Researchers used the Missile Defense Testbed and other engagement analysis software to simulate a hypothetical threat from a country possessing long- and intermediate-range ballistic missiles to demonstrate benefits of the Stunner. According to the assessment, a ballistic strike force comprising 600 Scud-type missiles and 200 long-range missiles, fired from 60-70 mobile launchers, could in minutes launch tens of missiles in rapid succession. Many would target critical assets, with the impact points of others uncertain, thus requiring complex threat-killing strategies.
Two defensive strategies were compared. In one, an investment of $1 billion in current missiles (e.g., MIM-104C Patriot missiles, upgraded MIM-23B Hawks and the Arrow II), each worth around $4 million, would result in 250 interceptors. To intercept the threats, defenders would need to launch at least 60 missiles, expending almost 25% of assets, against an estimated 10% of enemy inventory. With this strategy, a defensive shield would be gone after four attacks.
In contrast, by deploying David's Sling or a mix of David's Sling and existing interceptors, that same $1 billion would procure 600 Stunner interceptors, each costing less than $1 million, and 100 costlier missiles, which would be saved for special purposes. In this scenario, less than 10% of the defensive shield would be used to repel the threat (10 of the costlier missiles and 50 Stunners) and defenses would be maintained until the attacker runs out of missiles.
David's Sling will be integrated into a multilayered national defense system, receiving constant situational awareness and target updates from sensors and other assets, such as the Arrow Weapon Systems' Green Pine radar, national airspace control system and elevated sensor systems.
The Stunner is designed to be the basis for a next-generation air-to-air missile by removing the launch booster stage.