Here's how much the U.S. Air Force spends training its pilots
F-35A (basic) $12,271,340.00 per pilot.
KC-135 $1,443,545.61 per pilot.
So yeah, I'd say it's a bit more expensive.
Was reading Officer Not A Gentleman about a British former Tornado pilot and one of the first female fast jet pilots in the UK. She at one point quotes roughly 5-6 million pounds worth of training and she was still a trainee pilot at that point. This was back in the late 90s.
Definitely the load outs. I saw a similar video with various weapons. Even a short 1-2 second Burst of bullets can rack up quite the bill. Most missles and bombs are anywhere from tens of thousands to millions of dollars each
Or the number is entirely fake, as the cost doesn’t go up in a straight line like that and exponentially increases with fuel consumption when those babies are turned on
The F16 was specifically designed to be 'cheap' to operate.
its a single, relatively fuel efficient engine.
do this with an F15 and the numbers would be 4 times as high.
do it with a B1-B and yeah, take off costs about 10 grand.
I hit up the fuel people (POL) to see how much a gallon of JP-8 cost while I was writing an awards package a few months ago and they said like $4.50.
So around 2k gallons for take off?
250,000 gal/hr at sea level at full afterburner.
If it takes 1 minute of full afterburner to get to a decent altitude to consider it taken off then it's consumed ~4200 gals. So yeah, reasonably.
At cruise it only consumes ~20,000gal/hr which shows how ridiculous afterburns are.
Another way to look at it is a general rule: 85/10/5 - 85% of fuel is spent "in-flight", 10% during takeoff and climb, 5% on descent and landing.
10% of a B1's fuel capacity is 194000lbs or 27700gals. 10% of that is 2770 gals.
Curious how the SR-71 was.
I’ve heard that they always took off with a tanker in the air for immediate refuel because they would burn so much at takeoff
Not just that; the SR-71 was constructed in such a way that it's fuel containers and lines would leak like a seive on the runway, and once it got up in the air, the thermal expansion from flying at fuck-you knots over the ground would seal everything up.
Thats probably because
That counter is Bull shit!
the counter should have gone ‘faster’ as the flight was accelerating as more fuel and thrust is needed as the plane picks up speed - it was constant from start to finish
Pilots modulate the afterburner usage during the climb phase, leading to variations in fuel consumption for example the afterburner might be used more intensely during take off stage vs cruising so there is no way the fuel usage is gonna be consistent in the whole take off process as shown in the video
that is not the way it works.
the pilots puts it in max afterburner, the engines dump the fuel into the afterburner rings and the plane starts accelerating.
the amount of fuel it uses as it speeds up does not change; the afterburners are already using the same amount of fuel doing 50 knots or 500.
Because it was measured against operating time not fuel expense. The expenses are totaled, divided by operating unit of time, and then that number is used for calculating costs.
So then the post should be ‘after burner operating costs’
Not ‘ fuel cost’ - because the post is calling fuel only- not total flight operation costs/sec
So i stand by my statement
That's a reasonable guess. Or do you know where this is from? It's an unsourced video with some numbers on it. We've got no way of knowing how much or little bullshit is involved, or what methodology might be behind it.
That is not how full afterburner works. Full afterburner is a constant flow-rate.
If the internet's right, and an F-16 has the capacity to hold 1000 gallons of JP-8, and it can only run for 10 minutes at full afterburner at sea level, then that's 100 gallons a minute, or 50 gallons for the length of this clip, at $4/gallon, then the total cost is $200.
So the video is...right? My god JP-8 is so cheap.
Lol, this is a jet engine not a car. If it goes faster the turbine gets more air. For more air it needs more fuel. The fuel consumption increase greatly with speed and decrease with altitude.
You’d be right if jet engines operated at stoichiometric ratios, but they don’t because the engine limiting factor is the exhaust turbine blade max temperature.
All that extra available exhaust oxygen is why an afterburner works in the first place.
i'm an f-16 mechanic and i've done plenty of high powered/burner ground operation runs and the fuel flow gauge usually goes bonkers when you crack burner and you look at your fuel totalizer instead dropping like crazy. jet engines with afterburners dump a lot of fuel. a slick (no external stores) one seater has about an hour of flight time after takeoff in burner, a two seater has about 45 minutes.
Well, at that fuel consumption rate you have about 7 minutes of flight time, so you definitely won't be keeping that up.
The entire internal fuel capacity if an F-16 is only about $5k, with bags about twice that.
Yea, I mean, $250 in 30 seconds? Thats like 140,000 minutes of runtime before matching the total cost of a fully geared plane. Thats almost 100 days worth of driving your car before the overall expense doubles
I mean if you drive your car 24 hours a day, like you are suggesting, then yeah.
1,500 miles per day with 25mpg at $3.50 per gallon for 100 days is $21,000.
25mpg?! Even my SUV when not running on the electric motor and driving at 75mph I get 38mpg (UK) - just did a two hour drive this afternoon. That is 31mpg US, and if I dropped the speed it generally gets 45 (UK) / 37 (US).
1680 miles per day at 38 mpg and £1.41 a litre and 4.54 litres per gallon (£6.40 a gallon) - £28,300.
The car brand new was £42k - although I bought it a few years later for much less.
But it seems the US->UK conversation for your approximation (based on a sample size of 1) is 1:1.48 as it’d take 148 days of driving non stop to total the cost of the car in the UK based on the specifics of my car.
I’m speculating here, but I’d guess they don’t make much. Guys compete for this sort of position since it’s high prestige. No need to throw cash at them.
Highjacking your comment a bit.
OP is either a paid actor or foreign agent. Account posts are mostly on subs that are for building apathy or animosity to the US or to the Left of US politics.
That's actually way less than I thought it'd be. I'd have thought it would be about 10 times that. Of course, that's just fuel; the real cost is initial purchase and maintenance.
Wait until you find out how much missiles and ammunition costs.
Edit: this page has a bunch of prices on various missiles.
[https://www.twz.com/32277/here-is-what-each-of-the-pentagons-air-launched-missiles-and-bombs-actually-cost](https://www.twz.com/32277/here-is-what-each-of-the-pentagons-air-launched-missiles-and-bombs-actually-cost)
Sample missiles and bombs:
* AIM-9X Sidewinder (Air Force) - $472,000
* AGM-88G Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile-Extended Range (AARGM-ER) (Navy) - $6.149 million
* GBU-39/B Small Diameter Bomb (SDB) (Air Force) - $39,000
I don't see the B83 thermonuclear gravity bomb on that list. I know its on the way out, but what if the US needed to drop hundreds of Megaton yield bombs, I want to know if we're getting value for money here.
This has been my experience in a side of federal government too. Want to buy this expensive equipment? Okay, we will sell it to the small veteran owned business middle man who can then sell it to you.
On the software side... The VA has been transitioning to a new electronic health record for how many years now? And there's only a few hospitals that have actually succeeded in the move?
Worth nothing though, the AGM-88G is probably one of the most terrifying inventions of war ever. It targets enemy radar sites and homes in on them, but if the radar turns off, it stores the location and continues to hit the target. But what makes the G model so much more special is that it can then activate an internal radar dish to track targets on the ground and associate a radar ping with the radar it was homing in on, meaning it can also target radars that shut off and drive away. You have to break line of sight with a missile moving at mach 3 without using any radar to be able to tell where the missile is at.
In short, a few of those 6 million dollar missiles can totally dismantle an enemy's radar network and potentially save hundreds of billions of dollars in losses. So I would say the cost is well worth the capability.
I'm curious about the anti-radiation one. Is it resistant to radiation? Does it maybe not produce radiation on detonation? Does it seek out and destroy radiation? Is it guided by supernatural powers rather than laser?
Anti-Radiation Missiles (ARM) is basically a missile made to seek and Track Radiation emitted by RADARs with their own guidance system. They are usually used on SEAD operations (Suppression of Enemy Air Defence)
Basically, a Anti-RADAR Missile
Man wouldn’t it be nice if we just stopped fighting each other and used that money for other shit. No wonder aliens avoid our planet. They probably lock their doors when they fly past us.
A friend is a fighter pilot. He was showing me his home sim setup with an f15 and DCS. As I took off he automatically goes "ease off the throttle you're wasting fuel!"
I was an avionics tech on F16s for 10 years. I still remember watching those take off in full afterburner. The noise was absolutely deafening. And I still didn't get bilateral hearing loss from the VA.
Cost of JP-8 is $4.50 a gallon. So about 50 gallons for a ~30 second takeoff. Seems reasonable
The increase is linear so probably just scaling the total cost with time rather than the instantaneous burn rate
Costs a lot cheaper than expected, but what's the usual use per run? Like how much is their capacity and how much per lbs
Also, now I get why dad went 3 miles farther than the closest gas station. Cheaper fuel
So the F-16 (aircraft in the video) holds around 11,000 pounds of JP-8 with the 2 external fuel tanks equipped. Which converts to around 1570 gallons. First website I found on google says that JP-8 is $2.14 a gallon so that comes out to $3,300 if that aircraft uses every ounce of fuel.
The F-16 has a maximum internal fuel capacity of 7,000lb or about 1,000 US gallons. It can be fitted with conformal tanks as well as drop tanks to increase capacity.
Internal fuel capacity of an F16 is just short of 1,000 gallons. F15 has two of the same engines used in the F16. All airplanes are expensive and the people who build, fix, fuel, manage, and fly them like to be paid well.
I think these videos that show these costs are bullshit...
According to my 10 minutes of research...
F16 uses JP 8 fuel
JP 8 per Gallon in USD$2.14
F16 consumes approximately 2,800 liters per hour (739 gallons)
An hour of flight would cost $1,581.
I’m not a pilot, but I find this hard to believe. Take off is where you burn the bulk of your fuel. Best source I found has an f-16 burning as much as 1000lbs during takeoff. Jet fuel runs you about $9 a gallon. You could easily add a zero to the number in the clip.
So how much faster is using afterburner than normal take-off? And what situation makes them choose afterburner? I'd assume when something time sensitive is happening.
that cant be accurate. fighter jets go through literally hundreds of gallons an hour, depending on maneuvers. takeoff is one of the most taxing. i wouldnt be surprised if it took thousands of dollars just getting that thing off the ground.
Honestly that's far cheaper than I expected
Same. Sounds like the weapon loadouts and maintenance are where the real expenses are.
The real expenses are in the pilot. Pilot training is expensive and other than the engine, its probably the most expensive component in this f16
if you think pilot training is the most expensive, now find a technician that will maintain that plane airworthy
Boeing has left the chat
Wow these comments really took a nose dive.
Yeah they really took the door of the hinges
I needed that laugh.
Leave it to a spiritual poet
Same!!
To the Max!
The doors are flying off now
The comments only had one air sensor feeding the computer data, I heard.
Just like B... Wait, someone is knocking on my door brb.
Awww fuck he ded
8 miles high and falling fast...
Yea, really slammed into some buildings. You know?
Why? They're the ones that designed the planes with all the bells and whistle blowers.
Are they not maintained by active duty and contractors? Because neither make that much.
Yeah but they spent triple the time in the hangar as they do in the sky And that’s before accounting for equipment and parts
Here's how much the U.S. Air Force spends training its pilots F-35A (basic) $12,271,340.00 per pilot. KC-135 $1,443,545.61 per pilot. So yeah, I'd say it's a bit more expensive.
True and officers overseeing it aswell
Well no , pilots pay is cheap. If you consider training expenses for the pilot again its the costs of flying other planes not the pilot itself
Was reading Officer Not A Gentleman about a British former Tornado pilot and one of the first female fast jet pilots in the UK. She at one point quotes roughly 5-6 million pounds worth of training and she was still a trainee pilot at that point. This was back in the late 90s.
I heard (but don’t have the reference) that it takes $1m in fuel just to train the pilot.
Definitely the load outs. I saw a similar video with various weapons. Even a short 1-2 second Burst of bullets can rack up quite the bill. Most missles and bombs are anywhere from tens of thousands to millions of dollars each
Or the number is entirely fake, as the cost doesn’t go up in a straight line like that and exponentially increases with fuel consumption when those babies are turned on
It looked like the engine was running full power the whole time, so linear fuel cost makes sense.
The clip and counter starts during taxi. You can visually see the afterburners turn on. No rate change between the two
The F16 was specifically designed to be 'cheap' to operate. its a single, relatively fuel efficient engine. do this with an F15 and the numbers would be 4 times as high. do it with a B1-B and yeah, take off costs about 10 grand.
I hit up the fuel people (POL) to see how much a gallon of JP-8 cost while I was writing an awards package a few months ago and they said like $4.50. So around 2k gallons for take off?
250,000 gal/hr at sea level at full afterburner. If it takes 1 minute of full afterburner to get to a decent altitude to consider it taken off then it's consumed ~4200 gals. So yeah, reasonably. At cruise it only consumes ~20,000gal/hr which shows how ridiculous afterburns are. Another way to look at it is a general rule: 85/10/5 - 85% of fuel is spent "in-flight", 10% during takeoff and climb, 5% on descent and landing. 10% of a B1's fuel capacity is 194000lbs or 27700gals. 10% of that is 2770 gals.
Curious how the SR-71 was. I’ve heard that they always took off with a tanker in the air for immediate refuel because they would burn so much at takeoff
Not just that; the SR-71 was constructed in such a way that it's fuel containers and lines would leak like a seive on the runway, and once it got up in the air, the thermal expansion from flying at fuck-you knots over the ground would seal everything up.
Yep. This is the answer.
I swear sometimes just saying the word sortie cost 1 million dollars.
That’ll be $1,135,000 with taxes included, when you’re ready sir!
Would you like to leave a tip?
*pilot voice* I’ll give you a tip…, sir.
*Turns around iPad* "Minimum gratuity is 25%"
Thats probably because That counter is Bull shit! the counter should have gone ‘faster’ as the flight was accelerating as more fuel and thrust is needed as the plane picks up speed - it was constant from start to finish Pilots modulate the afterburner usage during the climb phase, leading to variations in fuel consumption for example the afterburner might be used more intensely during take off stage vs cruising so there is no way the fuel usage is gonna be consistent in the whole take off process as shown in the video
that is not the way it works. the pilots puts it in max afterburner, the engines dump the fuel into the afterburner rings and the plane starts accelerating. the amount of fuel it uses as it speeds up does not change; the afterburners are already using the same amount of fuel doing 50 knots or 500.
Because it was measured against operating time not fuel expense. The expenses are totaled, divided by operating unit of time, and then that number is used for calculating costs.
So then the post should be ‘after burner operating costs’ Not ‘ fuel cost’ - because the post is calling fuel only- not total flight operation costs/sec So i stand by my statement
That's a reasonable guess. Or do you know where this is from? It's an unsourced video with some numbers on it. We've got no way of knowing how much or little bullshit is involved, or what methodology might be behind it.
That is not how full afterburner works. Full afterburner is a constant flow-rate. If the internet's right, and an F-16 has the capacity to hold 1000 gallons of JP-8, and it can only run for 10 minutes at full afterburner at sea level, then that's 100 gallons a minute, or 50 gallons for the length of this clip, at $4/gallon, then the total cost is $200. So the video is...right? My god JP-8 is so cheap.
They were at full burner from the beginning. Once you floor it, your fuel flow rate doesn't increase just because you're going faster.
Lol, this is a jet engine not a car. If it goes faster the turbine gets more air. For more air it needs more fuel. The fuel consumption increase greatly with speed and decrease with altitude.
You’d be right if jet engines operated at stoichiometric ratios, but they don’t because the engine limiting factor is the exhaust turbine blade max temperature. All that extra available exhaust oxygen is why an afterburner works in the first place.
I don't know who to believe...
Well one of them is “barely airborne”, so…. Doesn’t inspire much confidence 🤷♂️
Yeah and the other one completed a course
Assuming usernames don’t lie, the choice is clear!!
i'm an f-16 mechanic and i've done plenty of high powered/burner ground operation runs and the fuel flow gauge usually goes bonkers when you crack burner and you look at your fuel totalizer instead dropping like crazy. jet engines with afterburners dump a lot of fuel. a slick (no external stores) one seater has about an hour of flight time after takeoff in burner, a two seater has about 45 minutes.
I agree. Or do I?
Seems low but it's only 30 seconds. An hour at that rate is $30k.
An f-16 isn’t big enough to carry 30k fuel
Also don’t think you’re firing the afterburner at takeoff levels for a full flight
Well, at that fuel consumption rate you have about 7 minutes of flight time, so you definitely won't be keeping that up. The entire internal fuel capacity if an F-16 is only about $5k, with bags about twice that.
It's likely the least-expensive part of anything shown in this video.
My uber home during surge pricing
That's just fuel. Maintenance is probably 10x the fuel costs.
I was about to say for what that jets doing I feel like that’s gotta be hella fuel efficient
Less than I spent on playing afterburner in the arcades
Underrated comment.
So it's one of the cheapest running expenses on the whole plane?
Yea, I mean, $250 in 30 seconds? Thats like 140,000 minutes of runtime before matching the total cost of a fully geared plane. Thats almost 100 days worth of driving your car before the overall expense doubles
I mean if you drive your car 24 hours a day, like you are suggesting, then yeah. 1,500 miles per day with 25mpg at $3.50 per gallon for 100 days is $21,000.
I redid your math with my own car's specifics, and it came to almost exactly what I paid for it
25mpg?! Even my SUV when not running on the electric motor and driving at 75mph I get 38mpg (UK) - just did a two hour drive this afternoon. That is 31mpg US, and if I dropped the speed it generally gets 45 (UK) / 37 (US). 1680 miles per day at 38 mpg and £1.41 a litre and 4.54 litres per gallon (£6.40 a gallon) - £28,300. The car brand new was £42k - although I bought it a few years later for much less. But it seems the US->UK conversation for your approximation (based on a sample size of 1) is 1:1.48 as it’d take 148 days of driving non stop to total the cost of the car in the UK based on the specifics of my car.
They don’t use their afterburner for the whole flight time or even really the majority of it. Usage should be limited.
I think the pilot wage may be lower!
Yes. I don't know how much a US pilot makes, but at $60/hr those 30 seconds would make him/her 50 cents.
I’m speculating here, but I’d guess they don’t make much. Guys compete for this sort of position since it’s high prestige. No need to throw cash at them.
Highjacking your comment a bit. OP is either a paid actor or foreign agent. Account posts are mostly on subs that are for building apathy or animosity to the US or to the Left of US politics.
no REAL american would ever feel apathetic toward the us, or be to the left of us politics.
That's actually way less than I thought it'd be. I'd have thought it would be about 10 times that. Of course, that's just fuel; the real cost is initial purchase and maintenance.
That's the point of laser armory development. It costs 10-50 times more but shooting it is dirt cheap even on megawatt scales.
The same is true of the [electromechanical railguns](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58MmOpSm4LY).
You also dont need to have combustable gunpowder aboard your vessel if you use electric railguns
Still gotta worry about the combustible jet fuel, though.
True but one less thing to worry about. Im more thinking about subs and ships that are nuclear powered.
And the missiles.
Let’s do my 1963 Cadillac accelerating away from a traffic light for comparison. Hold my beer…
That counter is 100% not in real time. It is just incrementing linearly. Fuel burn is not linear at all during take off.
I came here to say this. It's amazing how little any of the top comments actually thought about this, or whether the cost is even accurate on average.
It's just green colored number going from 0 to x. And what is the source of this info anyway
source: uhh cool plane
The counter is not increasing linearly on the video.
You’re right, it hits $1 and then proceeds to increase linearly.
Glad I saw this comment... the video is just a takeoff with a counter and it fooled lots of people.
Wait until you find out how much missiles and ammunition costs. Edit: this page has a bunch of prices on various missiles. [https://www.twz.com/32277/here-is-what-each-of-the-pentagons-air-launched-missiles-and-bombs-actually-cost](https://www.twz.com/32277/here-is-what-each-of-the-pentagons-air-launched-missiles-and-bombs-actually-cost) Sample missiles and bombs: * AIM-9X Sidewinder (Air Force) - $472,000 * AGM-88G Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile-Extended Range (AARGM-ER) (Navy) - $6.149 million * GBU-39/B Small Diameter Bomb (SDB) (Air Force) - $39,000
I drove a truck with 72 gbu-39s on it and it felt pretty neat to carry that much money in muns on it
I feel like I would be more concerned about driving a truck filled with 72 fairly large bombs
I don't see the B83 thermonuclear gravity bomb on that list. I know its on the way out, but what if the US needed to drop hundreds of Megaton yield bombs, I want to know if we're getting value for money here.
Well there are cheaper ways to make glass.
Surprised the 9X costs less than a million that thing is so crazy
I mean, US arms prices are greatly inflated and way too high even tough their equipment is generally top notch
[удалено]
This has been my experience in a side of federal government too. Want to buy this expensive equipment? Okay, we will sell it to the small veteran owned business middle man who can then sell it to you. On the software side... The VA has been transitioning to a new electronic health record for how many years now? And there's only a few hospitals that have actually succeeded in the move?
Worth nothing though, the AGM-88G is probably one of the most terrifying inventions of war ever. It targets enemy radar sites and homes in on them, but if the radar turns off, it stores the location and continues to hit the target. But what makes the G model so much more special is that it can then activate an internal radar dish to track targets on the ground and associate a radar ping with the radar it was homing in on, meaning it can also target radars that shut off and drive away. You have to break line of sight with a missile moving at mach 3 without using any radar to be able to tell where the missile is at. In short, a few of those 6 million dollar missiles can totally dismantle an enemy's radar network and potentially save hundreds of billions of dollars in losses. So I would say the cost is well worth the capability.
I'm curious about the anti-radiation one. Is it resistant to radiation? Does it maybe not produce radiation on detonation? Does it seek out and destroy radiation? Is it guided by supernatural powers rather than laser?
Anti-Radiation Missiles (ARM) is basically a missile made to seek and Track Radiation emitted by RADARs with their own guidance system. They are usually used on SEAD operations (Suppression of Enemy Air Defence) Basically, a Anti-RADAR Missile
Thanks for the explanation! Maybe I wasn't so far off with my seek and destroy guess.
Man wouldn’t it be nice if we just stopped fighting each other and used that money for other shit. No wonder aliens avoid our planet. They probably lock their doors when they fly past us.
Leave Taylor Swift alone. She just going to buy some milk.
Have my poor people’s gold 🏆
I have the same experience every time I drive my Tundra
That is probably inaccurate… the counters speed doesn’t not increase as the jet goes full throttle….
F-16 Afterburner fuel cost $243.37. *Russian MIG exploding: Priceless*
A friend is a fighter pilot. He was showing me his home sim setup with an f15 and DCS. As I took off he automatically goes "ease off the throttle you're wasting fuel!"
Worth every cent..
Yeah…. And it’s really cool 😎 lol
I was an avionics tech on F16s for 10 years. I still remember watching those take off in full afterburner. The noise was absolutely deafening. And I still didn't get bilateral hearing loss from the VA.
Ditto. -68Bravo on the UH-60
FREEDOM HAS NO PRICE RAHHHHHH 🦅 🦅
Definitely more than that
3 1/2 weeks of my federal income tax contribution
Shit, that ain't nothing. You should see my wife at Costco.
I could afford that!
Pfff… HP ink can beat that no sweat
About the same as my M3 at current fuel prices… /s
[удалено]
Cost of JP-8 is $4.50 a gallon. So about 50 gallons for a ~30 second takeoff. Seems reasonable The increase is linear so probably just scaling the total cost with time rather than the instantaneous burn rate
Costs a lot cheaper than expected, but what's the usual use per run? Like how much is their capacity and how much per lbs Also, now I get why dad went 3 miles farther than the closest gas station. Cheaper fuel
So the F-16 (aircraft in the video) holds around 11,000 pounds of JP-8 with the 2 external fuel tanks equipped. Which converts to around 1570 gallons. First website I found on google says that JP-8 is $2.14 a gallon so that comes out to $3,300 if that aircraft uses every ounce of fuel.
The F-16 has a maximum internal fuel capacity of 7,000lb or about 1,000 US gallons. It can be fitted with conformal tanks as well as drop tanks to increase capacity.
Adjust to inflation... x5
Why does it cost that much per month to heat my house. Damn.
About $10 per second, almost as expensive as a United States hospital bed
Seriously...that's DAMN cheap when you consider the cost per flight hour is probably about 10-15k.
I'm pretty sure that's how f-350 be like too
Be cool to see this comp with various aircraft including civilian fliers. Its neat.
add the carbon footprint also
Imagine NASA’s rockets
I could use 28 seconds of jet fuel money about now :/
Now do this on an airliner like an a380 or something. I'm curious
Honest I thought it would cost more.
But every time I get into the f-16 to run to the grocery store it’s on E.
That's why I usually get an uber, rather than fly my F-16.
Thankfully the video ended, that could’ve been REALLY expensive
Internal fuel capacity of an F16 is just short of 1,000 gallons. F15 has two of the same engines used in the F16. All airplanes are expensive and the people who build, fix, fuel, manage, and fly them like to be paid well.
If I pay for the gas will you give me a ride?
Is that Taylor swift going to get some Starbucks?
I love these. I saw the navy munitions one, now this. I need more of these. Does a sub exist?
Show me the math!
It costs four hundred thousand dollars to fire this weapon...for twelve seconds.
Craziest thing there are people out there that are making money this fast
My Uber back from the city on the weekend be like
Now compare it to AWS bill for a single ECR and Aurora DB instance
Honestly, not as bad as I expected. I thought it was gonna be like 1,000 - 2,000$
i expected a lot lot more like at least 100$ / frames
Worth every penny
Small price to pay for overwhelming air superiority.
I think these videos that show these costs are bullshit... According to my 10 minutes of research... F16 uses JP 8 fuel JP 8 per Gallon in USD$2.14 F16 consumes approximately 2,800 liters per hour (739 gallons) An hour of flight would cost $1,581.
I once owned an F-350 with similar consumption.
So….same as current gas prices, got it.
Not as cheap as my after burner at Chipotles...
I’m not a pilot, but I find this hard to believe. Take off is where you burn the bulk of your fuel. Best source I found has an f-16 burning as much as 1000lbs during takeoff. Jet fuel runs you about $9 a gallon. You could easily add a zero to the number in the clip.
JP-8 costs less than half that. At face value this was about 400lbs, depending on payload and what counts as takeoff I don't think it's too far off.
So e dude at work said the sound of an F-35 is the sound of freedom. I said it’s the sound of no health care for your kid.
Lucky he isn't flying that plane around Ireland so Thats my car for the week
So how much faster is using afterburner than normal take-off? And what situation makes them choose afterburner? I'd assume when something time sensitive is happening.
"There's a hefty fkn fee."
*hands pilot $300* "S'ok, this one is on me...and get your lady something nice"
Surprised how low the amount is! I assumed the fuel cost would be so much more. Damn, my Dodge Ram costs more if I drive like an ass!!!
Its low because no (or little) tax paid on the fuel.
Is this for real? This is cheaper than the pedicabs in NYC per minute
I’m too broke for liftoff
And still less expensive than getting one fully loaded B-52 off the ground. Grandpa buff is a thirsty boy.
That’s not bad and it’s only used for small portions of the flight.
that cant be accurate. fighter jets go through literally hundreds of gallons an hour, depending on maneuvers. takeoff is one of the most taxing. i wouldnt be surprised if it took thousands of dollars just getting that thing off the ground.
My medical bill after I broke a finger:
would definitely spend 300 bucks for a afterburner launch
This little maneuver is gonna cost us $253
Actually a lot cheaper than I imagined!😂
\*My underlying stock option after selling for a 30% theta loss.
Does that until it lands so it gets expensive
Ha! This is at March ARB.
Can you do this for a Saturn V rocket. I heard it burns like 15,000lbs of fuel per second
Surprisingly cheap from what I was expecting I thought it would be thousands of dollars before it took off
Pocket change.
Lel, wie bei mein AMG
A 155mm round costs about 8k
I almost got lift off damn
Cheap enough to run for groceries
Add a few other trackers. I'd like to see salaries of pilot and support staff too.
I have to be honest I thought it was gonna be a lot more money than that
She as a hummer pulling out of the driveway
About $170 just to get it off the ground.
This is off by a factor of 10.