So, something I've wondered for a while is why do we operate the B52 instead of the B1 only? From what I understand the B1 is faster, has a greater payload, and costs about 9000 dollars less per hour to fly. The only advantage I think the B52 has is range (7500 vs 8800), which can be a considerable issue for certain missions where aerial refueling can be difficult (or avoided). And with the B52, it is almost 30 years younger than the B1.

I have heard maintenance is easier on the B52 though. Not sure if true.

Anyone have insights?

Some thoughts:

- 45 Bones vs.76 Buffs
- Ease of MX
- Range
- Saving the Bones for a tougher penetration type mission in a peer, near-peer war

Endless missions over Iraq wore the B-1 out, particularly its swing wing pivot mechanism. We retired another seventeen recently because they were uneconomically repairable. The B-1 was designed to fly 8,000 to 10,000 hours, or about 30 years in normal service, depending on the rate of usage, but the fleet is well over 32 years old and has actually flown over 12,000 hours, on average.

BONE

Although even older than the B-1, the remaining B-52Hs sat nuclear alert for much of the first half of their lives and so still have just under half their design lives remaining. The engine and radar replacement programs will resolve the largest individual maintenance and fuel contributors to its cost per flying hour.

BUFF