• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    210 days ago

    I think the missing piece here is that B-52 isn’t just a pretty good cargo hauler, it’s a pretty good cargo hauler that we don’t need to buy a whole new airframe to get. Think of it less as “we’re commissioning these B-52s” and more as “hey look we found a way to use all these B-52s we already had” only this just keeps working forever.

    • @someguy3
      link
      English
      110 days ago

      Well they upgraded all the engines at some point. I don’t know the cost breakdown between engines vs frame but I don’t think it’s good.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        110 days ago

        Gotta be cheaper than buying new planes which would also have new engines. Generally there needs to be a pretty substantial increase in capability before it’s worth retiring an existing platform, especially in a logistics role where you don’t get as much benefit from the bleeding edge because nobody’s supposed to be shooting at you in the first place.

        • @someguy3
          link
          English
          110 days ago

          You need new electronics for the new engines, new training for the new handling, etc etc. The cost difference to existing cargo planes that are already in service is becoming less and less. This could easily be a case of being penny wise and pound foolish.