Comparing the Cost of Penetrating Bombers to Expendable Missiles Over Thirty Years
An Initial Look
Download Free Electronic Document
| Format | File Size | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| PDF file | 0.1 MB | Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience. |
Project AIR FORCE (PAF) developed preliminary life cycle costs estimates for a new penetrating bomber, including the cost per day of fighting one or more conflicts against adversaries that possess even moderate air defenses. PAF also developed preliminary cost estimates for cruise missiles launched from standoff distances by non-stealthy platforms. Procurement costs for the cruise missile launch platforms were not included and PAF assumed that cruise missiles do not require more ISR support than bombers. The findings show that penetrating stealth bombers cost less than expendable missiles for similar missions. The paper also identifies other negative aspects of relying on expendable missile options.
Research conducted by
The research reported here was sponsored by the United States Air Force and conducted by RAND Project AIR FORCE.
This report is part of the RAND Corporation Working paper series. RAND working papers are intended to share researchers' latest findings and to solicit informal peer review. They have been approved for circulation by RAND but may not have been formally edited or peer reviewed.
This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.
The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.