Schedule Estimating Relationships for Air-Launched Missiles

  • Bruce Harmon
  • Lisa Ward
Conference paper

Abstract

Representatives of the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) are responsible for review of service acquisition programs prior to their inclusion in the defense program that is submitted to the president and subsequently to Congress. Part of this process involves the review of proposed acquisition schedules. This paper documents research into methods for assessing the reasonableness of proposed acquisition schedules for air-launched-missile programs. Such methods should reproduce typical schedules while accounting for schedule variations among programs. Variations may be due to a variety of factors, such as the acquisition strategy embodied in the programs and the technical characteristics of the missile.

Keywords

Radar Alan Dala Culmination 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    Harmon, Bruce R., Lisa M. Ward and Paul R. Palmer Jr., Assessing Acquisition Schedules For Tactical Aircraft, Institute For Defense Analyses Paper P-2105, February 1989.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Rothman, M.B., Aerospace Weapon System Acquisition Milestones: A Data Base, RAND, October 1987Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Gogerty, David C, Bruce M. Miller and Paul R. Palmer Jr., Acquisition of Contemporary Tactical Munitions, Volume II: Case Studies, Institute For Defense Analyses Paper P-2173, June 1989.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Jane’s Weapon Systems 1987-1988, Jane’s Publishing company Ltd., London, 1987Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Aircraft Armament Volume II, Interavia S.A., Geneva, Switzerland, 1982Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    DM5 Market Intelligence Reports (Missiles), DMS Inc., 1985Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Kluge, Arthur J., The Tactical Missile Technical Data Handbook, Tecolote Research, Inc. TM-102, 1977Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Jaffurs, C. Z., A. J. Kluge and D.C. Morrison, Missile Cost Data Book, Tecolote Research, Inc., November 1984.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Eichblatt, Emil J., Test and Evaluation of an Air-to-Air RF Guided Missile, Pacific Missile Test Center, Point Mugu, California, May 1986.Google Scholar
  10. [10]-Friedman, Norman, U.S. Naval Weapons, Naval Institute Pres, Annapolis, Maryland, 1983Google Scholar
  11. [11]-Gunston, Bill, The Illustrated Encyclopedia of the World’s Rockets and Missiles, Salamander Books Ltd., London, 1979Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    Nicholas, Ted G., U.S. Missile Data Book, Data Search Associates, October 1987Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    York, James L., et al, Tactical Missile Development Cost, Science Applications International Corporation, May 1987.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Vokolek, Alan S., and Damon C. Morrison, Naval Weapons Center Cost Model, Tecolote Research Company, CR-0171, January 1987.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Luttrell, W.D, Phoenix Missile System Research and Development Program, Naval Missile Center, Technical Publication TP-70-51, June 1970.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    Navy and Air Force Integrated Logistics Support Plan For Sidewinder AIM-9L Weapon System, February 1977.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    AIM-9L Independent Cost Analysis Summary Documentation, Air Force Systems Command. August 1973.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    Dwyer, Thomas J. and Arthur J. Kluge, Tactical Missile Hardware Cost Study, the Sparrow Missile.,Tecolote Research, Inc. TM-57, July 1977Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    Sparrow III Master Plan Excerpts, Raytheon Company, Lowell Massachusetts, 1973.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    Dwyer, Thomas J. and Arthur J. Kluge Tactical Missile Hardware Cost Study, the Maverick. Missile., Tecolote Research, Inc. TM-41, July 1977Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    Geiger, Clarence J., History of the AGM-69A SRAM: Short Range Attack Missile, 1963-1975, Volume I-Narrative, History Office, Aeronautical Systems Division, Air Force Systems Command.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bruce Harmon
    • 1
  • Lisa Ward
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute for Defense AnalysesAlexandriaUSA
  2. 2.General Electric AerospaceSpringfieldUSA

Personalised recommendations