany and Japan, it mainly relied on old bombers such as B7B29. However, under the test of actual combat, these bombers exposed a series of problems: limited range, low flight sound, and excessive dependence on front-line airfields made them extremely easy targets for enemy anti-aircraft artillery and new surface-to-air missiles. The top level of the US military realized that in order to meet the needs of future strategic bombing, it was necessary to develop a strategic bomber with better performance.
On November 19, 1945, the U.S. Air Cargo Command clearly put forward various technical indicators for the new strategic bomber in response to this demand. They wanted the bomber to carry a crew of five, have a cruising altitude of up to 10,400 meters, cruise at a speed of 480 kilometers per hour, and have a combat radius of a staggering 8,000 kilometers.
On February 13, 1946, the U.S. Air Force issued an invitation to tender aircraft manufacturers based on these specifications. Boeing, United Aircraft and Glen Martin responded by submitting their designs. However, due to the limitations of the technical level at that time, the design plans of various companies did not fully meet the requirements of the US military. Under the urgent need for combat readiness, the US military had to make a compromise and chose Boeing's scheme from many designs.
Boeing's Type 462 helicopter then stood out and was selected by the U.S. military and awarded a $1.7 million contract to build a full-scale model for preliminary engineering and testing. This experimental aircraft was officially named XB52 by the military, marking the official beginning of the development process of the B52 bomber.
Although Boeing's design was initially chosen, Rear Admiral Earl Partridge was the first to speak out against it. He pointed out that the performance of the Type 462 bomber was not significantly improved compared to the previous generation of the B36, and its potential for improvement was relatively limited. Compared to the previously agreed development standards, the Type 462 bomber can almost be considered a substandard product. After listening carefully to Major General Partridge's opinions, the U.S. military began to re-examine the performance of this fighter. After a more in-depth discussion, it was discovered that the bomber may have serious performance deficiencies, and that its actual performance did not meet the previously agreed standard values. As a result, the military had to send a notice to Boeing asking them to put the project on hold for the time being.
Faced with severe criticism from the military, Boeing's chief designer Edward Wells was under pressure to completely overturn the original design and reimagine it from scratch. He was determined to explore the latest technological innovations in order to create a bomber with excellent performance. Among them, in-flight refueling and flying wing design have become his key considerations.
However, in the course of in-depth research, Wells noticed the stability and control problems encountered by Northrop's YB35 and YB49 flying-wing bombers. This made him realize that the flying wing design might not be the best choice. As a result, Boeing decided to return to traditional aircraft design, and in early 1947 completed the latest round of design.
This time they came up with a completely new 464 scheme. In terms of aerodynamic layout, Boeing boldly adopted a previously untried 20-degree swept wing design, while raising the vertical tail to optimize flight performance. In terms of airborne weapons, in addition to retaining a tail turret to provide basic defense capabilities, they decisively eliminated all self-defense weapons in order to reduce the weight of the aircraft and improve flight efficiency.
This new design is the result of the ingenuity and sweat of Boeing's designers, who are looking forward to winning the military's approval for the bomber to provide strong support for future strategic bombing missions.
At a time when the technical indicators seemed to have met the military's requirements, a huge crisis was quietly coming. As the Cold War intensified and tensions between the two blocs of the United States and the Soviet Union escalated, the shadow of nuclear war seemed to be looming over the world. Against this background, the US Air Force, in order to find an ideal way to drop nuclear weapons, set up a special heavy bombing committee to study solutions.
After in-depth discussion and analysis, the members of the Committee agreed that the speed and maximum sound of the aircraft carrying the nuclear bomb were of paramount importance when carrying out a nuclear bombing mission. They demanded that the newly developed strategic bomber must have higher performance standards, including a maximum range of at least 12,000 kilometers and a cruising speed of no less than 800 kilometers per hour. This requirement was undoubtedly a huge challenge for the bombers of that time.
At the same time, other ordinary strategic bombers will no longer be considered a priority by the US military due to their lack of performance. And the B52 bomber at that time, although it performed well in many aspects, could only reach 720 kilometers per hour in terms of speed, which was still a certain gap from the new requirements of the military. If it cannot be upgraded and improved in time, the B52 bomber is likely to face the fate of being abandoned by the US military.
Faced with this daunting challenge, Boeing and other agencies had to revisit the design of the B52 bomber and look for ways to improve key performance such as speed. They knew that only by allowing the B52 bomber to meet or exceed the military's requirements would it be able to ensure that it would continue to play an important role in future strategic bombing missions.