Lawmakers denounce plan to retire six B-1Bs - Air Force News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Air Force Times

Lawmakers denounce plan to retire six B-1Bs

Six B-1B Lancers, fundamental to operations in Afghanistan, are on the chopping block — a move that a handful of lawmakers are fighting because of what it would mean both for the war and for the communities they represent.

The Air Force wants to retire the bombers to finance nearly $100 million in avionics upgrades to its other 60 B-1Bs, but the lawmakers argue the Lancers are too important to lose because of their combat role and the hundreds of millions of dollars they generate for local economies.

Right now, the cuts are included in the White House’s fiscal 2012 defense budget as well as the House and Senate versions of next year’s defense authorization bill. The House measure, approved in May, protects 36 combat-ready Lancers; the Senate bill, passed out of the Senate Armed Services Committee in June, requires a detailed retirement plan and an explanation of how the remaining fleet will be updated.

Four of the Lancers targeted by the Air Force are assigned to Dyess Air Force Base, Texas, and two are at Ellsworth Air Force Base, S.D.

“The B-1 is reliable, capable and providing invaluable support to our troops in the field,” Rep. Randy Neugebauer, R-Texas, who represents Dyess, told the House Armed Services Committee in April. “It seems to me that when a plane is so valuable ... that we should not be looking to cut six of them.”

“If we are more than 15 years away from a new bomber, isn’t it critical that we keep the ones we have?”

For Abilene, Texas, and Rapid City, S.D., the cities near Dyess and Ellsworth, the loss of the bombers could have a crippling effect.

“The bottom line is, it is yet to be resolved,” said Pat McElgunn, a retired colonel and director of military affairs for Rapid City’s Chamber of Commerce. “The Air Force has got to make a compelling argument to Congress.”

An economic blow

About 360 civilian and Air Force jobs — 200 at Dyess and 160 at Ellsworth — would be lost if the B-1s are cut, according to the Air Force.

The bases generate hundreds of millions of dollars for the communities they’re in, though no figures are available for how much the bombers alone kick into the local economies.

Dyess contributes $365 million a year to the economy of Abilene, according to the Abilene Chamber of Commerce. Rapid City reaps about $300 million annually from Ellsworth, according to McElgunn. The economic loss for Rapid City if the B-1Bs leave: at least $10 million a year.

Neugebauer and Rep. Kristi Noem, South Dakota’s only House member, are proposing an amendment to keep the Lancers for at least another year, according to their offices. Included as co-sponsors are Reps. Mac Thornberry and Mike Conaway, both Texas Republicans.

The four senators who represent South Dakota and Texas vow to fight to keep the Lancers.

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, is on the Senate Appropriations Committee, which must weigh in on the Air Force’s detailed retirement plan. She has promised to protect the B-1Bs.

Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, has asked the Defense Department and the Air Force to explain how the cuts are consistent with a need to sustain military force during war and why the B-1Bs, instead of the much older B-52s, are headed for the chopping block. He is waiting for answers.

“Senator Cornyn impressed upon the Air Force leadership the need to keep the B-1 healthy and fully capable in the years ahead. It proves its worth every day over Afghanistan, where it maintains a constant presence in support of our ground troops,” said Charles Chamberlayne, Cornyn’s spokesman.

Sen. Tim Johnson, D-S.D., is opposed to the cuts, and he told the Rapid City Journal he would use his seat on the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee to block the cuts.

The office of Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., did not respond to requests for comment from Air Force Times.

Thune, however, voiced his opposition to the Rapid City Journal: “The fact that we are a nation at war and facing an uncertain world calls for sustaining the current military force structure of Army brigades, Air Force wings and Navy ships. We should not be cutting our military capabilities and force structure at a time when we are involved in three wars overseas.”

Déjà vu

Thirty-three Lancers went to the bone yard in 2003 for the same reasons the half-dozen appear headed there now — money and spare parts.

When the Air Force retired the B-1s, it recouped operational and maintenance costs, and cannibalized the bombers to keep the rest of the fleet in the air.

By retiring the six bombers, the Air Force estimates, it will get back $357.3 million over the next five years.

About a third of the savings, $125.4 million, will go back into the B-1 fleet — $80.7 million for avionics and $44.7 million for procurement of “critical spares,” according to Air Force figures.

The other $231.9 million will go toward strengthening the nuclear enterprise; intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance support; an investment in “building partnerships” capacity; and the modernization of Air Force inventories, according to the service.

Boeing Co. announced July 5 it had received a $99.5 million contract to upgrade the B-1B fleet with three avionics modifications: a vertical situation display unit in the forward cockpit and a fully integrated data link and central integrated test system in the aft cockpit. The modifications, according to spokeswoman Jennifer Hogan, will be installed on four Lancers next year, and all the bombers should be upgraded by 2019. If the six B-1s are spared, she said, they would be modernized.

Sheer numbers explain why the Air Force wants to sacrifice the B-1B and not its other two bombers, the B-2 and the B-52. There are only 20 B-2s, and the 85 or so B-52s have been flying for more than 50 years, according to defense analyst Loren Thompson.

Still, the Air Force relies heavily on the B-1B and has for the last decade. Since 9/11, Lancers have flown 72 percent of the bombing combat missions in Iraq and Afghanistan. The B-52s picked up 27 percent of the work and the B-2s are in third place with less than 1 percent, according to statistics Neugebauer gave in his testimony.

The B-1 has flown more than 7,500 sorties for over 88,500 hours in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to statistics provided by Dyess.

“The default description of the B-1 is that it is a workhorse,” said Thompson, chief operating officer of the Washington-area Lexington Institute. “It’s considered to be the only low-density, high-demand asset. The Air Force has only got three bombers. ... Of course, it’s a workhorse because there’s not another option.”

Despite its heavy use, he said, the B-1B is not a popular aircraft with the Air Force — mostly because it’s expensive to maintain.

Popular or not, the Air Force’s decision leaves Thompson scratching his head.

“It’s hard to understand why more B-1s would be removed from the force when there are so few strategic bombers left and nothing waiting in the wings,” he said.