You want to argue with the Sukhoi design bureau patent?
That has completely nothing to do with the question or the answer, your opinion on how far we reach and spend is completely irrelevant to the damage the budget cuts had done to the already previously built complex and number of equipment that was being actively maintained.
Wouldn’t the overall overspending hurt the programs where the cutoffs are happening? I assumed that the cutoffs happen for a reason.
The patent isn’t at all pertinent to the Su-57, as it’s nothing but a design placeholder from over a decade ago. As said before, the PAK-FA design has been tweaked so much that the T-50 only resembles the Su-57 in general characteristics.
There is no logic in that assessment.
Then why would the cutoffs happen?
T-50 apparently remains Sukhoi’s internal designation
1 Like
Cutoffs happen for a myriad of reasons - but when the cutoffs prevent vehicles from doing the expected maintenance cycles and repairs that are mandatory and a normal part of their service life… it cripples our operational readiness. When they want to increase the tempo of our operations it results in extremely long work hours and poor retention. This is where the conversation would get political - but I am not going to delve into that portion.
The F-22 can’t maintain it’s RAM because of these budget cuts. They knew when they purchased it what it would cost to do the bare minimum maintenance, and later decided they didn’t want to do the bare minimum. That’s why they’re in their current state.
OK dude - you do the same with your argument then.
1 Like
Ah got it, thanks for clarifying. Bit of a shame to see such a beautiful aircraft not properly maintained.
Of… what? The T-50?
Ah yes, what a source! I’m sure “expert analysis” definitely wasn’t written due to a lack of information on the topic!
I’m fairly certain it has nothing to do with this, and everything to do with spending too much time on a tropical island before squadrons are cycled back. This kind of corrosion happens on every jet, regardless of stealth coating, when exposed to salt water.
The F-22 has maintenance issues from cutting the production run early leading to a lack of spare parts availability, not because they aren’t getting budget.
They have known for 75+ years what tropical islands do to vehicles. Not spending the money to analyze the wear & tear expectations and not slowing down the operations to keep up with maintenance cause these issues… budget cuts simply make the problem worse and cost us more in the long run.
1 Like
75+ years of know-how can’t change physics. And neither can it create more aircraft outbof thin air after certain idiots gut a production line. And you don’t slow down real world operations for maintenance that isn’t considered critical. People much smarter than you make those decisions.
Our F-16s sat in Hawaii for 2 months, granted in open-air AMUs. Corrosion wasn’t an issue at all, despite minimal cleaning, and from what I’ve seen their F-22s are in mostly pristine condition. If we got the treatment of a 5th gen fighter squadron, we’d be scrubbing our jets spotless every week.
We didn’t.
We came out cleaner than we came in, funnily enough.
Can… Can you tell me why the F-22’s production was cut? It may surprise you…
It can absolutely lay down maintenance routines and basic upkeep of the aircraft.
Yeah, budgets do that. Sadly they… Aren’t getting the budget.
You absolutely do? Especially as an ANG unit, and especially working 5th gen fighters on a saltwater archipelago.
Hell, preventative maintenance isn’t considered “critical” and it’s done every 20-30 sorties. A basic check, a light cleaning, and a full flush is done on a weekly or bi-monthly basis. It takes months of neglect to even cause particle streaks from storage or routine flights, usually being seen around the 120-150 day mark.
I highly doubt F-22s in an ANG unit would go more than 2 weeks without a basic cleanse, let alone close to 5 months.
I’ve made those decisions before, for 2 years in particular. The other 5 were spent actually doing said preventative maintenance.
Pray tell, how long have you been making these kinds of decisions? What experience do you have to back your dictations?
1 Like
Lmao the fuck it does.
Believable
CAP
Sounds like about the same as yours, except i don’t overinflate my impact the way you are currently.
Read again. I said we don’t know and cannot know for certain. That’s not an argument, it’s a factual statement.
iirc. Salt Water corrosion is something that was resolved years ago. I doubt its that major of an issue these days, though I can see the RAM coating being newer/more vulnernable.
For example the Harrier Gr3s deployed to the Falklands actually had some quite major issues being transported down south and operating from the carriers but the SHars that were built for those conditions had almost no issues at all (radar had to have a mod to make it weather proof and some cockpit avionics struggled with how wet it was)
I doubt tropical weather would have that great of an impact on top of that.
Stealth wise yes. the SU-57 is most likely faster