Military resource allocation choices are often contentious, especially when — as now — international events and domestic budgets require significant changes in the character and capabilities of U.S. military forces. With major changes occurring in systems, forces, and the way those forces are used, it is more important than ever that new concepts be evaluated against an integrated set of capability needs based on future missions and operational objectives. In this report, the authors present a tool to help decisionmakers, concept developers, and operators integrate objectives and capabilities, note deficiencies, and offer solutions or compromises. The tool the authors choose to accomplish these objectives is the nomograph. The set of nomographs presented integrates quantitative expressions of objectives, options, outcome measures, and costs. Each nomograph is developed for a specific mission and operational objective within a specific contemplated contingency. The authors caution that alternative objectives and force packages need to have their own nomographs created. All resulting nomographs should then be integrated with metrics not amenable to nomography representations, such as cost of the modernization packages, the number of U.S. casualties, and interoperability of modernized U.S. forces with allied forces.
Bonds, Timothy M., Glenn A. Kent, Colin Lampard, Randall G. Bowdish, John Birkler, Monti D. Callero, and James Chiesa, A Tool for Evaluating Force Modernization Options. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 1998. https://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR905.html. Also available in print form.
Bonds, Timothy M., Glenn A. Kent, Colin Lampard, Randall G. Bowdish, John Birkler, Monti D. Callero, and James Chiesa, A Tool for Evaluating Force Modernization Options, RAND Corporation, MR-905-OSD, 1998. As of February 15, 2024: https://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR905.html