HEINZ TRANSCRIPT (part 3): The benefits of 2 engine makers

The F-16 isn't the best of comparisons. It was an effort driven by Congressional Pork. Note that the two-engine setup for the F-16 was not a perfect drop in setup, You had to have big mouth and small mouth F-16s (except for a few early Block 30s that tried this out with the small mouth GE)... and other appliances were motor maker specific. Not really a comparison to a F135 or F136 which is supposed to be drop in.

We had two engines for the F-16 in the 90's during the procurement holiday. You know what caused a big engine related grounding?.... A PowerPoint warrior trying to find "savings" in an engine sustainment program that was funded well and operating well. The little group thinkers pulled money from that program for something else and about a year later planes started engine failing and being grounded.

Since there was no perfect drop-in setup between GE and PW you couldn't just chuck in the other engine vendors motor. Also the F-16 goofs deployment logistics because you need to take two different motors to war and match them to a specific mixed community of GE or PW jet squadrons at the war theater.

So using the F-16 two motor topic as a comparison shows the persons absolute lack of knowledge on the topic.

It will be interesting to see where this all goes... the GE/Rolls F136 may turn out fine. Problem is that it is behind the PW on its tick off's of testing. For example all the flight tests have been with a PW motor. So at some point there will be a whole sector of flight testing just to get the F136 motor up to qual.

If the F-35 program gets into trouble because it couldn't get airframes built in enough quantity early- on to keep price/cost down because we had to fund the F136 motor.... Well, we were warned.

try not to let your hatred of the F-35 overwhelm you and instead actually pay attention to what he said

> Also the F-16 goofs deployment logistics because you need to take two different motors to war

well we seem to have managed it just fine for over 20 years

> Since there was no perfect drop-in setup between GE and PW you couldn't just chuck in the other engine vendors motor

he never said you could

the competition was at the time of procurement, they would either buy a batch of block X0 (GE) or block X2 (PW) fighters based on who submitted a better bid

he specifically said "I think I can see from the timeframe of when there was no competition to the timeframe of the early years when it started there was almost a 20% price reduction"

are you saying he's lying?
have you looked at the charts and determined he misinterpreted them?

they instituted competition and suddenly there was a 20% price drop

that seems pretty clear to me

and as you so wonderfully pointed out, you will be able to swap engines in the F-35 unlike the F-16, thus there will be EVEN MORE COMPETITION for the F-35

suddenly that 20% price drop looks pretty conservative

> Since there was no perfect drop-in setup between GE and PW you couldn't just chuck in the other engine vendors motor

again you make the argument that an alternate engine is EVEN MORE VALUABLE to the F-35 than the F-16

if the alternate engine was worth it for the F-16 (and it was), it will be even more beneficial for the F-35 since the ability to swap engines BOTH increases competition AND allows for the fleet to keep flying if one engine is grounded

> So using the F-16 two motor topic as a comparison shows the persons absolute lack of knowledge on the topic

no, it just establishes a baseline that even with the limits on competition, they still achieved a 20% cost savings

The concept of the F-35 alternate engine for any airframe. THAT is a great thing if you want to go that way. THAT is the only combat justification for an alternate engine jet, that you can put in either a PW or a GE in any airframe during war.

The F-16 had groundings via engine type and guess what? They couldn't just put in a PW engine in a GE airframe or vice versa. Savings is pretty hard to gain when you have to take two motor types and two airframe types of the F-16 on all those deployments over the years and have no clean swap out. No wonder the USAF is broke with thinking like that. Saving one color of money while wasting 3 other colors of money. A DOD tradition.

> The F-16 had groundings via engine type and guess what? They couldn't just put in a PW engine in a GE airframe or vice versa

so you're saying you don't support buying any more F-16s? glad to hear it

> THAT is the only combat justification for an alternate engine jet, that you can put in either a PW or a GE in any airframe during war.

even on the crude level, if one engine is grounded, it only affects part of your fleet instead of ALL your fleet

> No wonder the USAF is broke with thinking like that

So, how much does carrying a 2nd engine actually cost the USAF?

Does that cost overwhelm the lowered procurement price?

Until you can actually show some numbers, your argument rings hollow