Evening star., 1961-08-14
ObsoIescence Cost

SOoG VI OUSOlcSCcIlCG, COEl-
tains some truth. I am con-
vinced that it also contains
some error.
1t is true, as you point out,
that the B-52 bomber, cur
rently the mainstay of SAC,
is already 10 years old. 1t
also is true, as you point out,
that this is a subsonic plane
already considered to be
obsolescent. It is much slow
er in fact than commonly
used commercial air trans
portation.
1t is not precisely correct,
however. to say that the B-52
is uniformly described as the
best bomber in the Air
Force arsenal" Many of US
in Congress, as well as many
of the military who are not
talking for print on the sub
ject, are convinced that we
have in the inventory an ex-
cellent long-range supersonic
bomber in the B-58. The fol-
lowing points are pertinent:
Cd The B-58, flying twice
the speed of sound, is the
Free Worlds fastest and
only supersonic bomber. 90
Within the past year, it has
broken six worlds speed re-
cords previously held by
Soviet aircraft. (3) 1t won
last years SAC-wide radar
bombing competition, becom-
ing the only airplane to win
this competition in its first
operational year. "a In re-
peated exercises, it has
proven its ability to penetrate
our own air defenses and has
never been successfully inter-
cepted in these exercises
even when flying a pre-deter-
mined route and giving per-
iodic position reports. 60 1t
is the only bomber the Free
World has which is a match
for fast Soviet interceptors.
It is true, as the Secretary
Of Defense points out, that
in late 1862 we will have
more than 700" of the B-52'S
and B-58's in operational in
ventory.
What the Secretary did not
point out is that more than
600 of these will be the older,
slower subSonic B-52's.
Committees of Congress,
composed of men who make
a careful study of our defense
capabilities, have discovered
what they earnestly believe
to be a need for additional
B-58's. These committees
have suggested to the mill
tary that they continue pro-
curement of this most mod
ern bomber in our arsenal.
We have invested approx
mately SO billion in the de-
velopment of the B-58 to
date. for which we will have
two operational wings. A
third wing, as originally
scheduled, could be had for
approximately $346 million.
The unit price of the B-58
now is cheaper than for the
old subsonic B-52.
It is not necessarily cor
rect. then, to conclude, as
Senator Proxmire did, that
"the extra $525 million would
not buy research a new
design additional speed
or protection"
If invested in additional
procurement of the present
model Of B-58's, some of this
money could assuredly buy
additional speed and protec-
ton. If invested in an
advanced version of the B-58.
which could be produced
with a capability of extended
flight and longer range at
Mach "a, it also could
contribute significantly to
advancing research and new
design.
Many of us agree with The
Star that an extended pro-
duction schedule for q
bomber already 10 years old
(the B-52) is not a secur-
ity requirement, particularly
when we have more than 600
of them in being and on
order.
We do earnestly believe,
however, that extended pro-
duction for the B-58 is very
definitely a security require
ment.
Jim Wright.
Representative from Texas.
Matter of Opinion
A Washington dispatch
states that Adlai E. Steven