Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
ZENODOarrow_drop_down
ZENODO
Other literature type . 2026
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
ZENODO
Other literature type . 2026
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Counter-Unmanned Aircraft Systems Technologies: A Comparative Study of Kinetic, Electronic Warfare, and Directed Energy Countermeasures (2022-2026)

Authors: Pokorny, Laszlo;

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Counter-Unmanned Aircraft Systems Technologies: A Comparative Study of Kinetic, Electronic Warfare, and Directed Energy Countermeasures (2022-2026)

Abstract

The proliferation of low-cost unmanned aerial systems (UAS) has created an unprecedented cost-exchange asymmetry in modern air defense, exemplified by the expenditure of $3-5 million interceptor missiles against drone threats costing as little as $20,000. This quantitative study conducted a comprehensive cost-effectiveness analysis of counter-UAS (C-UAS) technologies across kinetic, electronic warfare (EW), and directed energy weapon (DEW) domains during the critical period of 2022-2026. Utilizing publicly available datasets from Oryx, SIPRI, and ACLED, combined with defense industry specifications and operational data from the Ukraine conflict, this research developed and applied the Multi-Layered Defense Economics Model (MLDEM) to evaluate 19 distinct C-UAS systems against standardized threat profiles. The analysis employed descriptive statistics, Kruskal-Wallis H-tests, Mann-Whitney U-tests, multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA), and Monte Carlo simulation with 10,000 iterations to assess cost-effectiveness metrics, technology readiness, and operational sustainability. Results revealed that cost-per-engagement (CPE) varies by more than five orders of magnitude across system categories, ranging from approximately $0.01 for EW systems to $4.75 million for advanced missile interceptors. Statistical analysis demonstrated significant differences between technology categories (H = 13.92, p = 0.0009, ε² = 0.745), with DEW and gun-based kinetic systems achieving consistently favorable cost-exchange ratios against mass drone threats. Hypotheses H1a, H1b, and H2 were supported, indicating that DEW systems achieve CPE ratios below $500 per engagement, gun-based systems below $2,000 per engagement, and multi-layered architectures outperform single-technology solutions. Hypothesis H3, positing a positive correlation between technology readiness level and cost-effectiveness, was not supported (ρ = -0.404, p = 0.086). These findings provide empirical foundations for defense acquisition decisions, demonstrating that economically sustainable C-UAS architectures require a diversified technology portfolio prioritizing directed energy and gun-based effectors over missile systems for high-volume drone defense scenarios.

Keywords

electronic warfare, Warfare, counter-UAS, Cost-Effectiveness Analysis, defense economics, unmanned aerial systems, Cost-Effectiveness Analysis/statistics & numerical data, Shahed drone, Military Science, Patriot, Weapons/economics, Weapons/statistics & numerical data, Cost-Effectiveness Analysis/economics, Weapons, Military equipment, Ukraine, multi-layered defense, directed energy weapons, Drones

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!