The U.S. Air Force’s efforts to keep its Cold War-era B-52 bomber viable for 21st-century warfare have hit a financial turbulence. The Radar Modernization Program (RMP), a key component of transforming the B-52H into the more capable B-52J, has breached a critical cost threshold, sparking a Nunn-McCurdy notification and reigniting a broader debate about whether the aging Stratofortress is still worth the investment.
The RMP has now overrun its original cost projections by 17% — above the 15% overage that triggers congressional scrutiny under the Nunn-McCurdy Act. According to Air & Space Forces Magazine, a deviation report was filed in April, with formal notification to Congress expected imminently. The cost increase raises the total price tag from $2.3 billion to an estimated $2.6 billion.
The program, led by Raytheon through prime contractor Boeing, replaces the outdated AN/APQ-166 radar with a modern active electronically scanned array (AESA) system, designated the AN/APQ-188. The new radar borrows technology from radar systems used in the F-15 and F/A-18 fighter jets, offering vastly improved resolution, reliability, and target tracking capabilities.
The radar upgrade is intended to give the B-52J new tactical versatility. According to the U.S. Office of the Director, Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E), the AESA radar will provide high-resolution ground mapping, enhanced tracking of moving targets, and improved navigation reliability. These enhancements would allow the B-52 to conduct all-weather, day-and-night operations with greater precision.
The RMP is designed to complement other major upgrades under the B-52J transformation, including the Commercial Engine Replacement Program (CERP), new cockpit displays, upgraded communications, and new weapons integration systems. These combined improvements aim to extend the aircraft’s service life into the 2050s.
However, as the radar program stumbles financially, the question arises: Is the military pouring money into an aging platform that may not be survivable in tomorrow’s battlefields?
The causes of the RMP cost overrun are complex. Increased labor costs, extended timelines, integration challenges, and unforeseen technical difficulties have all played a role. One specific issue involved a fiber optic line that failed during testing, disrupting communication between essential processors and prompting a design overhaul.
While Pentagon officials emphasize that the program is still meeting its technical requirements, the cost escalation has forced a reevaluation of priorities. Air Force acquisition leaders insist that they remain committed to the upgrade, but they are working to refine requirements and control future expenses.
Low-rate production decisions affecting 28 aircraft are scheduled for 2026, with the first operational radar systems expected by 2027. Full deployment, however, will depend on how Congress responds to the Nunn-McCurdy breach.
Supporters of the B-52J point to its continuing strategic relevance. Kris Osborn, writing in 1945, describes the B-52J as an “arsenal plane,” capable of unleashing long-range standoff weapons, including cruise missiles and precision-guided bombs. It could also serve as a drone “mothership,” launching and controlling swarms of unmanned aircraft for reconnaissance or attack missions.
DOT&E documentation notes that the B-52J is expected to execute missions including strategic attack, close air support, air interdiction, suppression of enemy air defenses (SEAD), minelaying, and nuclear deterrence.
But detractors argue that no amount of electronics can overcome the limitations of a non-stealthy, slow-moving aircraft in the era of near-peer adversaries. Andrew Latham, also writing for 1945, claims that while the B-52 may operate safely at standoff distances today, future battlefields shaped by hypersonic weapons, advanced integrated air defense systems (IADS), and sophisticated electronic warfare could render the aircraft obsolete.
Latham also warns of diminishing returns. The Air Force already struggles to maintain its B-1 and B-2 bombers, both of which have lower mission-capable rates than the B-52. Every dollar spent modernizing the Stratofortress, he says, could be better spent accelerating the B-21 Raider program.
Mission-capable (MC) rates reveal the strain on the Air Force bomber fleet. In 2024, the B-52 maintained a 53.77% MC rate. That was better than the B-1 Lancer at 43.44% and slightly below the B-2 Spirit’s 55.04%, but still troubling for a force that could face high-tempo operations in multiple theaters.
The modernization path forward also faces additional obstacles. The CERP, which will replace the B-52’s eight aging TF33 engines with more efficient Rolls-Royce F130s, has been delayed, pushing the B-52J’s full initial operating capability (IOC) to 2033—three years later than originally anticipated.
Despite its vulnerabilities, the B-52 still plays a unique diplomatic role in U.S. military strategy. Bomber Task Force (BTF) missions regularly deploy B-52s to Europe and the Indo-Pacific to reassure allies and deter adversaries. These missions showcase American power and serve as a form of signaling short of outright escalation.
The bomber’s recallability—its ability to launch, signal resolve, and then stand down if tensions ease—makes it a flexible tool of coercive diplomacy.
However, that flexibility may come at a strategic price. A November 2024 RAND report co-authored by Dahlia Goldfeld warns that long-range bombers like the B-52 could inadvertently provoke nuclear escalation, particularly in a Taiwan conflict.
The report notes that dual-capable bombers carrying air-launched cruise missiles (ALCMs) could be misinterpreted by Chinese decision-makers as part of a decapitation strike. Historical patterns—such as the use of high-tempo bomber operations in the 2003 Iraq War—may reinforce these fears.
In combination with the use of deception tactics and limited early warning systems, these operations could trigger false alarms, leading to a catastrophic chain reaction.
The U.S. Air Force itself may be hedging its bets. As The War Zone reported in March 2025, the service recently issued a contracting notice seeking information about alternatives to the AN/APQ-166 radar. While the notice stated that there are no immediate plans to change course, it suggests the Air Force is keeping its options open.
Whether that means a potential pivot away from the RMP or merely exploring contingency plans remains unclear. But the timing of the notice—just before the Nunn-McCurdy breach—raises questions about internal confidence in the program.
In a world of constrained budgets and rising threats, every defense dollar is contested. The B-52J may offer a powerful platform for standoff missions, but its age, cost, and vulnerability spark debate about strategic priorities.
Proponents say the bomber remains a cost-effective force multiplier, particularly when equipped with modern sensors and weapons. Its unmatched payload, long range, and versatility make it uniquely valuable for both nuclear and conventional missions.
Skeptics argue that even with new radars and engines, the B-52 is a relic that cannot be justified in the face of advancing adversary technologies and the urgent need to field next-generation systems like the B-21.
As the RMP heads into congressional review and cost control measures tighten, the B-52 stands at a crossroads. Its future will not only depend on engineering milestones and budget charts but also on how it is perceived in a strategic landscape that grows more contested—and more dangerous—by the year.
