Stock of the United States’ largest defence contractor Lockheed Martin was downgraded to Hold from Buy at Deutsche Bank by 14.5 percent, with a price target of $523
Of course you can blanket say that SU57 is cheaper. We know that the total cost of the jet is a fraction of f35, we know that Russian military industry is state owned, and is not operated for profit, and we know that Russia spends a fraction of what US does on the military overall. It’s obvious to anybody with even a minimally functioning brain that the cost of weapon production in Russia is much lower than in the US. Meanwhile, the fact that Russia makes engines that actually last a long time shows the strength of Russian engineering.
To back calculate the cost per flight hour (which 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 don’t have info on SU57 yearly costs, aside from the link I’ve already provided for you. However, as I keep repeating, and you keep ignoring, overall military spending in Russia is FAR LOWER than in the US. That alone clearly shows that cost has to be lower. Perhaps try engaging with that instead of dancing around the elephant in the room.
Pretty sure Russia has been flying a lot more missions over past three years than US has. No only that, but they actually have to contend with real AD instead of just terrorizing farmers, but do go on making some very interesting and intelligent points.
Of course you can blanket say that SU57 is cheaper. We know that the total cost of the jet is a fraction of f35, we know that Russian military industry is state owned, and is not operated for profit, and we know that Russia spends a fraction of what US does on the military overall. It’s obvious to anybody with even a minimally functioning brain that the cost of weapon production in Russia is much lower than in the US. Meanwhile, the fact that 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.
do feel free to provide sources for the claim
To back calculate the cost per flight hour (which 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 don’t have info on SU57 yearly costs, aside from the link I’ve already provided for you. However, as I keep repeating, and you keep ignoring, overall military spending in Russia is FAR LOWER than in the US. That alone clearly shows that cost has to be lower. Perhaps try engaging with that instead of dancing around the elephant in the room.
Having only a handful of jets you rarely fly really helps keep costs down.
Pretty sure Russia has been flying a lot more missions over past three years than US has. No only that, but they actually have to contend with real AD instead of just terrorizing farmers, but do go on making some very interesting and intelligent points.