Is there a rule against wishing for more wishes? If not, an unlimited benevolent genie lamp would be the go to.

I haven’t seen another stick community. There’s a stick rating Instagram account, but that’s pretty different.

!stick@sh.itjust.works

Having only a handful of jets you rarely fly really helps keep costs down.

Russia makes engines that actually last a long time shows the strength of Russian engineering.

I was saying exactly the opposite. US engines usually last a couple thousand hours, Russian engines last a few hundred.

To back calculate the cost per flight hour (with is what you’re suggesting) we’d need to know the overall cost of the su57 and the number of flight hours flown. Do we know those numbers? Given there are only about a dozen su57, they’ll have very low flight hours. Plus Russia tends to have about half the training time for pilots as the US, so that further lowers the flight hours.

But do you have info on the yearly cost of the su57?

I’m trying to say we have no idea what the maintenance costs are on the su57. Russia doesn’t report things like that. I don’t know if they even track it themselves. So you can’t just blanket say the su57 is cheaper to maintain unless you bring data.

One thing that works against Russia in maintenance is they tend to run their equipment much harder. To get good performance on their engines, they sometimes push them so that they only last a couple hundred flight hours. Doing the same with many components would indicate a very high maintenance factor.

Anyway, let’s talk maintenance costs. You have any data?

If you’re saying it’s still pre production, then it’s production delay is worse than the F35. It’s first flight was in 2010, so that puts it at 15 years from first fight to lrip and counting. F35 only had 10 year timeline between first flight in 2001 and lrip in 2011.

First, maintenance costs are fundamentally different from sticker price. To find maintenance cost, you’d want to find the maintenance factor, how many hours of maintenance per flight hour, and the cost of replacement parts per flight hour.

Comparing quoted sticker price isn’t much good either, since they haven’t sold any, and as you said it’s still pre production, so even if the cost wasn’t subsidized, it’d still be way off from final numbers.

What’s the su57 cost per hour taking into account maintainer income differences? I don’t see any numbers. And weren’t you criticizing the F22 for only having 200 units?

Expensive maintenance compared to what? Have you looked at the operations rates? It looks like F35 costs about the same per hour as the F15EX.

https://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/45/documents/rates/fy2023/2023_b_c.pdf

Looks like maybe CCP is more of the transliteration of the first letters of the Chinese words, but CPC is more of a translation, which the party prefers? But I’m getting a ton of conflicting state sources muddying the water. Some indications that CCP was seen negatively, so CPC was emphasized as a rebrand. Or that Chinese is a slur, so using China instead is more sensitive.

Anyway, CPC is what the tankies insist on, so I’ll keep using CCP.

But you do have an idea what it is. I use it because that’s the only thing I’ve seen non tankie people refer to it as, and I definitely don’t want to follow the tankie’s lead. Is it a translation thing that someone swapped or something? Or did they change it at some point?

No, it was an attempt to make something stol and cheaper, and it succeeded after billions of extra dollars and an extra decade. NGAD is supposed to be the all around better replacement.

But you know that that’s the same thing.

It lacks the molds, fittings, and jigs to. They were destroyed after the production run shut down. Similar story to the F1 Saturn V engines, it’d be more work to recreate them than to make something better.

Did you see the comparison to other jets?

Su57 is artisanally made, less than two dozen. ~200 is a short production run, they shut it down early because those 200 could defeat every other air force on the planet several times over. But tech has progressed since then, it’s only a bit better than the J20. But like the U2, that’s not it’s fault.

Yes you do.

The purpose of the U2 was to make a plane that could never be intercepted for the rest of time? No, they saw a gap that the Soviets didn’t have protection for yet, so they exploded it. One the Soviets caught up and closed the gap, they went higher and faster with the SR71, then higher and faster with satellites. It’s always back and forth, and the U2 gave a valuable capability until a counter was developed.

I did provide evidence, you didn’t. You have not provided evidence yet, if I believed you I’d be believing things without evidence.

Jfs has been a cluster, they wanted a VTOL jet that do everything, which physics doesn’t like. But with 15 years extra development, they kinda did it.

80% readiness is higher than most jets, my sources are actually showing loser, but still in line with other military jets.

A-10 Thunderbolt II (67 percent) and the F-16C (69 percent), while significantly outperforming air superiority fighters like the F-15C (33 percent) and F-22 (52 percent). https://www.sandboxx.us/news/why-media-coverage-of-the-f-35-repeatedly-misses-the-mark/

And is your third source just saying that the biggest problem with the F22 is that they want more of them? That hardly seems like a criticism of the plane itself.