Comparing the Cost of Penetrating Bombers to Expendable Missiles Over Thirty Years

An Initial Look

by Thomas Hamilton

Full Document

FormatFile SizeNotes
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.

Permission is given to duplicate this electronic document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Copies may not be duplicated for commercial purposes. Unauthorized posting of RAND PDFs to a non-RAND Web site is prohibited. RAND PDFs are protected under copyright law. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit the RAND Permissions page.

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.