A filler for the long-lived: a new radar for the B-52

8 875 40
A filler for the long-lived: a new radar for the B-52

So, in the US, a new program is underway that many are now saying is "critical to maintaining the bomber's relevance into the future." If the bomber, briskly cruising toward its centennial, has any future at all.

We're talking about the new AN/APQ-188 active electronically scanned array radar for the B-52, or more accurately, being installed on the B-52, as the first B-52 bomber equipped with such an active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar has arrived at Edwards Air Force Base for testing.



This is an important but much-overdue measure, one of many that will be achieved as the B-52H evolves into the significantly modernized B-52J. Thanks news On the flight that began in San Antonio, where the upgraded AN/APQ-188 radar system for Raytheon bombers was installed, we also get a good look at the radar, based on a fighter jet's radar, installed in the nose of a B-52. While the new radar certainly looks more modern than its predecessor, the mechanically scanned AN/APQ-166, its operational effectiveness may be questionable.


The legacy AN/APQ-166 radar and the new AN/APG-79 radar mounted under the BUFF fairing.

The flight of this modernized B-52 marks a significant milestone in our bomber modernization efforts. aviation"," Air Force Secretary Troy Meinck said in an Air Force press release. "The radar upgrade ensures the B-52 will remain a cornerstone of American airpower well into the future. We are committed to extending the service life of this vital platform so it can operate alongside next-generation fighters and bombers."


A modernized B-52 arrived at Edwards Air Force Base after flying in from Texas.

The minister is certainly exaggerating about the "cornerstone." A rotten old tree stump would be a fairer comparison. And the "new" radar—well, it's not really that new.

The "new" BUFF radar is based on the AN/APG-79, which equips most F/A-18E/F Super Hornets and all F/A-18G Growlers, as well as the nearly 100 F/A-18A/D Hornets still in service with the US Marine Corps. The AN/APG-82 for the F-15E Strike Eagle and F-15EX Eagle II is also based on AN/APG-79 technology, but has some design differences due to differences in the aircraft's designs. It is currently one of the Pentagon's most proven AESA systems, based on service life and production numbers.

So, let's be honest, the radar isn't exactly new: testing of the AN/APG-79 began in 2003, and it was accepted into service in 2007. Almost twenty years of service isn't that long, but for an electronic device, it's quite a long time, during which it could easily become obsolete. So, it's a tried and tested radar, nothing more.

This doesn't mean that adapting the radar to the B-52's needs went smoothly. The program went over budget and missed deadlines, forcing the Air Force to seek alternatives. The cost also rose so much that a comprehensive, statutory review of the program's core requirements and cost estimates was required. Flight testing of the first B-52 with the new radar was originally expected to begin in 2024.

It's known that one of the challenges encountered during the program was the physical placement of the new radar in the nose of the B-52. For such a massive contraption as the B-52, this is more than a little odd.

The Air Force continues to refine the system's radome design to address aircraft integration issues. Radar performance may change depending on the final radome design, according to the Pentagon's Office of the Director of Test and Evaluation's latest annual report, published earlier this year. The program office must fully characterize the final radome design to determine operational employment tactics.

Judging by the photographs published so far, the appearance of the B-52's nose has remained virtually unchanged since the installation of the AN/APQ-188. A relatively narrow, different-colored seam is visible between the nose and the cockpit.


A close-up of the nose of the first B-52 to receive the new AN/APQ-188 radar. The seam between the nose and the cockpit is visible.

It's worth noting that the AN/APG-79 antenna installed in the BUFF is angled downward. This is due to its unique location in the B-52, namely on the lower deck under the massive radome. Its upward viewing is limited by the bulkhead above it.

The new radar on the B-52 also features "two display processors and system sensors as flight computers to integrate the radar with B-52 systems, as well as two large 8x20-inch high-definition touchscreens in the navigation and radar stations to display radar imagery, control, and legacy displays, and two fighter-style hand controllers to operate the radar," according to a Boeing press release. "The system features an advanced cooling system that provides liquid cooling for the radar and heated bleed air for operation in very cold conditions."


Another photo of the first B-52 equipped with the new AN/APQ-188 radar arriving at Edwards Air Force Base.

Regardless of the challenges facing the US Air Force's AN/APQ-188 radar modernization program, a derivative of the AN/APG-79, the conversion process has begun and is moving forward. A new AESA radar is truly essential to maintaining the B-52's relevance, and, in America's view, for decades to come.

Simply put, equipping the B-52 with a modern multi-mode AESA system provides a significant boost in capabilities. This is understandable, but the question is how much more effective the new radar will be on an older aircraft.

Overall, AESA radars offer greater range, accuracy, and resistance to countermeasures, as well as the ability to provide better overall situational awareness than mechanically scanned radars. More sophisticated AESA radars offer additional capabilities, including electronic warfare and communications support.

As for the B-52, any new multi-mode AESA system would improve the bomber's target acquisition and identification capabilities, including when used in conjunction with the targeting pods currently available to bombers.

New radars for bombers will also be useful when it comes to targeting weapons to targets at long ranges. The radars can provide additional ground moving target indicator (GMTI) and synthetic aperture radar surveillance capabilities. Radar upgrades can help protect the B-52 from air-to-air threats, including by improving the detection of incoming enemy aircraft or missiles Long-range. The latter, however, is highly questionable, especially when it comes to the latest Russian or Chinese products.

In addition to their tactical advantages, AESAs are generally more reliable, particularly due to their lack of mechanical moving parts. Without the need to rapidly move the radar antenna in multiple directions while the aircraft is subjected to various G-forces, buffeted by turbulence, and during rough landings, the actual time the radar is available for use increases. The aforementioned secondary electronic warfare capabilities also cannot be underestimated. The new radar will undoubtedly become a key and highly powerful component of the B-52's upgraded electronic warfare system, which will be crucial to the aircraft's survival in future combat.

As mentioned, the AN/APQ-188's placement in the BUFF's nose affects its upward-looking capability. However, this is more suited to air-to-ground missions, given the B-52's missions.

By comparison, the AN/APG-79 mounted on the Super Hornet is pointed upward. This is due, at least in part, to the Super Hornet's stealth capabilities. The standard Hornet's antenna pod is positioned nearly vertically, as that platform has no stealth requirements whatsoever. Similarly, the B-52 is about as unstealthy as it gets, so the downward tilt is clearly not dictated by stealth requirements.


This image shows the AN/APG-79(V)4, a special configuration for the Legacy Hornet that can be installed in the bay of the older AN/APG-65/73.


AN/APG-79 installed on the US Navy Super Hornet

The new radar is just one aspect of a comprehensive B-52 modernization program that will result in the aircraft being designated the B-52J.

Even more important than the new radar is the replacement of the aging TF-33 low-bypass turbofan engines with Rolls-Royce F-130 turbofan engines.

The program is already well underway, but is behind schedule and over budget, with full operational capability not expected until 2033. While a fully operational B-52J won't fly anytime soon, the hope is that once completed, the 76-aircraft fleet will remain reliable and relevant until at least 2050, operating alongside the much more modern B-21 Raider.

This cheerful figure of "2050" is, to put it mildly, stupefying. We remember that the last B-52s were assembled in 1962. That means in 2050, these aircraft will be "only" 88 years old. And aircraft manufactured just two years earlier will be 90 years old.

Let's take a step back for a second, literally. Imagine yourself in that place...



It doesn't matter if it's to the left, to the right, or behind you. You're sitting in a very large metal flying coffin that's twice as old as you are, in the worst-case scenario!

Yes, American F-14s have been serving in Iran since 1977, that's 48 years. And I can imagine the feelings of the young pilots who climbed into the cockpits of aircraft that were literally twice their age! That's probably why, during the most recent combat operations involving Iran, the F-14s were completely invisible in the skies. Training flights are one thing, but combat operations under full load and full G-forces are quite another.

This, in essence, answers the question of why Tomcats were so unseen in Iranian skies. Everyone in the Iranian Air Force understood perfectly well that flying such aircraft, especially those equipped with homemade parts, could be very expensive. So they decided to spare the pilots by keeping them grounded.


By the way, they did the right thing. Now they'll buy Sukhoi fighters from Russia, retrain everyone who can fly, and Iran will have a blast.

But it's hard to say how those who climb into the cockpits of the B-52J "miracle bombers" will feel. I wouldn't trade places with them for any amount of money, because dollars are dollars, and a 90-year-old structure that can simply fall apart at 10,000 meters simply because it's 90 years old is something else entirely.

The Air Force currently plans to conduct a series of ground and flight tests of the B-52 with the new AN/APQ-188 next year. According to a Boeing press release, the initial phase of system performance verification was completed before the aircraft's flight to Edwards.

Following successful completion of testing at Edwards, the Air Force will make a formal decision on whether to begin serial production of the radar for installation on the remaining B-52 bombers. Air Force officials recently stated that they expect to achieve initial operational capability for the AN/APQ-188 on the B-52 between 2028 and 2030.

This phase of the program is designed to ensure that we get things right from the start so that we can implement the full radar modernization program,
" said Troy Dawson, vice president of Boeing Bombers.

The AN/APQ-188, which will transform the B-52G into the B-52J, is certainly a good thing. But it really does look more like gerontology: lips pumped up with silicone, wrinkles tightened, eyelids injected with Botox. It seems fine, you can sing "the weather in the house." But what to do with tired bones, weakening hearts, and a completely overworked liver is a question. That's in human terms, but in airplanes, it's practically the same. Metal fatigue is something no one can do; it's physics. Old structural metal, old wiring in the electrical circuits buried deep inside the plane, and so on.

All this fuss around the radar seems more like a simple business venture. And really, why not make money on those B-52s, which don't fly very far, if you can?
40 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. 12+
    22 December 2025 03: 49
    I wouldn't trade places with them for any amount of dollars, because dollars are dollars, and a 90-year-old structure that can simply fall apart over ten thousand meters simply because it's 90 years old is something else.

    For its age, it has a very low accident rate, despite the fact that the vehicles are not left idle on the ground but are used very intensively.
    P.S.: Boeing once knew how to create super-reliable machines.
    1. -3
      22 December 2025 04: 31
      Quote: Puncher
      For its age, it has a very low accident rate, despite the fact that the vehicles are not left idle on the ground but are used very intensively.

      Just because they're featured in the media doesn't mean they're being used intensively. After all, the term "intensively" also includes—often every single one, and at maximum takeoff weight.
      1. +5
        22 December 2025 04: 48
        Quote: Vladimir_2U
        Just because they appear in the mass media doesn't mean they are being intensively exploited.

        They don't flash in the style of "oh what an elephant that was..."
        21.11.2025
        On November 20, several B-52 H Stratofortress bombers flew off the northern coast of South America.

        09.11.2025
        US Air Force B-52H Stratotanker strategic bombers arrived at Moron Air Base in Spain.

        12.11.2025
        An American B-52H Stratofortress strategic bomber conducted a training flight in Estonian airspace on Wednesday, Itamilradar reported.

        15.15.2025
        B-52 Stratofortress bombers from the 9th Air Force Operations Support Group, based at Barksdale Air Force Base, Louisiana, will conduct practice airdrop operations to drop 500-pound ordnance in the Fort Hood kill zone from 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m., Dec. 15-19, as part of scheduled training.
        1. 0
          22 December 2025 05: 09
          Quote: Puncher
          They don't flash in the style of "oh what an elephant that was..."

          Well, obviously it's not like Kirkorov, but even 760 flights a year, for example, is only 10 flights per car...
          Well, it depends on what you mean by intensive exploitation, but that’s possible too.
          What we know about this aircraft: It has the name Aluminum Overcast, model B-17G-105-VE, serial number 44-85740, civil registration N5017N, and is one of the few surviving B-17 Flying Fortresses. It is owned by the Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA) and tours the United States and Canada.

          https://warwall.ru/news/polet_na_bombardirovshhike_b_17_letajushaja_krepost/2014-06-11-770
          It's simply a question of runway quality and takeoff and landing weight. Although, it's worthy of respect, there's no arguing with that.
          1. +8
            22 December 2025 05: 18
            Quote: Vladimir_2U
            Well, it's clear that it's not like Kirkorov.

            Oh my God... Monday morning, the end of the year and Kirkorov... Holy, holy...
            Quote: Vladimir_2U
            Even 760 flights a year is only 10 flights per aircraft...

            I couldn't find any flight statistics; unfortunately, there are few resources left for aviation enthusiasts these days. Yes, people used to search for and translate flight statistics and accidents. But in any case, the aircraft aren't idle.
            Quote: Vladimir_2U
            It's just a question of bandwidth quality

            Judging by the feedback from our pilots who have been with them, everything is in order with their runway, the quality is high.
            As for the old B-17, with proper care, why not? It's like with a car: if the owner treats it with respect and love, it will be closer to factory condition.
            1. -2
              22 December 2025 05: 35
              Quote: Puncher
              It's like with a car: if the owner treats it with respect and love, its condition will be closer to the factory condition.

              That's the thing, it doesn't go well with "intensive exploitation"...
  2. The comment was deleted.
    1. The comment was deleted.
  3. +4
    22 December 2025 06: 17
    The author suggests that Americans line up for a pack of da?
    1. 10+
      22 December 2025 08: 32
      The author simply diligently trashes both the aircraft itself and its radar. That's the way it's supposed to be. The B-52 itself, however, doesn't care!
      1. +3
        22 December 2025 11: 31
        Good Evil
        The author simply diligently trashes both the aircraft itself and its radar. That's the way it's supposed to be. The B-52 itself, however, doesn't care!


        What else is he supposed to do if the last "Antey"—the legacy of the Soviet Union—has fallen apart, worn to the point of holes? Since nothing comparable can be achieved in today's Russia, so, yes, the propagandists are doing their job—throwing shit at those for whom things are going differently...
        1. -1
          22 December 2025 16: 09
          The AN-22 was replaced by the AN-124 (for example, the US equivalent, the C-5, is the youngest, from 1989 = lost competencies)
          The lifting capacity of the new Il-76 (produced in 2020) is equal to the lifting capacity of the An-22 = a perfectly acceptable replacement
          The US equivalent of the IL-76 is the S-17 (the newest one from 2015 = lost capabilities)
          The B-52 is a piece of junk from the 50s, the oldest is the Tu-95 (from the 80s).
          everything turns out the same
  4. +2
    22 December 2025 08: 24
    Against this backdrop, it's odd to read news like "the MI-8 fleet is set to be decommissioned due to the expiration of its airworthiness..." or something like that. If such exhibits are being refitted for military equipment museums.
    1. 0
      22 December 2025 11: 33
      The B-52 takes to the skies 10-15 times a year. The Mi-8s often fly fully loaded every other day.
      1. +4
        22 December 2025 12: 30
        Does this change the situation in any way?
        Helicopters fly every day
        The elevators operate 24 hours a day...
        The resource is exhausted.....
        But the coffin is a B52
    2. 0
      22 December 2025 21: 57
      Nothing strange, in helicopters both the engine and the gearbox operate under increased load and their wear is easily explained.
  5. Des
    +4
    22 December 2025 09: 23
    The B-52 is a unique aircraft. Like many others, it can live a long life if properly cared for.
    In theory, the respected author of VO (and others), who is fluent in presenting information, could, in addition to lamenting the aircraft's coffin-like state, have spoken specifically about the inspection of the airframe, wiring, and other maintenance work to extend its service life. So, yes, the US is simply extending the service life of an old aircraft. Unfortunately, no.
    1. -2
      22 December 2025 16: 11
      You can defend the US, but you have to admit that the B-52 from the 50s speaks of a loss of competence.
      1. +1
        22 December 2025 22: 00
        No, it doesn't talk about a loss of skills. It talks about cost savings.
  6. -3
    22 December 2025 09: 34
    The B-52 radar won't be of much help; its radars can be seen from hundreds of kilometers away.
  7. -2
    22 December 2025 11: 07
    In the photo on the left, a technician is adjusting something with a hammer. Yes, it's a rubber hammer, but still... wink
    1. 0
      22 December 2025 12: 32
      The missiles for the S-75 anti-tank missile system were assembled using rubber-coated mallets.
      True, we had to make them ourselves.
      1. 0
        23 December 2025 16: 18
        It's a pretty decent tool for working with soft alloys. I'm just kidding. wink
  8. +1
    22 December 2025 11: 38
    Isn't this modernization part of the adaptation measures for operations at low altitudes, during the breakthrough of echeloned air defense?
    1. +2
      22 December 2025 12: 33
      How does the B52 fare at low altitudes?
      Unless we break through to the airfield for landing...
      1. 0
        22 December 2025 20: 22
        You might want to look into this. I was surprised to learn that the Americans are practicing such maneuvers.
        1. 0
          22 December 2025 23: 20
          What do you mean by low altitudes?
          1. kig
            0
            28 January 2026 04: 28
            Somewhere here on VO there were memoirs of a B52 pilot, and he said that they practiced flights at an altitude of 60 m, and at night.
  9. +1
    22 December 2025 12: 24
    ...and Iran will enjoy heavenly prosperity.... What are you talking about??? So Iran bought the S-300 and Tor air defense systems from Russia, so what? The US and Israeli air forces swept through them like a knife through butter, and not a single plane was lost!! They bombed a nuclear center!!!
    1. +1
      22 December 2025 16: 12
      Is there any evidence that the Israeli Air Force is going through Iran like a knife through butter? (All the evidence is from the Dalil cruise missiles.)
    2. 0
      22 December 2025 22: 02
      This does not guarantee that the B-52s will pass through just as easily.
  10. +4
    22 December 2025 13: 52
    Frankly, I'm amazed by the work and achievements of this aircraft's designers and engineers. Creating a bomber capable of serving for nearly a hundred years is a labor and organizational feat.
    As I understand it, the long duration of work is based on some facts
    1) The aircraft was originally built with great modernization potential and service life
    2) Enough aircraft were built that it was always possible to distribute a variety of tasks across such a fleet (which means there is not much work for each individual unit)
    3) Strict operating standards (in most cases, aircraft are not loaded beyond their limits unless necessary)
    4) Excellent, timely and competently planned maintenance and modernization
    5) The B-52 itself is a successful platform; you can change a lot of external equipment, and the aircraft will remain relevant.

    Our Tu-95 is close to the same model, but it's not a complete analogue. Due to its use of different engines and initially smaller dimensions, it has greater potential for modernization.
    No matter who throws their hats, the B-52 is the STANDARD of a strategic bomber.
    1. +2
      22 December 2025 14: 36
      In fact, any large machine can be modernized better and easier than a small one.
      For bombers, the size and design of the bomb bay are also of great importance.
      For example, the Tu-95 doesn't fit inside the Kh-101 and 102. The B-52 has a wider range of weapons.
      But here too - will the strategist be able to apply everything that was stuffed into him?!
    2. -4
      22 December 2025 16: 14
      This rather suggests that the US is incapable of producing strategic aircraft in quantity and therefore continues to fly on the achievements of its ancestors.
  11. 0
    22 December 2025 14: 32
    I read somewhere that the new Tu-160s also had a PFAR installed (either from the Su-30SM or the Su-35S).
  12. +4
    22 December 2025 15: 07
    The style of modern VO in all its glory is a conceptual article on a subject in which the author, using an old Russian proverb, is "neither ear nor snout."
  13. +2
    22 December 2025 15: 50
    Great! Threw shit on the fan and expects thanks?
    1. -1
      22 December 2025 16: 17
      When article authors criticize Russian planes (like the Tu-95), the comments are full of thanks for the good article, but when they talk about American planes, many commentators fly to the moon.

      Not a single fact from this article can be refuted
  14. +1
    22 December 2025 19: 29
    How many serial AFARS are there in our aviation?
  15. 0
    22 December 2025 21: 50
    The Americans are slowly rusting. Just like the British once did. And before them, the Spanish and Portuguese.
  16. +1
    22 December 2025 22: 02
    Quote: Kull90
    This rather suggests that the US is incapable of producing strategic aircraft in quantity and therefore continues to fly on the achievements of its ancestors.


    You have voiced an interesting option.
    Americans continue to fly, building on the achievements of their ancestors. But Americans don't have fairy tales about magic carpets. And hot air balloons originated in Europe. Or China.
    Have we abandoned the achievements of our ancestors?
  17. -1
    22 December 2025 22: 21
    Quote: Nikname2025
    The style of modern VO in all its glory is a conceptual article on a subject in which the author, using an old Russian proverb, is "neither ear nor snout."


    Sorry, but you are wrong.
    Perhaps Russian is not your first native language.
    "Neither ear nor snout" would probably be more correct.
    And... What is this concept in the article?
    Are Americans extending the life expectancy of pension wings?
    Many countries are doing this. Both because of a lack of funds for anything truly modern and because of capitalist cynicism. There are a million unemployed. If a quarter of those workers were sent to factories to make chainmail for pilots and crossbows for radio operators, then army recruitment would speed up. And the efficiency of capitalist farms would increase.