toxic_pus
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2009
- Messages
- 1,852
- Reaction score
- -4
- Country
- Location
Un-effing-believable.
Firstly, I have provided more than enough sensible arguments to prove that your maths is ridiculously wrong, so wrong that it will put a kindergarten kid to shame.
Secondly, I have never disputed that transport aircraft flies more hours per aircraft. I have however questioned your magical 2.5x figure.
Thirdly, strictly between airframes, the transports will certainly log more flight hours than the fighters. But fleet wise, the combat fleet will log more flight time than the transport fleet, simply because of higher number of fighters in a combat fleet. For example, using your logic, your weird calculations and your figures:
For fighters: 704*180 = 126,720 hrs
For fixed wing transports: 263*180*2.5 = 118,350 hrs
As you can see, inspite of lower flight time per aircraft, the fighter fleet still manages to fly more hours cumulatively. This is because, although the average flight hours per transport are 2.5 times(sic) more than the fighters, the number of fighters is 2.67 times more than the transports.
Fourthly, whether or not the BR logic is flawed is irrelevant, because I have not cited their analysis but merely used their figures, just like you. If you quit using their figures, Ill quit using theirs as well. Capiche?
Fifthly, the average flight hours of 187 proves nothing except your penchant for mental masturbation. There is a saying that it is better to look stupid than to open ones mouth and prove it. Given your piss poor grasp of basic maths, which students of standard 5 or 6 are expected to know, you should keep that in mind for all times.
