In the Analysis team's estimation, systems above the line may have sufficient value to offset the technical challenge of producing such a system. Thus, systems to the left of the charts need less value to be attractive options than systems to the right of the chart, because the difficulty of achieving the capability is much less. The exact location of the line is somewhat arbitrary. It was drawn fairly low, terminating on the right at a value of 20, to identify the most promising systems. GIMS has the highest score but has high technical challenge, while GSRT performs some of the functions of GIMS but also with less technical challenge.
Sanctuary base has high value but also the highest technical challenge.
It may remain infeasible even beyond 2025. Appendix E contains tables of each system's value score for each future and weight set. Dividing the figures above into quadrants provides a delineation of the systems into four categories based on value and technical challenge. Figure 3-1 shows representative systems for each quadrant. The variation between futures is greater for the Alternate Futures Weights, reflecting both the more extreme views of a team immersed in the construction of the alternate futures and the centering effect of averaging the weights of the AU team members.