PAR Study-1 JSH 3/28/2005 MIT Lincoln Laboratory MPAR Cost-Benefit Discussion Mark Weber Jeff Herd 14 December 2009
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
PAR Study-1JSH 3/28/2005
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
MPAR Cost-Benefit Discussion
Mark Weber
Jeff Herd
14 December 2009
MIT Lincoln LaboratoryPAR Study-2
JSH 3/28/2005
Purpose of Briefing
• Update MPAR acquisition cost data developed from ongoing Lincoln-MaCom panel demonstration project
• Review methodology used to compare life-cycle costs for MPAR versus legacy radars
• Discuss strategies for developing monetary benefits associated with MPAR
MIT Lincoln LaboratoryPAR Study-3
JSH 3/28/2005
Active Phased Array Radar Recurring Cost Distribution
• Major cost of phased array radar is in active electronically scanned array (AESA) aperture
– Typical AESA is 75% of total radar cost*
– Key AESA cost driver is transmit-receive module
15%75%
10%
Typical Radar Cost Breakout*
Active ESA
Signal, Data Processor
Receiver/Exciter
Rad
ar
+ P
roc
Active ESA
* Loomis, J.M.; ‘Army Radar Requirements for the 21st Century’, 2007 IEEE Radar Conference, 17-20 April 2007 Page(s):1 - 6
MIT Lincoln LaboratoryPAR Study-4
JSH 3/28/2005
MPAR Risk Reduction Panel
T/R Modules
Aperture Board
DC Power + Control
Heat Exchanger
• MPAR risk reduction panel cost estimates based upon low/high volume pricing from multiple sources
• Domestic and off-shore
• Utilizing commercial high volume manufacturing practices
• Target cost of $50k per m2
MIT Lincoln LaboratoryPAR Study-5
JSH 3/28/2005
MPAR T/R Module Cost
• IC chip cost estimates based upon current commercial wafer processing costs for >2M parts
• All costs based upon actual Bills of Material (BOM)
• Current assembly, test, and overhead costs based upon actual MPAR T/R module fabrication and test
• Potential for reduced costs based upon additional IC chip integration and lower bandpass filter cost
MIT Lincoln LaboratoryPAR Study-6
JSH 3/28/2005
MPAR Aperture Board Cost
• Biggest cost driver for Aperture Board is multilayer PC board– Significant spread in PC board manufacturer costs
(~factor of 2)
• Rollup cost estimates for panel range between $7k-15k ($40k-90k per m2)– Close to target cost of ~ $50k per m2
16”
Highest PC Board Estimate
Lowest PC Board Estimate
MIT Lincoln LaboratoryPAR Study-7
JSH 3/28/2005
Cost Rollups
• “Terminal” MPAR (4 m diameter, ASR equivalent)– Low: (50 m2 x $41 K/m2) ÷ 0.6 = $ 3.4 M– High: (50 m2 x $88 K/m2) ÷ 0.6 = $ 7.3 M
• Full Scale MPAR (8 m diameter, NEXRAD, TDWR, ARSR equivalent)– Low: (201 m2 x $41 K/m2) ÷ 0.6 = $ 13.7 M– High: (201 m2 x $88 K/m2) ÷ 0.6 = $ 29.5 M
• TDWR Replacement Costs (per Ted Weyrauch, AJT 1210)– Equipment: $7.0 M per site– Installation: $0.5 M per site– Activation/Commissioning $0.5 M per site– Academy Course Development $3.0 M total– Aeronautic Center Facility $100 M total– Logistics Center Stock (25% of equip.) $1.75 M per site– Log. Ctr. test equip./support contracts $80 M total– Program Office Support $40 M total– P3I $173 M total
Roughly 50% of TDWR replacement costs are non-recurring
MIT Lincoln LaboratoryPAR Study-8
JSH 3/28/2005
Purpose of Briefing
• Update MPAR acquisition cost data developed from ongoing Lincoln-MaCom panel demonstration project
• Review methodology used to compare life-cycle costs for MPAR versus legacy radars
• Discuss strategies for developing monetary benefits associated with MPAR
MIT Lincoln LaboratoryPAR Study-9
JSH 3/28/2005
Life Cycle Cost Comparison(Presented to NAS Study Panel)
• Replacement of legacy systems with MPAR on as-needed basis saves ~ $2.4B over 20-year period
• Majority of savings comes from reduced O&M costs
• Assumes equivalent cost per element of $188.00 ($100k per m2)– Must include assembly, testing, radar back-end, software, …
• Replacement of legacy systems with MPAR on as-needed basis saves ~ $2.4B over 20-year period
• Majority of savings comes from reduced O&M costs
• Assumes equivalent cost per element of $188.00 ($100k per m2)– Must include assembly, testing, radar back-end, software, …
• Assumptions:– 510 legacy @ $5-10M ea
– 167 full-size MPAR @ $15M ea– 167 terminal-area MPAR @ $5M
ea– Legacy O&M = $0.5M per year– MPAR O&M = $0.3M per year
$2.4B
MIT Lincoln LaboratoryPAR Study-10JSH 3/28/2005
Purpose of Briefing
• Update MPAR acquisition cost data developed from ongoing Lincoln-MaCom panel demonstration project
• Review methodology used to compare life-cycle costs for MPAR versus legacy radars
• Discuss strategies for developing monetary benefits associated with MPAR
MIT Lincoln LaboratoryPAR Study-11JSH 3/28/2005
Multifunction Phased Array Radar
11
Need methodology for ascribing monetary benefits to potential service improvements
MIT Lincoln LaboratoryPAR Study-12JSH 3/28/2005
Example: Model for Assessing Impact of Reduced
Tornado Warning Lead Times
MIT Lincoln LaboratoryPAR Study-13JSH 3/28/2005
Tornado Impact Mitigation: (i) Reduced Lead Time, (ii)Reduced Lead Time plus Improved PD
Fatalities
Scenario
Fractional Threat
Reduction (FT)
MissedTornadoes
DetectedTornadoes
Total
Baseline(No Warnings)
– 26 36 62
Current(Pd = 0.58)
0.50 26 18 44
Current+LMS(Pd = 0.58)
0.46 26 17 43
Current+LMS(Pd = 0.8)
0.46 12 23 35
Injuries
WarningScenario
Fractional Threat
Reduction (FT)
MissedTornadoes
DetectedTornadoes
Total
Baseline – 520 718 1238
Current(Pd = 0.58)
0.67 520 480 1000
Current+LMS (Pd = 0.58)
0.63 520 451 971
Current+LMS(Pd = 0.8)
0.63 248 622 870
Related Documents
