gressional tasking, a detailed analysis of cost was also requested. This chapter summarizes the committee’s comparison of operational utility, technical maturity, and cost for U.S. boost-phase and non-boost systems. It is important to note that the committee did not analyze personnel requirements for the force structure; however, the BMD system deployment recommendations for U.S. homeland and European defense are identified well enough to support further study of personnel levels. In general, the Services have defined the force structure and performance that they can afford for BMD missions requiring the use of Aegis, Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), and Patriot Advanced Capability (PAC)-3, and the committee does not believe an assessment of force structure and associated costs was part of its tasking.

COMPARISON OF BOOST-PHASE AND NON-BOOST-PHASE SYSTEMS

Twenty-Year Life-Cycle Costs

Figure 4-1 displays the 20-yr life-cycle costs (LCCs) for the BMD systems—U.S. boost-phase defense and non-boost-phase defense alternatives (midcourse, ascent, late midcourse, and terminal)—examined in this report from FY 2010 forward. Here, the total estimated costs (in FY 2010 constant-year dollars) are broken down into three categories: development; procurement, including military construction (MILCON); and operations and support (O&S) over 20 years. These costs do not include the cost of supporting sensors, which is provided in a later section of this chapter. Sunk investment costs from the start of these programs (or previous heritage programs) through FY 2009 for these various BMD systems are shown in black.

Comparison of Costs and Effectiveness

Table 4-1 and Table 4-2 compare the BMD systems examined in this report. Table 4-1 compares U.S. boost-phase defense systems and Table 4-2 compares non-boost-phase defense alternatives. The reader will recognize the programs of record discussed earlier in Chapters 2 and 3 but will also notice two other systems—continental U.S. (CONUS)-based evolved ground-based missile defense (GMD) (called GMD-E in Chapter 5) and forward-based evolved GMD—where the committee’s analysis and simulation work found significant weaknesses.

Table 4-1 and Table 4-2 present summary measures of effectiveness along with a range of system LCC estimates and force-level quantity buys. Each effectiveness category is a summation of many measures of effectiveness. The system LCC estimates are broken down and discussed further in Appendix E.1

_____________

1In addition, Appendix E provides a detailed discussion and analysis of the cost system methodology utlized for this study.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement