Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Normal
It is very easy to actually look up the program and inventory costs for these PGMs. Instead of talking non specifics, how about pick 2-3 weapons, and get us what it would cost to say double their inventory over 6-8 years? Let's see if that is going to break a bank across 2 AF (SDB-1, and SDB-2) and a couple of US Army (let's pick excal and PGK) inventories.We actually have historic information. The AF has in prior years purchased > 7,000 SDB's a year. It can very easily go back to those levels if it wanted. The difference from current procurement rates to that isn't very much in terms of the overall AF procurement budget. The argument that even larger than current stockpiles are unaffordable does not really stand up to scrutiny. Feel free to expand that to more expensive weapons. Army expects to pay 1 Million per PrSm on average. Planned inventory is 3900 missiles. That's a 4-5 Billion 10-15 year acquisition program. A 3x increase in it gets them to about a billion a year in procurement. Increasing PGM stockpiles is actually way more affordable than fielding, operating, or recapitalizing platforms so if a decision is made to adjust the stockpile up compared to where they think they need to be to be comfortable, that can very easily be done in 1/2 or even less the time it takes to field a platform these days.
It is very easy to actually look up the program and inventory costs for these PGMs. Instead of talking non specifics, how about pick 2-3 weapons, and get us what it would cost to say double their inventory over 6-8 years? Let's see if that is going to break a bank across 2 AF (SDB-1, and SDB-2) and a couple of US Army (let's pick excal and PGK) inventories.
We actually have historic information. The AF has in prior years purchased > 7,000 SDB's a year. It can very easily go back to those levels if it wanted. The difference from current procurement rates to that isn't very much in terms of the overall AF procurement budget. The argument that even larger than current stockpiles are unaffordable does not really stand up to scrutiny. Feel free to expand that to more expensive weapons. Army expects to pay 1 Million per PrSm on average. Planned inventory is 3900 missiles. That's a 4-5 Billion 10-15 year acquisition program. A 3x increase in it gets them to about a billion a year in procurement. Increasing PGM stockpiles is actually way more affordable than fielding, operating, or recapitalizing platforms so if a decision is made to adjust the stockpile up compared to where they think they need to be to be comfortable, that can very easily be done in 1/2 or even less the time it takes to field a platform these days.
