You're arguing from the wrong position. The cost of a defense system competes against the cost of other defense systems, and only very indirectly against the co

You're arguing from the wrong position. The cost of a defense system competes against the cost of other defense systems, and only very indirectly against the cost of the attack. If you haven't read the article: The final paragraph addresses most costs. Prototyping the laser - which is always a bit more expensive than a productionized version - was $73 million. A single missile shot is $4 million. That's 20 missiles shot at drones. That's it. Which means, on a pure cost basis, this thing getting off 20 shots at drones means it's paid for itself. Given it's capable of firing 6 shots per minutes, you need 4 minutes to make it worth the investment. Which, given drone speeds, probably means you fire for 2 minutes and start moving - another advantage it has over a more stationary missile systems. Cost isn't the issue here. As the fine article points out, the problems are of an operational nature.