F-35B/C Lightning II (Joint Strike Fighter)

[KBayDog]

With modern engine reliability, I think it's a lot less necessary than it used to be. Also, it's inherently more efficient to have one big engine, vice two smaller ones.

The only downside of one engine vs. two is that the existence of single-engine aircraft is the only thing preventing Otto from his daily delivery of SEALS into unimproved zones while on fire.

 

[BACONATOR]

The only downside of one engine vs. two is that the existence of single-engine aircraft is the only thing preventing Otto from his daily delivery of SEALS into unimproved zones while on fire.

I'm sorry. I just saw this. Fill me in, since I'm too obtuse and uninterested to interpret your meaning.

 

[KBayDog]

I'm sorry. I just saw this. Fill me in, since I'm too obtuse and uninterested to interpret your meaning.

 

[BACONATOR]

Ugh... just tell me on FB, dude.

 

[KBayDog]

Ugh... just tell me on FB, dude.

Hold your breath for that.

Please.

 

[Recovering LSO]

It's a good thing, but not a required thing.

Until they both quit - then I learned to REALLY appreciate each of them.

 

[BusyBee604]

The A-4 and A-7 were SE, and each served for 20-30 years in the fleet.s.

4,000+ hours in A-4s (J-65 & J-52), 1 engine failure, (man caused - flak). A 2nd engine would not have saved the aircraft as it was engulfed in fire. Never thought much about a second engine. It was second nature: Restart attempt(s)...flameout approach if practical/authorized... or ejection.

Never was confronted with that evil, devilish "3-engine approach"!
BzB, just trapped on RANGER 11/59 Family Day Cruise (note "pumpkin" flight suit of that era)

 

[Recovering LSO]

Until they both quit - then I learned to REALLY appreciate each of them.

In 2003 I had about 100 hours in the Chariot of Electronic Armegeddon. One engine quit on a low level, the other quit with WonW at KSKA (thanks to the USAF for ridiculously long runways). I suppose you could say that second engine lasted just long enough? For my money, 2 > 1

 

[OUSOONER]

Bzb once we get rid of our Mighty P-3 Orion, we'll be back to two engines.

 

[Reconjoe]

Another step in the right direction for the Bee

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/01/20/panetta-military-commits-to-marines-f-35-fighter/

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...er-pentagontre80j04g-20120119,0,6449814.story

 

[Brett327]

That's encouraging news.

Brett

 

[scoolbubba]

Anything less than 4 is inherently unsafe, and therefore absurd. I refuse to fly the P-8, not enough redundancy for this cat.

 

[pourts]

Reminds me of the lex fences on the legacy hornet. They didn't figure out about the vertical stab cracks until lots of a/c had been produced.

 

[Uncle Fester]

The Wonder Jet of the Future has a lot of problems...having one less engine than it oughta hardly tops the list.

 

[Alpha_Echo_606]

120222-O-GR159-002 NAVAL AIR STATION PATUXENT RIVER, Md. (Feb. 22, 2012) Lockheed Martin test pilot Dan Levin flies F-35B test aircraft BF-2 with external weapons pylons for the first time. The test measured flying qualities with external pylons, inert AIM-9X Sidewinder air-to-air missiles and centerline 25 mm gun pod. The F-35B is the U.S. Marine Corps variant of the Joint Strike Fighter, capable of short takeoffs and vertical landings for use on amphibious ships or expeditionary airfields to provide air power to the Marine Air-Ground Task Force. The F-35B is undergoing test and evaluation at NAS Patuxent River before delivery to the fleet. (U.S. Navy photo courtesy of Lockheed Martin by Andy Wolfe/Released)