@xianc78 @PurpCat
No one would use it outside of government organisations and state-owned companies, which would probably have to if they pass a related law, but I won't expect them to be adding features either — same as with "Russian alternative" to… anything really, it would likely become another sinkhole for government spending and would die out of natural causes (lack of interest) in a couple of years.
@xianc78 @PurpCat
Besides, no one is denying participation — everyone can still send in patches, no one's even stripping them of their credits for contributing, the devs were excluded from *MAINTAINERS* only — had they handled it better, shit wouldn't even hit the fan. But Linus not only did it like an asshole (his usual thing), but as an utter dumbfuck too — I'm not new to this, but even I was somewhat… bamboozled🤪
@PurpCat
That is so! When it comes to industrial equipment and heavy machinery, a lot of stuff still gets imported through proxy countries, with consumer stuff the overhead costs make it non-viable though and yes, China became a major player: more than half of cars imported last year were Chinese brands, most consumer electronics is Chinese too.
With computer equipment I was always skeptical about this whole localisation thing…
@PurpCat
Most "localised" hardware is rebadged Chinese solutions, but when it comes to software it's even worse — no one wants to touch anything Russian unless required by the law: I can remember government organisations still investing in solutions based on Oracle and even DB2 and buying new licenses in 2016 (!), when it was already obvious that it would become a problem really soon. And I'm pretty sure they still use all that — just without support or paying licensing fees.
Also they had some hilariously bad design flaws in some of them, like the IL-62 and it's engine pods. There were two LOT crashes from engine failures because they mounted two engines next to each other.
@PurpCat
Ha-ha-ha, I do remember Soviet civil planes from childhood — sure, they were clunky, but compared to other Soviet things (especially cars 😏) not that bad!
I suspect most of the issues were not due to poor design choices, although I can't exclude that too, but due to not being able to service them properly: keeping a spare part in the warehouse and getting it installed by a qualified serviceman — impossible, it's always "scavange repairs" of some sort 🤦
@PurpCat
From what I know, it is still a major problem, they've made Superjet 100 before any major sanctions, but it failed internationally because they couldn't handle the logistics and make spare parts available.
I'm not an expert on military jets, but it also seems to be the problem — AFAIK MIG-31 wasn't a bad fighter design and spec-wise, especially for its time, but it was demanding in maintenance and they couldn't handle it properly, that is why it failed to see wider adoption.
I know Russia's aircraft industry struggled after the fall of the USSR and it never recovered because from 1991-2022 Russia could just buy foreign aircraft freely.
Now it's been 2 years in "oh shit we need to actually make planes" mode and they have been struggling hard. Even during the "freer times", there were stories about how the one airline running the SSJ-100 (a Russian plane that they intended to export like China is with theirs) in Mexico had issues obtaining parts and service pre-sanctions. One article compared it to driving a USA vehicle in the EU, where nobody can service it or has parts for it.
https://www.smh.com.au/traveller/inspiration/interjets-grounded-sukoi-superjets-in-mexico-being-used-for-spare-parts-20180115-h0i9gj.html
https://www.airdatanews.com/almost-all-ssj100s-from-interjet-are-on-the-ground/
https://www.ch-aviation.com/news/63472-mexicos-interjet-grounds-4-ssj-100s-for-spares
This is something you'd see with a DC-3 or DC-6 or the US Government's legendary infamous 707 boneyard, not a 4 year old plane.