Analysis of Existing Methods for Calculating the Cost of the Stage of Use of Weapons and Military Equipment in the System of their Life Cycle Management
Abstract
Purpose: To comprehensive comparative study of scientific and methodological approaches to calculating the cost of the stage of use of weapons and military equipment in the US Armed Forces and the NATO system to identify their key conceptual advantages over the current national methodology and form a sound analytical basis for its further adaptation. The study is aimed at establishing the key factors in the formation of operating costs and determining the directions of transforming the domestic approach into a holistic engineering and economic cost management system.
Method. Methods of systems analysis, analogy, and comparison.
Findings. Approaches to estimating the O&S costs of weapons and military equipment have been systematized and analyzed. Key features of modern methodologies have been identified, with particular attention paid to their application under martial law conditions. The feasibility of implementing a unified cost structure adapted to the needs of the Defence Forces of Ukraine has been substantiated.
Theoretical implications. The research deepens scientific understanding of methodologies for evaluating the O&S costs of military assets, providing a foundation for the development of effective decision-making in defence planning and resource management.
Practical implications. The results can be applied to improve approaches to estimating the O&S costs of weapons and military equipment in the Defence Forces of Ukraine, as well as to develop relevant methodological materials and internal regulatory documents in the field of defence planning.
Paper type. Theoretical.
Downloads
References
DSTU V 15.004:2022. (2022). Armament and military equipment life cycle management system. Stages of the life cycle of armaments and military equipment. Retrieved from https://online.budstandart.com/ua/catalog/doc-page.html?id_doc=99700
Arulnathan, V., Heidari, M. D., Doyon, M., Li, E. P. H., & Pelletier, N. (2022). Economic indicators for life cycle sustainability assessment: Going beyond life cycle costing. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/366444003
U.S. Department of Defense. (2021). Analysis of alternatives cost estimating handbook. https://www.cape.osd.mil/files/otherGuides/AoACostHandbook2021.pdf
NATO. (2007). Code of practice for life cycle costing (RTO-TR-SAS069). https://nso.nato.int
U.S. Department of Defense. (2020). Operating and support cost-estimating guide. https://acqnotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Operating-and-Support-Cost-Estimating-Guide-Sept-2020.pdf
Jones, G., White, E., Ryan, E. T., & Ritschel, J. D. (2014). Investigation into the ratio of operating and support costs to life-cycle costs for DoD weapon systems. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264083243
NATO. (2007). Methods and models for life cycle costing (RTO-TR-SAS054). https://nso.nato.int
Ballentine, E. (2018). Analysis of cost avoidance for military aircraft components using condition-based maintenance practices (Doctoral dissertation, University of South Carolina). https://scholarcommons.sc.edu
Mardo, M. (2022). The principles of life cycle costing of the assets of the defence forces. https://www.kvak.ee/files/2023/01
Ball, K., & Juarez, G. (2025). Analysis of traditional manned aviation systems and fuel-efficient UAVs for ship resupply. Naval Postgraduate School. https://dair.nps.edu
Williams, J. T. (2023). Optimization model for minimizing the bullwhip effect in the U.S. defense industrial base (Doctoral dissertation). https://scholarspace.library.gwu.edu
Savić, A. O., Mihajlović, M. M., & Božović, I. D. (2023). Macroeconomic aspects of comprehensive costs of assets in defense systems. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/371646806
Calin, V. (2024). Life cycle cost analysis of military equipment. https://codrm.eu
Zikos, T., Karadimas, N. V., Tsigkas, A., & Sidiropoulou, K. (2022). Weapons life cycle cost as a key factor in logistics success. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/360052678
NATO. (2012). NATO life cycle costing common methodology (ALCCP-1.1). https://nso.nato.int
Junaid, Z. B., & Asif, R. (2020). Life cycle cost optimization in defense industry. https://twasp.info/public/paper/5%20(10)%2018-25.pdf
Ministry of Defence of Ukraine. (2024). Methodology for calculating the life cycle cost of weapons, military and special equipment (Order No. 106, February 12, 2024). https://zakon.rada.gov.ua
ACEIT. (n.d.). Automated cost estimating integrated tools. https://sumble.com/tech/aceit
Defense Acquisition University. (n.d.). Operating and support management information system (OSMIS). https://www.dau.edu
U.S. Department of Defense. (n.d.). Visibility and management of operating and support costs (VAMOSC). https://evamosc.osd.mil
NATO. (n.d.). Logistics functional area services (LOGFAS). https://nexuslcm.com
SAP. (n.d.). SAP defense & security solutions. https://www.sap.com
PTC. (2020). Windchill SaaS selected for U.S. Navy digital transformation. https://www.ptc.com
CLEVR. (2025). Why aerospace and defense needs PLM: Siemens Teamcenter. https://www.clevr.com
IBM. (n.d.). IBM Maximo. https://mediacenter.ibm.com
NATO. (n.d.). Development of a MATLAB toolbox for multi-sensor tracking simulation. https://www.sto.nato.int
Klug, M., & Alexa, A. (2011). Excel-based probabilistic logistics planning analysis. https://www.msc-les.org
Oracle. (n.d.). Oracle Crystal Ball. https://www.oracle.com
Abstract views: 0 PDF Downloads: 0
Copyright (c) 2026 Володимир Мазур
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The authors agree with the following conditions:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication (Download agreement) with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
2. Authors have the right to complete individual additional agreements for the non-exclusive spreading of the journal’s published version of the work (for example, to post work in the electronic repository of the institution or to publish it as part of a monograph), with the reference to the first publication of the work in this journal.
3. Journal’s politics allows and encourages the placement on the Internet (for example, in the repositories of institutions, personal websites, SSRN, ResearchGate, MPRA, SSOAR, etc.) manuscript of the work by the authors, before and during the process of viewing it by this journal, because it can lead to a productive research discussion and positively affect the efficiency and dynamics of citing the published work (see The Effect of Open Access).
