Clan Smoke Jaguar
29-10-2003, 15:58
One of the most popular things to do in NS is to buy and sell military weapons and equipment. However, this can be problematic as many players decide to sell things with only a wild guess as to the actual cost, look at an ancient price, or think that they can jack the prices down 50-90% like stores do in some sales. Because of the frequency of these problems, and the trouble they cause to those who do bother do look things up, I’m creating this thread. Please not that this is not just for sellers. This thread is also a guide to buyers, and will give them something to follow to see if they’re getting ripped off. As there's really no baseline for anything beyond it, this guide is primarily for modern and near-future tech.
For starters, I will talk about some of the pitfalls with research that the good researcher must try to avoid:
One of the biggest problems is the variety of information on the internet, and one must be sure to get current and correct information whenever possible, as many players have listed units for an original production cost that’s several decades out of date. It is indeed imperative to check the year the price is coming from, because, as a general rule, prices go up every year. One of the primary reasons for this is inflation, which averages about 4% per year, so if you know the year the price comes from, you can calculate at least a rough estimate from there. Now, to make sure this is understood, this is compounded, so if you were to get a 2001 price, you’d multiply it by 1.04, and then multiply the result by 1.04. One of the most common prices listed is FY ’98 dollars, which would be multiplied by approximately 1.21665 (that’s nearly a 22% increase in only 5 years). However, for really old prices (over 20 years), you may want to look up actual annual inflation rates, as there are some periods of above average inflation. The most common place to find old prices is with aircraft, with things like $30 million for an F-15C or F-15E, or an F/A-18. Those are the initial production costs all those years ago, and each of these costs over $50 million today.
Another thing to watch out for is the average unit cost. FAS and globalsecurity.org (along with a number of other sites), which generally have some good pricing information, will often provide an average unit cost as the total program cost divided by the number of units built. Both the B-2 bomber and TACMS missile on globalsecurity fall under this category. As you might expect, the listed price is going to be much more (in some cases, over twice as much) than the actual unit cost. Therefore, whenever you see “total program cost,” be wary. Occasionally, the average unit cost will be correct, but check by dividing total program cost by the number of systems, just to be sure. The final pitfall is related to this, and that’s the cost of a prototype or preproduction unit versus the actual production one. For example, the prototype F-117A cost over $110 million, while the actual production units were only $42.6, a rather significant drop.
Finally, a good place to find the most accurate prices is going to be in the unit descriptions (at globalsecurity) and information on military sales. They will occasionally state the cost of a contract and the number of units ordered, as well as when the purchase was made.
Now, there is some leeway in pricing, but you do have to be careful. There are generally 4 ways to drop the price: cheaper labor, better manufacturing facilities, larger production runs, and updated components & manufacturing.
The first of these is the easiest. Any nation that regularly chooses the second option in the Workers Strike issue, or abolishes minimum wage laws, will be able to employ workers for less than others, allowing a small portion of the cost to be shaved off (or slightly greater profit for each unit sold). However, nations that grant pay raises and keep minimum wage laws cannot do this (sorry guys). Another option is better manufacturing facilities. More modern the facilities can produce things much more cheaply (this is part of the benefit the Japanese have). Nations with exceptionally strong economies (Powerhouse and above), and those with decent economies that have rebuilt after a war that destroyed their infrastructure, will gain the most benefit from this. Those with a fair economy or lower might have poor production facilities that are more expensive to use. Improved factories will likely take off more than cheaper labor, but they actually cost a decent amount of money to set up, which is why nations with weaker economies might not be able to afford them. However, the easiest way to drop the price is with a huge production run. The more of a unit is produced, the cheaper each individual one will be. The decrease is not very significant with only a few units, but when production runs go into the thousands, they will start to drop considerably. Naturally, ships aren’t as affected by this as aircraft, munitions, and ground vehicles. The final method, and the one with the greatest potential price drop, is to use newer components and manufacturing techniques on older systems. This is what dropped the Tomahawk’s unit price by over 50%. However, the systems this can be used on are limited (more complex units like aircraft and ships are less susceptible), and most won’t show quite such a dramatic drop. The systems must also be several decades old for such a significant drop. On a lighter level, factories can be retooled to provide a modest reduction in production units without the age requirement, but it will be only a fraction of that seen with the Tomahawk. A fifth way of dropping the cost, and one that's not recommended, is to drop quality. You can cut costs significantly by using poorer components or even omitting some things outright, but you must, at least OOCly, state that you've done this. You'll also find that others will tend to avoid you unless they desperately need really cheap equipment.
The Soviet Union used many of these to keep costs down. They naturally had large amounts of cheap labor, and made huge production runs. They also left out many features and systems that are considered essential by Western nations. Because of this, most Soviet fighters, including the MiG-29, are extremely dependent on outside control, as they lack the avionics to fight effectively on their own. Likewise, Soviet tanks dropped many of the key survivability features on Western units. This means that a Soviet tank is far more likely to be destroyed when the armor is penetrated, while Western tanks that are knocked out can usually be salvaged and repaired.
When designing an original unit, it is imperative to look at other, similar, systems (assuming there are any), and use the cost of those as a guide for pricing your own unit. Just because you designed it yourself doesn't mean that the Ubertank MkII can be equivalent to an Abrams and still cost only $1 million. Likewise, there's no reason to be selling it for $10 million.
One of the things that annoys me the most is the obscenely low pricing of battleships and the like. I will put this simply: The most recent AEGIS destroyers and Cruisers cost more than $1 billion, so it goes against all logic to be selling AEGIS battleships for less. My best estimate for the cost of an Iowa Class battleship, built to the modern refit standards, is in the range of $3 billion. This is taking into account things like operating cost and upgrade cost, and comparing them to other large ships. A battleship without AEGIS is around $3 billion. You’d have to add a couple hundred million for an AEGIS suite (the system itself costs $200 million), and then consider that most battleships in NS are bigger than an Iowa. Taking it in mind, the average battleship should cost $3-6 billion, or as much as a nuclear powered aircraft carrier. Some could conceivably go as high as $10 billion or more. Any one going for less than $2 billion should be ignored.
As one might have expected, I will now give the current prices on a number of systems. Most of these prices are the average cost taken straight from the FY2002 US procurement budget.
M16A2 Rifle: $653.59
M4A1 Carbine: $857.14
Mk.19 AGL: $19,072.85
AIM-120 AMRAAM: $702,000
AGM-84G SLAM-ER: $873,000
AGM-114 Hellfire: $81,000
D-5 Trident II: $47.38 million
M270A1 MLRS Launcher: $4.24 million
M1114 HMMWV: $74,488
UH-60L Blackhawk: $16.37 million
F/A-18E/F Super Hornet: $66.25 million
V-22 Osprey: $90.07 million
E-2C Hawkeye: $76.96 million
MH-60S Knighthawk: $19.48 million
KC-130J Tanker: $74.75 million
C-17 Globemaster III: $208.87 million
E-8C JSTARS: $328.8 million
Predator UAV: $3.27 million
Virginia SSN: $2288.3 million
Arleigh Burke DDG: $1062.47 million
T-AKE 1 Lewis & Clark: $370.8 million
Now some of these, like the UH-60, are more expensive partially because of lower procurement. That one would probably be closer to $13 million with a larger run. As you can see, a lot of these cost the US a lot more than what they’re being sold for in NS. Prices will also fluctuate a bit (the V-22 was $80.1 mil in 2000, and jumped to $133 mil in 2001 before dropping back down). Also, the lack of availability of components can affect price significantly. The E-8C is up nearly 50% from the $225 million cost in 2000.
There are also some other, general prices I can give. These aren’t quite as up to date, and in many cases I don’t quite know what year the prices come from, but they’re a decent guideline as well. Please note that I’m just listing a few here. I have no desire to show every price I’ve compiled, and don’t think I can fit that all anyway. I can, however, help to find pricing information on something that’s not here if you ask nicely.
Charles De Gaulle CVN: $3.35 billion
Kuznetzov CVN: $3 billion
Ticonderoga CG: $1.2 billion
Wasp LHD: $1.5 billion
Type 212A SSK: $370 million
A-50U AEW&C: $200 million
E-3 Sentry: $270 million
E-767: $400-500 million (1997)
MiG-25: $28 million
MiG-29: $15.5 million
MiG-31: $58 million
MiG-35: $70 million
Su-24: $24.5 million
Su-25: $15.5 million
Su-30MK: $34 million
Su-32: $36 million
Su-33: $35 million
Su-37: $40 million
Yak-141: $46 million
J-11 (Su-27): $30 million
F-15E: $50 million (1994)
F-16: $36.2 million (2001)
F/A-22: $100 million (estimate for production unit)
AV-8B Harrier II: $26.25 million
A-10 Thunderbolt II: $13 million
AH-64D: $15.2 million
T-90 Tank: $2.78 million
T-72 Tank: $1.2 million
BMP-3 ICV: $900,000 (in 1991)
BTR-80 APC: $91,000
2S6M Air Defense Vehicle: $285,000
BM-24 MRL: $250,000
M198 155mm TH: $527,337
M102 105mm TH: $196,341
Some places to go for information:
Military Aircraft Prices (http://www.aeronautics.ru/nws002/military_aircraft_prices.htm)
US Military Procurement Budget 2000-2002 (PDF file) (http://www.defenselink.mil/comptroller/defbudget/fy2002/amendfy2002_p1.pdf)
Globalsecurity-You might have to do some searching here, but a lot can be found (http://www.globalsecurity.org)
Google. You'd be amazed what you can find here if you know how to look (http://www.google.com)
For starters, I will talk about some of the pitfalls with research that the good researcher must try to avoid:
One of the biggest problems is the variety of information on the internet, and one must be sure to get current and correct information whenever possible, as many players have listed units for an original production cost that’s several decades out of date. It is indeed imperative to check the year the price is coming from, because, as a general rule, prices go up every year. One of the primary reasons for this is inflation, which averages about 4% per year, so if you know the year the price comes from, you can calculate at least a rough estimate from there. Now, to make sure this is understood, this is compounded, so if you were to get a 2001 price, you’d multiply it by 1.04, and then multiply the result by 1.04. One of the most common prices listed is FY ’98 dollars, which would be multiplied by approximately 1.21665 (that’s nearly a 22% increase in only 5 years). However, for really old prices (over 20 years), you may want to look up actual annual inflation rates, as there are some periods of above average inflation. The most common place to find old prices is with aircraft, with things like $30 million for an F-15C or F-15E, or an F/A-18. Those are the initial production costs all those years ago, and each of these costs over $50 million today.
Another thing to watch out for is the average unit cost. FAS and globalsecurity.org (along with a number of other sites), which generally have some good pricing information, will often provide an average unit cost as the total program cost divided by the number of units built. Both the B-2 bomber and TACMS missile on globalsecurity fall under this category. As you might expect, the listed price is going to be much more (in some cases, over twice as much) than the actual unit cost. Therefore, whenever you see “total program cost,” be wary. Occasionally, the average unit cost will be correct, but check by dividing total program cost by the number of systems, just to be sure. The final pitfall is related to this, and that’s the cost of a prototype or preproduction unit versus the actual production one. For example, the prototype F-117A cost over $110 million, while the actual production units were only $42.6, a rather significant drop.
Finally, a good place to find the most accurate prices is going to be in the unit descriptions (at globalsecurity) and information on military sales. They will occasionally state the cost of a contract and the number of units ordered, as well as when the purchase was made.
Now, there is some leeway in pricing, but you do have to be careful. There are generally 4 ways to drop the price: cheaper labor, better manufacturing facilities, larger production runs, and updated components & manufacturing.
The first of these is the easiest. Any nation that regularly chooses the second option in the Workers Strike issue, or abolishes minimum wage laws, will be able to employ workers for less than others, allowing a small portion of the cost to be shaved off (or slightly greater profit for each unit sold). However, nations that grant pay raises and keep minimum wage laws cannot do this (sorry guys). Another option is better manufacturing facilities. More modern the facilities can produce things much more cheaply (this is part of the benefit the Japanese have). Nations with exceptionally strong economies (Powerhouse and above), and those with decent economies that have rebuilt after a war that destroyed their infrastructure, will gain the most benefit from this. Those with a fair economy or lower might have poor production facilities that are more expensive to use. Improved factories will likely take off more than cheaper labor, but they actually cost a decent amount of money to set up, which is why nations with weaker economies might not be able to afford them. However, the easiest way to drop the price is with a huge production run. The more of a unit is produced, the cheaper each individual one will be. The decrease is not very significant with only a few units, but when production runs go into the thousands, they will start to drop considerably. Naturally, ships aren’t as affected by this as aircraft, munitions, and ground vehicles. The final method, and the one with the greatest potential price drop, is to use newer components and manufacturing techniques on older systems. This is what dropped the Tomahawk’s unit price by over 50%. However, the systems this can be used on are limited (more complex units like aircraft and ships are less susceptible), and most won’t show quite such a dramatic drop. The systems must also be several decades old for such a significant drop. On a lighter level, factories can be retooled to provide a modest reduction in production units without the age requirement, but it will be only a fraction of that seen with the Tomahawk. A fifth way of dropping the cost, and one that's not recommended, is to drop quality. You can cut costs significantly by using poorer components or even omitting some things outright, but you must, at least OOCly, state that you've done this. You'll also find that others will tend to avoid you unless they desperately need really cheap equipment.
The Soviet Union used many of these to keep costs down. They naturally had large amounts of cheap labor, and made huge production runs. They also left out many features and systems that are considered essential by Western nations. Because of this, most Soviet fighters, including the MiG-29, are extremely dependent on outside control, as they lack the avionics to fight effectively on their own. Likewise, Soviet tanks dropped many of the key survivability features on Western units. This means that a Soviet tank is far more likely to be destroyed when the armor is penetrated, while Western tanks that are knocked out can usually be salvaged and repaired.
When designing an original unit, it is imperative to look at other, similar, systems (assuming there are any), and use the cost of those as a guide for pricing your own unit. Just because you designed it yourself doesn't mean that the Ubertank MkII can be equivalent to an Abrams and still cost only $1 million. Likewise, there's no reason to be selling it for $10 million.
One of the things that annoys me the most is the obscenely low pricing of battleships and the like. I will put this simply: The most recent AEGIS destroyers and Cruisers cost more than $1 billion, so it goes against all logic to be selling AEGIS battleships for less. My best estimate for the cost of an Iowa Class battleship, built to the modern refit standards, is in the range of $3 billion. This is taking into account things like operating cost and upgrade cost, and comparing them to other large ships. A battleship without AEGIS is around $3 billion. You’d have to add a couple hundred million for an AEGIS suite (the system itself costs $200 million), and then consider that most battleships in NS are bigger than an Iowa. Taking it in mind, the average battleship should cost $3-6 billion, or as much as a nuclear powered aircraft carrier. Some could conceivably go as high as $10 billion or more. Any one going for less than $2 billion should be ignored.
As one might have expected, I will now give the current prices on a number of systems. Most of these prices are the average cost taken straight from the FY2002 US procurement budget.
M16A2 Rifle: $653.59
M4A1 Carbine: $857.14
Mk.19 AGL: $19,072.85
AIM-120 AMRAAM: $702,000
AGM-84G SLAM-ER: $873,000
AGM-114 Hellfire: $81,000
D-5 Trident II: $47.38 million
M270A1 MLRS Launcher: $4.24 million
M1114 HMMWV: $74,488
UH-60L Blackhawk: $16.37 million
F/A-18E/F Super Hornet: $66.25 million
V-22 Osprey: $90.07 million
E-2C Hawkeye: $76.96 million
MH-60S Knighthawk: $19.48 million
KC-130J Tanker: $74.75 million
C-17 Globemaster III: $208.87 million
E-8C JSTARS: $328.8 million
Predator UAV: $3.27 million
Virginia SSN: $2288.3 million
Arleigh Burke DDG: $1062.47 million
T-AKE 1 Lewis & Clark: $370.8 million
Now some of these, like the UH-60, are more expensive partially because of lower procurement. That one would probably be closer to $13 million with a larger run. As you can see, a lot of these cost the US a lot more than what they’re being sold for in NS. Prices will also fluctuate a bit (the V-22 was $80.1 mil in 2000, and jumped to $133 mil in 2001 before dropping back down). Also, the lack of availability of components can affect price significantly. The E-8C is up nearly 50% from the $225 million cost in 2000.
There are also some other, general prices I can give. These aren’t quite as up to date, and in many cases I don’t quite know what year the prices come from, but they’re a decent guideline as well. Please note that I’m just listing a few here. I have no desire to show every price I’ve compiled, and don’t think I can fit that all anyway. I can, however, help to find pricing information on something that’s not here if you ask nicely.
Charles De Gaulle CVN: $3.35 billion
Kuznetzov CVN: $3 billion
Ticonderoga CG: $1.2 billion
Wasp LHD: $1.5 billion
Type 212A SSK: $370 million
A-50U AEW&C: $200 million
E-3 Sentry: $270 million
E-767: $400-500 million (1997)
MiG-25: $28 million
MiG-29: $15.5 million
MiG-31: $58 million
MiG-35: $70 million
Su-24: $24.5 million
Su-25: $15.5 million
Su-30MK: $34 million
Su-32: $36 million
Su-33: $35 million
Su-37: $40 million
Yak-141: $46 million
J-11 (Su-27): $30 million
F-15E: $50 million (1994)
F-16: $36.2 million (2001)
F/A-22: $100 million (estimate for production unit)
AV-8B Harrier II: $26.25 million
A-10 Thunderbolt II: $13 million
AH-64D: $15.2 million
T-90 Tank: $2.78 million
T-72 Tank: $1.2 million
BMP-3 ICV: $900,000 (in 1991)
BTR-80 APC: $91,000
2S6M Air Defense Vehicle: $285,000
BM-24 MRL: $250,000
M198 155mm TH: $527,337
M102 105mm TH: $196,341
Some places to go for information:
Military Aircraft Prices (http://www.aeronautics.ru/nws002/military_aircraft_prices.htm)
US Military Procurement Budget 2000-2002 (PDF file) (http://www.defenselink.mil/comptroller/defbudget/fy2002/amendfy2002_p1.pdf)
Globalsecurity-You might have to do some searching here, but a lot can be found (http://www.globalsecurity.org)
Google. You'd be amazed what you can find here if you know how to look (http://www.google.com)