By Emelie Rutherford

Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Michael Moseley told lawmakers yesterday the service will likely need more than 76 B-52 bombers and that he is committed to fielding the next- generation bomber in 2018.

The Air Force has looked to trim its B-52 fleet, as directed by the 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review, to 56 aircraft to pay for upgrades to remaining B-52s, B-1s and B-2s. Yet Congress has moved to mandate the Air Force to keep at least 76 of the bombers, and Moseley yesterday publically acknowledged–for what some observers say is the first time–that the B-52 number may be 76 or higher.

Moseley told the Senate Appropriations defense subcommittee (SAC-D) that a service decision to task part of the B-52 force for a nuclear role helped bring about this altered B- 52 view.

“Gen. [John] Corley [commander of Air Combat Command] has not come to full detail on this, but I envision taking one of the squadrons for a six month or a one-year effective tasking, either at Minot [AFB, N.D.] or at Barksdale [AFB, La.], and making them exclusively nuclear,” Moseley said. “That takes us above 44 [B-52s], that takes us above 56, that takes us likely, likely above 76.”

Yet the general emphasized that he doesn’t “have those numbers yet,” because he and Corley haven’t been able to sit down and flesh out that rotation.

The service now has 93 B-52s, according to Air Combat Command spokesman Staff Sgt. Thomas Doscher.

Senator Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.) said it was “a positive development for our military capability” that the Air Force no longer wants to drop to 56 B-52s.

“I’ve long argued that the retirement of our B-52 fleet would create a situation where the Air Force cannot meet the need for long-range strike capability,” the senator said in a statement after the hearing.

“These are the lowest-cost bombers in our arsenal, and they have many decades of life left,” he said.

Moseley also told lawmakers yesterday that he is committed to fielding the next-generation bomber in 2018, after Dorgan suggested the aircraft–being developed via a classified program–may not be ready by that date.

“I’ll tell you 2018 is a timeline that’s doable on the new bomber,” Moseley said “We’ve got the plans and programs in place to make that happen. And if we can stick to that, if we can let the industrial base develop and integrate, because in this capability, which of course we have talked much about in this forum, we’re asking to integrate existing systems, not necessarily invent new systems, [then] 2018 is a doable date.”

“The B-1, B-2 and the B-52 are wonderful airplanes, but at some point we’ve got to have a survivable, penetrating persistent platform that we can go into any airspace and be able to persist for the combatant commanders,” the general added. “So I am holding to 2018, that’s my story.”

Moseley told lawmakers yesterday that a comprehensive bomber requirements study the SAC-D required–to attempt to prevent a future bomber gap–will be unveiled this month.

“My data says the bomber study is in the building now for policy review and sometime this month we can get it out,” he said. “So that is progressing so we can get the thing out so we can look at it.”

Dorgan added a provision to an appropriations bill prohibiting the Air Force from retiring any B-52s until that study is delivered to Congress, the senator’s office said. The report was supposed to be done last fall, Dorgan said.