On Feb 8, 5:01 pm, "Dean A. Markley" wrote:
Mike wrote:
Powering JSF: One Engine Is Enough.
Lexington Institute.
http://lexingtoninstitute.org/docs/797.pdf

That'll be little consolation to the pilot who experiences an total
engine failure 300 miles from the carrier!

Seriously though, It is nothing short of incredible how reliability has
increased in engines and aircraft. I'd still worry just a little bit
though....

Dean

I look at a statement like

"Using two different engine designs on the Joint Strike Fighter will
be detrimental to American industry. Splitting the manufacture and
sustainment of engines between two teams means that each company
participating in the program will get less work than they would have
if all the engines had been purchased from a single source.When
workloads shrink, the potential for economies of scale are reduced.
Fixed costs must be spread over a smaller business base and there are
fewer opportunities to extract price reductions from vendors on big
orders. Thus industry becomes less efficient. In addition, the
decision to fund a redundant "alternate" engine is an industrial
subsidy to the dominant military-engine supplier, weakening
its main competitor despite the fact that competitor's product was
deemed to be superior in past comparisons. None of these consequences
is likely to help U.S. industry in its struggle to remain competitive
in global markets."

I see a 21st century F/B-111.