Cost Asymmetry Visualisation

The core strategic logic of saturation warfare: if defenders must spend more per intercept than attackers spend per missile, cumulative costs diverge dramatically over multiple salvos. Configure the parameters below and watch the gap widen.

Configuration

Number of Salvos

How many salvos to simulate (1-50)

Missiles per Salvo

Avg ~120-200 BMs per large salvo

Attacker Cost per Missile ($M)

Kheibar Shekan est. ~$1-3M

Defender Cost per Intercept ($M)

Arrow-2 est. ~$3-10M per interceptor

Ballistic missiles in a single salvo

Attacker cost (per missile)

$0M

Defender cost (per intercept)

$0M

Total attacker — this salvo

$0M

Total defender — this salvo

$0M

Cumulative Totals Across All Salvos

Total Missiles Fired

Total Attacker Spend

Total Defender Spend

Cumulative Gap

Cumulative Cost Divergence Over Salvos

Per-Salvo Breakdown

Salvo	Missiles	Attacker Cost	Defender Cost	Gap (This Salvo)	Cumulative Gap

Note: Cost estimates are based on open-source and analyst reporting (Arrow-2: ~$3-10M per interceptor; Kheibar Shekan BM: ~$1-3M estimated per unit). Actual interceptor costs vary by system (Iron Dome ~$50K, David's Sling ~$1M, Arrow-2 ~$3-10M, Arrow-3 ~$2-3M, THAAD ~$12M). This visualisation uses a blended average for defender cost. The core strategic logic: if defenders must spend more to intercept than attackers spend to fire, saturation campaigns erode both interceptor magazines and defence budgets faster than they can be replenished.