ZT:美国第三、四代战斗机效费比比较(郭道平筒子的硕士论 ...

论文标题:美国第三、四代战斗机效费比比较
The Cost-Effectiveness Comparison Between the U.S.3rd and 4th Generation Fighters
论文作者 郭道平
论文导师 叶卫平,论文学位 硕士,论文专业 国防经济
论文单位 中国人民大学,点击次数 4,论文页数 73页File Size737k
2005-04-01论文免费下载 http://paper.dic123.com/lunwen_340658532/ 效费比;美国;战斗机;分析比较
Cost-Effectiveness; U.S.; Fighter;A nalysis and Comparison
本文根据现代战斗机效费分析的基本理论,对美国第三、四代(包括重型和轻型)战斗机的效费比进行了较为全面的比较分析。在比较美国第三代重型战斗机 F-15 与第四代重型战斗机 F/A-22,第三代轻型战斗机 F-16 和 F/A-18 与第四代轻型战斗机 F-35 的效费比的基础上,归纳总结了美国着力提高新一代战斗机效费比的动因和具体措施。 战斗机效费分析的基本理论认为,战斗机的效费权衡是在一定的权衡空间内进行的,即只有满足费用约束和最低效能要求的高效费比方案才是可行的。费用和效能是效费比分析的两个要素,费用是指包括研制、生产和使用保障费在内的全寿命周期费用(LCC);效能则分为系统效能和作战效能,系统效能是包括飞机作战能力、可靠性和维修性、保障性、生存力等相关因素在内的综合效能指标,作战效能是飞机所具备的作战能力。在现代战斗机效费分析中,一般使用系统效能作为效能参数,但出于一定的研究目的,也可采用作战效能作为效能参数。战斗机效费分析的根本任务是在一定的费用约束和效能要求下,找到提高飞机效费比的可行途径以及各种有效措施。提高战斗机效费比的可能途径有 5 种。就研制经济可承受的新一代战斗机而言,设法在费用上升不大的情况下使效能得到较大提高,是提高新一代战斗机效费比的切实可行作法,因为在战斗机发展史上尚无新一代战斗机比老一代战斗机还便宜的先例。 F/A-22 是冷战时期美国为了对抗苏联苏-27 和米格-29 等先进战斗机,以及苏制先进陆基防空导弹系统而开始研制的第四代重型战斗机,它实现了对美国空军第三代重型战斗机 F-15 的全面性能飞跃,包括具有高隐身能力、可超声速巡航、采用推力矢量发动机和综合航空电子系统等。国外有关研究机构所作的效费分析表明,F/A-22 的效费比比 F-15 高得多,在均 100%完成相同任务的情况下,F/A-22 所需出动的飞机和飞行员、飞机损失数量和易损支援飞机的总价值比 F-15C 少得多;但 F/A-22 的研制、生产费用和出厂单价极其高昂,在有限军费下无法满足美国空军原定的装备数量需求。造成 F/A-22 费用和价格不断上涨的主要原因有:冷战后美国处于军费预算削减的大环境下,反复修改计划而引起大量无效工作;某些关键技术不成熟造成项目费用超支和进度拖延;在采办管理上存在过时或不当作法等。F/A-22 采购数量不断减少导致出厂单价攀升并形成了难以摆脱的价格陷阱,这一采办困境引发了今后如何保持有活力的国防科技工业基础的思考。 冷战结束后,美国在军费紧缩的巨大压力下开始认真考虑武器装备的经济可承受性问题。美国军方将第四代轻型战斗机 F-35 的经济可承受性要求置于首位。与其将要取代的第三代轻型战斗机 F-16 和 F/A-18 相比,F-35 的三种型别飞机在性能/效能上均有不同程度的提高。为实现低成本目标,美国军方和承包商采取了一系列具体措施:(1)军方在充分论证的基础上提出经济可承受的作战需求,将成本作为独立变量(CAIV)来考虑,在调整作战需求时必须保证经济可承受要求;(2)实现空、海军和陆战队三军通用设计,从新一代作战飞机的全寿命周期费用上为整个军方的战术飞机现代化计划带来规模经济效益;(3)在技术和项目管理上,采取继承与创新相结合的方法,在进入飞机型号发展之前降低关键技术风险;(4)采取螺旋式采办新章法,以更快地满足不同用户的当前需求并更好地适应用户未来的需求变化;(5)为进一步降低成本和借鉴别国特有的技术经验,美国首次在新一代战斗机研制中采取广泛的国际合作;(6)充分利用信息技术的进展,仿真设计和虚拟制造成为缩短飞机研制周期和节省成本的关键;(7)实施一系列配套的防务采办改革,包括在更大范围内推行标准化、通用化和模块化,鼓励采用民用技术标准和货架产品等。 在军费极为有限的情况下,设法扭转战斗机的费用与效能同步上涨的局面,对于实现武器装备现代化建设具有重要的意义。资源在任何时候都是有限的,而发展现代高新技术武器装备的代价十分高昂,经济问题已成为发展高新技术武器装备的巨大障碍。有统计资料表明战斗机出厂单价随年代呈指数形式上升,新一代战斗机只有在满足费用约束的条件下尽可能达到较高的效费比才有实际意义。设法将费用控制在合理的范围内而尽力提高效费比,是各国发展新一代战斗机所面临的艰巨任务。美国将第四代轻型战斗机 F-35 的经济可承受性要求置于首位,在飞机价格相对较低的情况下实现高于第三代轻型战斗机 F-16 和F/A-18 的效费比,展现了与包括 F/A-22 在内的以往新一代高性能战斗机所不同的发展思路。对于美国的成功经验,需结合中国国情有选择地借鉴,如在军机发展中加强全寿命周期费用管理;贯彻三化(标准化、通用化和模块化)原则来实现规模经济效益;充分利用建模和仿真手段以及推行采办管理改革;进行国内联合研制并在政治许可的情况下广泛开展国际合作等。
According to the fundamental theory of the modern fighter cost-effectiveness analysis, this article analyses and compares widely the cost-effectiveness between the U.S. 3rd and the 4th generation fighters (concerning heavy and light types). Based on the cost-effectiveness comparisons between the U.S. 3rd generation heavy fighter F-15 and the 4th generation heavy fighter F/A-22, and between the 3rd generation light fighter F-16 or F/A-18 and the 4th generation light fighter F-35, it summaries the motive and measures of the United States improving the cost-effectiveness of the new-generation fighters. On the basis of the fundamental theory of the fighter cost-effectiveness analysis, the fighter cost-effectiveness trade-off is considered in a certain trade-off space, i.e. only meeting the demand of the cost constraint and the effectiveness requirement, the better cost-effectiveness fighter designs are feasible. Cost and effectiveness are two essential factors in the cost-effectiveness analysis. The cost refers to the life-cycle cost (LCC) including R&D, production and support spending; the system effectiveness is distinguished from the combat effectiveness by its implication, the system effectiveness is the comprehensive effectiveness including combat, reality and maintenance, supportability and survivability etc., and the combat effectiveness is the operational capability possessed by fighter. The system effectiveness is usually used in the modern fighter cost-effectiveness analysis, but on certain occasions the combat effectiveness is also used. The ultimate target of the cost-effectiveness analysis is, with the given cost constraint and effectiveness requirement, to find approaches to improve the cost-effectiveness of fighter and take the efficient measures. There are five approaches in improving the fighter cost-effectiveness. For developing the new-generation fighter, it is real to increase the effectiveness of aircraft with lightly cost rising. In the history of the fighter development, there isn’t such example that the new-generation fighter is cheaper than the older-generation aircraft. F/A-22 is the 4th generation heavy fighter designed by U.S. during the Cold War, and its original adversaries are the Soviet Su-27, MiG-29 fighters and the advanced surface-air defense systems. The fighter realizes fully the performance revolution compared with the 3rd generation fighter F-15, including stealth, supersonic cruise, thrust-vectoring nozzles and integrated avionics etc. The analysis conducted by the foreign research establishments indicates that F/A-22 is far better than F-15 in cost-effectiveness. Accomplishing the same mission on the 100% success, the required F-22s and pilots, their losses and the total value of the relative assets at risk are much less than those of F-15; but the R&D and production cost and price of F/A-22 are too very high to meet the original quantity requirement of the USAF with the limited military budgets. The major reasons that lead to the cost climbing of F/A-22: In the environment of U.S. military expenditure shrinking with the end of the Cold War, repeated plan modifications lead to the great of the non-valued efforts, some of the critical technology that haven’t matured lead to the cost overrun and the schedule delay, and there are the out of date or unsuitable practices in the acquisition management, etc. Decreasing the number of the F/A-22 production has caused the continued climbing of the aircraft price and formed a trouble price trap. The difficult position of the F/A-22 acquisition leads to the thinking of how to keep the defense industrial base vigorous in the future. After the Cold War, U.S. turns to pay attention to the affordability of the armament and equipment under the heavy pressure of the military budget shrinking. The affordability is superior in the requirements of the U.S. 4th generation light fighter F-35. Compared with the 3rd generation light fighter F-16 and F/A-18, three variants of F-35 have improvements more or less in the effectiveness/capability. To real论文标题:美国第三、四代战斗机效费比比较
The Cost-Effectiveness Comparison Between the U.S.3rd and 4th Generation Fighters
论文作者 郭道平
论文导师 叶卫平,论文学位 硕士,论文专业 国防经济
论文单位 中国人民大学,点击次数 4,论文页数 73页File Size737k
2005-04-01论文免费下载 http://paper.dic123.com/lunwen_340658532/ 效费比;美国;战斗机;分析比较
Cost-Effectiveness; U.S.; Fighter;A nalysis and Comparison
本文根据现代战斗机效费分析的基本理论,对美国第三、四代(包括重型和轻型)战斗机的效费比进行了较为全面的比较分析。在比较美国第三代重型战斗机 F-15 与第四代重型战斗机 F/A-22,第三代轻型战斗机 F-16 和 F/A-18 与第四代轻型战斗机 F-35 的效费比的基础上,归纳总结了美国着力提高新一代战斗机效费比的动因和具体措施。 战斗机效费分析的基本理论认为,战斗机的效费权衡是在一定的权衡空间内进行的,即只有满足费用约束和最低效能要求的高效费比方案才是可行的。费用和效能是效费比分析的两个要素,费用是指包括研制、生产和使用保障费在内的全寿命周期费用(LCC);效能则分为系统效能和作战效能,系统效能是包括飞机作战能力、可靠性和维修性、保障性、生存力等相关因素在内的综合效能指标,作战效能是飞机所具备的作战能力。在现代战斗机效费分析中,一般使用系统效能作为效能参数,但出于一定的研究目的,也可采用作战效能作为效能参数。战斗机效费分析的根本任务是在一定的费用约束和效能要求下,找到提高飞机效费比的可行途径以及各种有效措施。提高战斗机效费比的可能途径有 5 种。就研制经济可承受的新一代战斗机而言,设法在费用上升不大的情况下使效能得到较大提高,是提高新一代战斗机效费比的切实可行作法,因为在战斗机发展史上尚无新一代战斗机比老一代战斗机还便宜的先例。 F/A-22 是冷战时期美国为了对抗苏联苏-27 和米格-29 等先进战斗机,以及苏制先进陆基防空导弹系统而开始研制的第四代重型战斗机,它实现了对美国空军第三代重型战斗机 F-15 的全面性能飞跃,包括具有高隐身能力、可超声速巡航、采用推力矢量发动机和综合航空电子系统等。国外有关研究机构所作的效费分析表明,F/A-22 的效费比比 F-15 高得多,在均 100%完成相同任务的情况下,F/A-22 所需出动的飞机和飞行员、飞机损失数量和易损支援飞机的总价值比 F-15C 少得多;但 F/A-22 的研制、生产费用和出厂单价极其高昂,在有限军费下无法满足美国空军原定的装备数量需求。造成 F/A-22 费用和价格不断上涨的主要原因有:冷战后美国处于军费预算削减的大环境下,反复修改计划而引起大量无效工作;某些关键技术不成熟造成项目费用超支和进度拖延;在采办管理上存在过时或不当作法等。F/A-22 采购数量不断减少导致出厂单价攀升并形成了难以摆脱的价格陷阱,这一采办困境引发了今后如何保持有活力的国防科技工业基础的思考。 冷战结束后,美国在军费紧缩的巨大压力下开始认真考虑武器装备的经济可承受性问题。美国军方将第四代轻型战斗机 F-35 的经济可承受性要求置于首位。与其将要取代的第三代轻型战斗机 F-16 和 F/A-18 相比,F-35 的三种型别飞机在性能/效能上均有不同程度的提高。为实现低成本目标,美国军方和承包商采取了一系列具体措施:(1)军方在充分论证的基础上提出经济可承受的作战需求,将成本作为独立变量(CAIV)来考虑,在调整作战需求时必须保证经济可承受要求;(2)实现空、海军和陆战队三军通用设计,从新一代作战飞机的全寿命周期费用上为整个军方的战术飞机现代化计划带来规模经济效益;(3)在技术和项目管理上,采取继承与创新相结合的方法,在进入飞机型号发展之前降低关键技术风险;(4)采取螺旋式采办新章法,以更快地满足不同用户的当前需求并更好地适应用户未来的需求变化;(5)为进一步降低成本和借鉴别国特有的技术经验,美国首次在新一代战斗机研制中采取广泛的国际合作;(6)充分利用信息技术的进展,仿真设计和虚拟制造成为缩短飞机研制周期和节省成本的关键;(7)实施一系列配套的防务采办改革,包括在更大范围内推行标准化、通用化和模块化,鼓励采用民用技术标准和货架产品等。 在军费极为有限的情况下,设法扭转战斗机的费用与效能同步上涨的局面,对于实现武器装备现代化建设具有重要的意义。资源在任何时候都是有限的,而发展现代高新技术武器装备的代价十分高昂,经济问题已成为发展高新技术武器装备的巨大障碍。有统计资料表明战斗机出厂单价随年代呈指数形式上升,新一代战斗机只有在满足费用约束的条件下尽可能达到较高的效费比才有实际意义。设法将费用控制在合理的范围内而尽力提高效费比,是各国发展新一代战斗机所面临的艰巨任务。美国将第四代轻型战斗机 F-35 的经济可承受性要求置于首位,在飞机价格相对较低的情况下实现高于第三代轻型战斗机 F-16 和F/A-18 的效费比,展现了与包括 F/A-22 在内的以往新一代高性能战斗机所不同的发展思路。对于美国的成功经验,需结合中国国情有选择地借鉴,如在军机发展中加强全寿命周期费用管理;贯彻三化(标准化、通用化和模块化)原则来实现规模经济效益;充分利用建模和仿真手段以及推行采办管理改革;进行国内联合研制并在政治许可的情况下广泛开展国际合作等。
According to the fundamental theory of the modern fighter cost-effectiveness analysis, this article analyses and compares widely the cost-effectiveness between the U.S. 3rd and the 4th generation fighters (concerning heavy and light types). Based on the cost-effectiveness comparisons between the U.S. 3rd generation heavy fighter F-15 and the 4th generation heavy fighter F/A-22, and between the 3rd generation light fighter F-16 or F/A-18 and the 4th generation light fighter F-35, it summaries the motive and measures of the United States improving the cost-effectiveness of the new-generation fighters. On the basis of the fundamental theory of the fighter cost-effectiveness analysis, the fighter cost-effectiveness trade-off is considered in a certain trade-off space, i.e. only meeting the demand of the cost constraint and the effectiveness requirement, the better cost-effectiveness fighter designs are feasible. Cost and effectiveness are two essential factors in the cost-effectiveness analysis. The cost refers to the life-cycle cost (LCC) including R&D, production and support spending; the system effectiveness is distinguished from the combat effectiveness by its implication, the system effectiveness is the comprehensive effectiveness including combat, reality and maintenance, supportability and survivability etc., and the combat effectiveness is the operational capability possessed by fighter. The system effectiveness is usually used in the modern fighter cost-effectiveness analysis, but on certain occasions the combat effectiveness is also used. The ultimate target of the cost-effectiveness analysis is, with the given cost constraint and effectiveness requirement, to find approaches to improve the cost-effectiveness of fighter and take the efficient measures. There are five approaches in improving the fighter cost-effectiveness. For developing the new-generation fighter, it is real to increase the effectiveness of aircraft with lightly cost rising. In the history of the fighter development, there isn’t such example that the new-generation fighter is cheaper than the older-generation aircraft. F/A-22 is the 4th generation heavy fighter designed by U.S. during the Cold War, and its original adversaries are the Soviet Su-27, MiG-29 fighters and the advanced surface-air defense systems. The fighter realizes fully the performance revolution compared with the 3rd generation fighter F-15, including stealth, supersonic cruise, thrust-vectoring nozzles and integrated avionics etc. The analysis conducted by the foreign research establishments indicates that F/A-22 is far better than F-15 in cost-effectiveness. Accomplishing the same mission on the 100% success, the required F-22s and pilots, their losses and the total value of the relative assets at risk are much less than those of F-15; but the R&D and production cost and price of F/A-22 are too very high to meet the original quantity requirement of the USAF with the limited military budgets. The major reasons that lead to the cost climbing of F/A-22: In the environment of U.S. military expenditure shrinking with the end of the Cold War, repeated plan modifications lead to the great of the non-valued efforts, some of the critical technology that haven’t matured lead to the cost overrun and the schedule delay, and there are the out of date or unsuitable practices in the acquisition management, etc. Decreasing the number of the F/A-22 production has caused the continued climbing of the aircraft price and formed a trouble price trap. The difficult position of the F/A-22 acquisition leads to the thinking of how to keep the defense industrial base vigorous in the future. After the Cold War, U.S. turns to pay attention to the affordability of the armament and equipment under the heavy pressure of the military budget shrinking. The affordability is superior in the requirements of the U.S. 4th generation light fighter F-35. Compared with the 3rd generation light fighter F-16 and F/A-18, three variants of F-35 have improvements more or less in the effectiveness/capability. To real