F-35 Purchase Cancelled; CF-18 replacement process begins

[On Guard for Thee]

Mike Byers did nothing of the sort.......he proved, using USAF data that more single engine aircraft have had class A engine events then twin engine aircraft.......Now of course, he failed to mention how many single F-16s are operated by the Americans versus twin-engine F-15s........

And of course, once the F-15 and F-16 were equipped with a new engine design, these rates changed again, and has allowed the F-16 to achieve the best safety record within the United States Military…….

I actually think that he did. His stats proved that. And it wouldn't take a rocket scientist to understand that in the event of an engine failure in a SE aircraft, it's eject time. In a twin, it's head for home time. Pilot and multi million dollar aircraft back at the hangar instead of in a snow bank.

[Derek 2.0]

I actually think that he did. His stats proved that. And it wouldn't take a rocket scientist to understand that in the event of an engine failure in a SE aircraft, it's eject time. In a twin, it's head for home time. Pilot and multi million dollar aircraft back at the hangar instead of in a snow bank.

No they don’t……as proven by the actual “stats” once the size of each fleet is taken into account, and of course in the second set, when a F-16 and F-15 are equipped with a P&W engine (same maker of the F-35’s engine), the twin engine F-15E fleet has lost 5 aircraft since 1990 and the single engine F-16 (with the same engine) has lost zero aircraft since 1991.

[On Guard for Thee]

No they don’t……as proven by the actual “stats” once the size of each fleet is taken into account, and of course in the second set, when a F-16 and F-15 are equipped with a P&W engine (same maker of the F-35’s engine), the twin engine F-15E fleet has lost 5 aircraft since 1990 and the single engine F-16 (with the same engine) has lost zero aircraft since 1991.

No I stand by Byers stats. I realize that older a/c had less reliable engines. But bird ingestion will kill the most advanced engines. Look what Happened to Cpt. Sully ending up in the Hudson. And this engine has shown itself to have some flaws. It runs way too hot and that's why it doesn't even need a goose to kill it.

[Derek 2.0]

No I stand by Byers stats. I realize that older a/c had less reliable engines. But bird ingestion will kill the most advanced engines. Look what Happened to Cpt. Sully ending up in the Hudson. And this engine has shown itself to have some flaws. It runs way too hot and that's why it doesn't even need a goose to kill it.

Byers used the above USAF stats, but misrepresented and/or misunderstood them in his reporting……Of course Byers also claimed the F-16 was operated off of aircraft carriers in his report…

[On Guard for Thee]

Byers used the above USAF stats, but misrepresented and/or misunderstood them in his reporting……Of course Byers also claimed the F-16 was operated off of aircraft carriers in his report…

Here's a Canadian stat for ya. According to DND, between 1988 and 2012, F 18's had a total of 228 engine failures/shutdowns in flight. Those airplanes are all back home. So let's see multiply whatever the most recent number trotted out as to the cost per airframe by 228. Pretty soon you're talking big money!

[Derek 2.0]

Here's a Canadian stat for ya. According to DND, between 1988 and 2012, F 18's had a total of 228 engine failures/shutdowns in flight. Those airplanes are all back home. So let's see multiply whatever the most recent number trotted out as to the cost per airframe by 228. Pretty soon you're talking big money!

Reread your source…….228 precautionary shutdowns, not failures…..big difference, as a precautionary shutdown is not an indicator of an engine failure……..And as the above data from the USAF shows, when using the same engine, the USAF has lost 5 F-15s due to engine failures and not a single, single engine F-16 over the same timeframe.

Do you know how many CF-188s have been lost due to engine failure and/or ingestion of a bird?

[On Guard for Thee]

Reread your source…….228 precautionary shutdowns, not failures…..big difference, as a precautionary shutdown is not an indicator of an engine failure……..And as the above data from the USAF shows, when using the same engine, the USAF has lost 5 F-15s due to engine failures and not a single, single engine F-16 over the same timeframe.

Do you know how many CF-188s have been lost due to engine failure and/or ingestion of a bird?

I assume you MUST be a pilot. Therefore you would know that the only reason you would shut down an engine in flight would be because it was showing signs of failing, and either you felt you didn't need it to finish the flight, or you wanted to save the last breath of that engine for landing in which case you can restart and get the machine back on the ground. That's not an option with the F 35.

[Derek 2.0]

I assume you MUST be a pilot. Therefore you would know that the only reason you would shut down an engine in flight would be because it was showing signs of failing, and either you felt you didn't need it to finish the flight, or you wanted to save the last breath of that engine for landing in which case you can restart and get the machine back on the ground. That's not an option with the F 35.

Are you saying the F-35 doesn't have an APU?

Do you know what the two leading causes of engine failure in military aircraft, seized and rotary, are?

[On Guard for Thee]

Are you saying the F-35 doesn't have an APU?

Do you know what the two leading causes of engine failure in military aircraft, seized and rotary, are?

What the heck does APU have to do with any of this?

[Derek 2.0]

What the heck does APU have to do with any of this?

You said an F-35 couldn't shutdown it's engine in flight.

[On Guard for Thee]

You said an F-35 couldn't shutdown it's engine in flight.

I said nothing of the sort. My concern is that F 35 engines will shutdown in flight. Do you know what APU means?

[Derek 2.0]

I said nothing of the sort. My concern is that F 35 engines will shutdown in flight. Do you know what APU means?

Your post:

I assume you MUST be a pilot. Therefore you would know that the only reason you would shut down an engine in flight would be because it was showing signs of failing, and either you felt you didn't need it to finish the flight, or you wanted to save the last breath of that engine for landing in which case you can restart and get the machine back on the ground. That's not an option with the F 35.

And there are other reasons why one would shutdown an engine in flight, outside of an actual engine failure…..high oil temperature…fuel supply surge…and the always popular compressor stall/surge.........And yes, I know what APU means, especially in concert with these above listed events.

[On Guard for Thee]

Your post:

And there are other reasons why one would shutdown an engine in flight, outside of an actual engine failure…..high oil temperature…fuel supply surge…and the always popular compressor stall/surge.........And yes, I know what APU means, especially in concert with these above listed events.

The point being, the difference between a total engine failure, and an impending one, is how much longer do I have before it gets really quiet in here, and where is my nearest patch of tarmac.In the Canadian arctic that could be a long ways away. And it's very unlikely both engines would have a problem at the same time.

[Derek 2.0]

The point being, the difference between a total engine failure, and an impending one, is how much longer do I have before it gets really quiet in here, and where is my nearest patch of tarmac.In the Canadian arctic that could be a long ways away. And it's very unlikely both engines would have a problem at the same time.

No, as I indicated above, there are far many more reasons to temporally shut-down an engine, well not being directly related to said engine…..often, these problems are solved with a relight.

It’s also very unlikely that one engine will have a problem…..

[On Guard for Thee]

No, as I indicated above, there are far many more reasons to temporally shut-down an engine, well not being directly related to said engine…..often, these problems are solved with a relight.

It’s also very unlikely that one engine will have a problem…..

Why would you shut it down if all you needed to do was relight it? That makes absolutely NO sense.

[Derek 2.0]

Why would you shut it down if all you needed to do was relight it? That makes absolutely NO sense.

Sometimes the compressor doesn’t care……..different engines and circumstances (altitude, temperature etc) have differing procedures…..this circles back to the APU……now do you know what it is for?

[On Guard for Thee]

Sometimes the compressor doesn’t care……..different engines and circumstances (altitude, temperature etc) have differing procedures…..this circles back to the APU……now do you know what it is for?

Obviously you know naught of what you speak.

[Derek 2.0]

Obviously you know naught of what you speak.

How about you fill in the blanks

[On Guard for Thee]

An APU is an alternate method of powering up the aircraft either for a start or to maintain systems such as ac etc.aside from the ac's battery. They can be internal or external. Yeah I pretty much know what an APU is. Having used them for 40 years.

[bush_cheney2004]

No worries....all F-35 variants will come with fabulous Mk16 Martin Baker ejection seats. I assume Canada will pay for the seats...right ?

[On Guard for Thee]

"Sometimes the comnpressor doesn't care"? That's pretty funny.

[On Guard for Thee]

No worries....all F-35 variants will come with fabulous Mk16 Martin Baker ejection seats. I assume Canada will pay for the seats...right ?

That's good, because ejection seats will be needed.

[Derek 2.0]

An APU is an alternate method of powering up the aircraft either for a start or to maintain systems such as ac etc.aside from the ac's battery. They can be internal or external. Yeah I pretty much know what an APU is. Having used them for 40 years.

So why would you require, in-flight, to power up the aircraft for a start?

You've said you've flown 212s, so please, by all means, give us the Readers Digest on the procedures for a IFSD on this type, followed by relight.

[On Guard for Thee]

So why would you require, in-flight, to power up the aircraft for a start?

You've said you've flown 212s, so please, by all means, give us the Readers Digest on the procedures for a IFSD on this type, followed by relight.

You can look up the readers digest version if that means something to you. I would use the company checklist.

[On Guard for Thee]

You can look up the readers digest version if that means something to you. I would use the company checklist.

But basically it's pretty simple. Establish SE flight, roll throttle to idle, then to off. Reset switches.