Military Review

The US Air Force announced a new problem with F-22 fighters

77

The US military command identified an unexpected problem that opened up during the operation of fifth-generation fighter F-22.


The command of the US Air Force noted that we are talking about increasing the number of flights of these fighters in recent times. This leads to the fact that the engines wear out very intensively, developing their resource faster than provided for by the operation program.

It would seem that there can be no particular problem for the United States in this regard, because it is enough to replace the engines with new ones and continue to operate the F-22 fighters in the previous version. But it turned out that this is an additional difficulty for the US Air Force.

The command of the country's air forces said that there is already a shortage of aviation engines for the 5th generation F-22 fighters.

Now the US military intends to appeal to Congress with a request to increase funding for the engine industry - with the goal of creating a sufficient number of aircraft engines for the F-22.

We need a certain backlog on aircraft engines, otherwise the problem will only get worse
-
declare in command of the Air Force.

The F-22 is powered by Pratt & Whitney F119-PW-100 engines. They are twin-shaft motors with high and low pressure counter-rotating rotors. The mass of the engine is about 1,8 tons. Their thrust reaches 15,8 tons. Since the start of production, more than half a thousand F119-PW-100 have been produced. At the same time, the first stage of production lasted only 2 years and was completed in 2013. There is no official information about the engine resource.
77 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Invoce
    Invoce 26 June 2020 08: 21 New
    +4
    This is not a problem of aircraft operation, but a problem of economy and financing of the military-industrial complex.
    It can be safely stated that judging by the fact that the engine resource is coming to an end, the aircraft is being operated intensively, and therefore it is not bad.
    The question arises, but is it impossible to extend the resource for these engines? Or are they made in such a way that they worked out 1000 hours and that’s all for recycling? And the repair?
    1. Alex777
      Alex777 26 June 2020 08: 34 New
      +4
      The Jankers winter came unexpectedly. laughing
      The engines are over ... Well then.
      Let them sit. Do not fly. What for? bully
      The question arises, but is it impossible to extend the resource for these engines?

      Repair is a problem again. Spare parts are needed. Qualitative. Not cheap.
      If something goes wrong - the loss of the most expensive aircraft. hi
      1. NIKN
        NIKN 26 June 2020 09: 21 New
        +4
        Quote: Alex777
        Repair is a problem again. Spare parts are needed. Qualitative. Not cheap.

        Well, actually the extension of the resource, this is world practice. The same B-52s have been renewed many times already. The extension of the resource in general should initially be incorporated into the design, but if not like that, then the poor design ... and it was necessary to plan to decommission the F-22 earlier. (well, as an irony)
        1. Alex777
          Alex777 26 June 2020 09: 42 New
          +6
          So on the B-52 there are no unique engines with a flat nozzle.
          And those that are used on civilian aircraft were used.
          And on the Boeing 707-123B, and on the Boeing 720-023B, and on the KC-135E.
          There is no problem with them. Therefore, they extend the service life.
          Now, in general, we have thought about new engines for the B-52.
          Try them out. hi
          https://www.aex.ru/news/2019/9/19/202348/
          1. NIKN
            NIKN 26 June 2020 09: 56 New
            +3
            About the B-52, I am in the know about new engines for them. I mean that any design (and engines with flat and triangular wink nozzle) Already at the R&D stage, it provides for the extension of the resource ... otherwise the engine is "cost-effective", well, or more designed for use in the Kyrgyz Republic. (irony again) smile
            With respect! hi
      2. orionvitt
        orionvitt 26 June 2020 13: 40 New
        +2
        Quote: Alex777
        Spare parts are needed. High quality

        Especially if you print parts on 3D printers. The Americans have such a fashion. And then they complain about the low quality.
    2. Insurgent
      Insurgent 26 June 2020 08: 36 New
      +1
      Quote: Invoce
      This is not a problem of aircraft operation, but a problem of economy and financing of the military-industrial complex.

      There have been problems in the US economy before, but at the moment, against the backdrop of unstable political system and turbulence in society, they can deepen.
      Yes, and the seemingly unlimited financial system may begin to show failures and failures ...
    3. Cyril G ...
      Cyril G ... 26 June 2020 08: 38 New
      +3
      Maybe the resource is low initially
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 26 June 2020 10: 46 New
        +6
        Pratt & Whitney has world records for resources.
        The latest F-16s, for example, have 8000 hours. For the entire life of the aircraft - without
        engine replacement.
        1. Cyril G ...
          Cyril G ... 26 June 2020 11: 52 New
          +7
          If everything had been so blissfully, there would have been no problem voiced. This time
          Resource 119 of the engine was not announced. These are two.
        2. orionvitt
          orionvitt 26 June 2020 13: 43 New
          +2
          Quote: voyaka uh
          The latest F-16s, for example, have 8000 hours. For the entire life of the aircraft

          And why then in Israel, engine repair for the F-16 has been established. Maybe not everything is so blessed?
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 26 June 2020 16: 33 New
            +1
            I wrote - at the LAST (Blocks) F-16.
            Prior to this, engine change / repair was performed once during the lifetime of the aircraft. Which is also good.
            For comparison: the Su-30, according to statistics, during the operation of the aircraft engines change twice (two engines). This is the data of the auditors of India.
        3. Technical engineer
          Technical engineer 27 June 2020 10: 42 New
          +5
          At the air base there was a branch on the resource. One nuance was noted. Our bench tests of the engine for a resource take place according to the scheme: take-off-flight-landing-take-off, etc. .. Americans have all 8000 hours in cruise flight mode. Hence the difference in hours. Because the take-off mode, and indeed the change of modes, cause the main wear. And at face value, the engine can plow ... In the Army I was a diesel engineer and my tank diesel engine at the power plant worked without overhaul for 22 years (I remember the technical documentation), I don’t think that his brother in the tank could work for so many hours. At DES, he worked at par without peak loads, threshed himself slowly.
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 27 June 2020 10: 49 New
            +1
            The statistics itself are true: how many replacements were there over the entire service life.
            In Israel, the F-16 plow in the tail and mane in shock operations, loaded
            bombs and rockets. At the oldest - from the beginning of the 80s - engines were changed two or three times.
            Three in 40 years. Resource more modern increased.
            1. Cyril G ...
              Cyril G ... 27 June 2020 11: 20 New
              0
              Did not try to count? Even if we take the average 300 hours per year of flying, 12 hours will come out. Lana chatted imagine a fantastic 000 a year, then goes bingo 400 hours. As a result, the engine changes on average at an operating time of 16 to 000 hours.
              And therefore, everything is true 8000 hours is the nominal value. It doesn’t happen on a fighter
    4. EvilLion
      EvilLion 26 June 2020 08: 45 New
      +3
      We grow single-crystal turbine blades, and then repair them with a file and solder the tin solder to the rotor.

      And the problem is m / b, if the resource turned out to be lower than calculated, but then the question is for engineers. Either the engine operation modes are very different from the planned ones due to various reasons, which leads to a decrease in the resource.
    5. Yrec
      Yrec 26 June 2020 10: 12 New
      +9
      Repair of an aircraft engine, especially a fighter one, is the replacement of attachments and various highways, electronics. The "body" of the engine gradually burns out during operation, the tolerances go away, and the thrust drops. Theoretically, it is possible to extend the resource, but the parameters will drop dramatically and the security will be very much. By the way, that is why the Chinese prefer our engines - their resource is about 3 times more than the Chinese clones.
    6. Boratsagdiev
      Boratsagdiev 26 June 2020 12: 53 New
      +1
      Quote: Invoce
      and the problem of the economy and financing of the military-industrial complex.

      including the problem of a wonderful Western economy, which stagnates and degrades every 15-20 years (and now economic crises every 5-7 years).
    7. +5
      +5 26 June 2020 15: 07 New
      +3
      Where in the article about intensive operation? The article is about unexpectedly fast engine wear. If it were predictable, there would be no ahtung.
    8. doubovitski
      doubovitski 27 June 2020 22: 23 New
      0
      Quote: Invoce
      This is not a problem of aircraft operation, but a problem of economy and financing of the military-industrial complex.
      It can be safely stated that judging by the fact that the engine resource is coming to an end, the aircraft is being operated intensively, and therefore it is not bad.
      The question arises, but is it impossible to extend the resource for these engines? Or are they made in such a way that they worked out 1000 hours and that’s all for recycling? And the repair?

      Why did you get that if you ride a lot, is he good? You can, of course, and on a donkey, but it is adapted little. So, if you want, if you don’t want, harness and ride.
      The fact that dviguny have to be changed often is not an economic problem, it is a design problem. These are industry problems. Replacement is a disconnection from a combat mission. After replacement, flying and testing. Which is an encouraging factor for us.
  2. Piramidon
    Piramidon 26 June 2020 08: 28 New
    24
    The command of the US Air Force noted that we are talking about increasing the number of flights of these fighters in recent times. This leads to the fact that the engines wear out very intensively, developing their resource faster than provided for by the operation program.

    Here is the answer to the question why our Tu-95s fly along the borders of the United States - the resources of their engines are intercepted at intercepts. lol
    1. Pessimist22
      Pessimist22 26 June 2020 10: 18 New
      +9
      Our diesel engines are so buzzing that F 22 and something may fall off smile
  3. Machete
    Machete 26 June 2020 08: 31 New
    +8
    And did they plan to use this miracle of aircraft industry in military conflicts with more or less intensive aircraft use?
    Or would you like to make one sortie every three days?

    It’s just funny to read about military equipment.
    Combined use is contraindicated in technology. Hmm ..
    1. Invoce
      Invoce 26 June 2020 08: 47 New
      0
      Quote: Machete
      And did they plan to use this miracle of aircraft industry in military conflicts with more or less intensive aircraft use?
      Or would you like to make one sortie every three days?

      It’s just funny to read about military equipment.
      Combined use is contraindicated in technology. Hmm ..

      The F-22 has been in operation for about 20 years !!!! I think that they do not fly 1-2 departures a week. On our aircraft, which are in service with the Aerospace Forces, during the threatened period, the temperature behind the CC is increased, which greatly reduces the resource of the engines .. Here, in my opinion, the staff have a different approach to operation, I do not presume to assert, but apparently the Pratt & Whitney F119-PW- 100 always have the ability to reach max. regimes even in peacetime. Americans consider themselves exceptional, the richest and have never spared money for the army ... But what was laid down 20 years ago has now become a problem for them ...
      An illustrative example ... the transition from large-capacity automobile engines to small and hybrid ones ...
      1. Machete
        Machete 26 June 2020 09: 00 New
        +4
        All the same, they fly in a sparing mode. And then the interceptions began to do constant. And the resource began to melt rapidly.
        Ours in Syria flew continuously for a couple of months, two or three flights a day on board. Then they drove away for maintenance and drove others.

        I do not think that the f-22 can withstand even half that intensity.
    2. 3danimal
      3danimal 26 June 2020 12: 42 New
      +1
      If you believe everything .. Although, if you a priori consider the Americans to be bad business executives and lack of class (according to Zadornov), then you can.
  4. rocket757
    rocket757 26 June 2020 08: 41 New
    0
    What can this talk about ... cannot carry out intense hostilities?
    So they and so they made flights a couple of times a day, nothing more.
    1. Eug
      Eug 26 June 2020 09: 00 New
      +8
      They have long whined that the flights of Russian bombers are forcing them to raise their planes to intercept, while consuming a precious resource.
      1. rocket757
        rocket757 26 June 2020 09: 30 New
        +1
        interceptions are less common. So this is their business, they will figure it out.
        1. Oyo Sarkazmi
          Oyo Sarkazmi 26 June 2020 10: 38 New
          0
          Quote: rocket757
          interceptions are less common.

          But for a long time - a few hours. Training also lasts only an hour from strength.
          1. rocket757
            rocket757 26 June 2020 10: 47 New
            0
            These are their affairs, their problems, their grandmothers.
      2. Cyril G ...
        Cyril G ... 26 June 2020 11: 58 New
        +3


        An inconspicuous fighter with a special stealth coating is also wintering under the snow, like in some sort of scoop. laughing They even clean it with shovels. But what about warm hangars? They say they spend money on the army exorbitantly!
        They probably steal just as immeasurably. lol
        1. Iris
          Iris 26 June 2020 15: 47 New
          0
          Well, actually, these are not shovels, but brooms)))
      3. doubovitski
        doubovitski 27 June 2020 22: 29 New
        0
        Quote: Eug
        They have long whined that the flights of Russian bombers are forcing them to raise their planes to intercept, while consuming a precious resource.

        Is it possible for such an interception, in a clearly peaceful time, so to speak, in a PROTOCOL, DEMONSTRATIVE way, is it possible to drive cheaper airplanes? If they want to train pilots, then why the hell are they offended by us? Let them be offended by themselves.
  5. Avior
    Avior 26 June 2020 08: 54 New
    +1
    It is not clear what the problem of engine manufacturing is.
    A mass-produced engine for the F-35 is made on the basis of the f-22 engine
    1. dzvero
      dzvero 26 June 2020 09: 29 New
      +1
      The problems are most likely logistic. There is money, but it is necessary to restore the production line, relations with subcontractors ... It is still not clear whether there is free capacity or if another model should be removed from production.
      1. Avior
        Avior 26 June 2020 10: 23 New
        -2
        I had to read that the problem is that they are not currently being released, since there was a margin
        It’s just surprising that it’s difficult to restore, because the engine for the f-35, it is actually the f-22 engine with some improvements, that is, they will restore far from zero
        1. Genry
          Genry 26 June 2020 10: 53 New
          +1
          Quote: Avior
          what is the difficulty to restore, because the engine for the f-35, it is actually the f-22 engine with some modifications,

          They have only the "hot part" similar - this is the basis for the next engine model ..
        2. +5
          +5 26 June 2020 15: 12 New
          0
          You are greatly mistaken about the proximity of 119 and 135 drygalents .... it's like a Volkswagen "suddenly" in 2012 could launch the release of Golf 5 .... because it has a lot in common with the Passat B7 ...
    2. doubovitski
      doubovitski 27 June 2020 22: 36 New
      0
      Quote: Avior
      It is not clear what the problem of engine manufacturing is.
      A mass-produced engine for the F-35 is made on the basis of the f-22 engine

      Not the fact that they have interchangeable parts. The Watt locomotive is made on the basis of a cart.
  6. Eug
    Eug 26 June 2020 08: 58 New
    +1
    I didn’t understand something - why will the Air Force ask Congress to increase funding for the engine industry, and not the Air Force itself? Who is the customer of the engines - the state or the air force? Did they follow the path of the USSR when a large part of military spending goes beyond the budget of the military department?
    1. +5
      +5 26 June 2020 15: 14 New
      +1
      So they destroyed the polymers, you can't just take and order these engines ... more precisely, you can, but the price of 1 will be incredible, "the boys won't understand" .... and first they will invest in restoring production, and then they will buy at the operating cost + margin .... something like that.
    2. doubovitski
      doubovitski 27 June 2020 22: 39 New
      0
      Quote: Eug
      I didn’t understand something - why will the Air Force ask Congress to increase funding for the engine industry, and not the Air Force itself? Who is the customer of the engines - the state or the air force? Did they follow the path of the USSR when a large part of military spending goes beyond the budget of the military department?

      The Air Force does not finance a private enterprise. The intermediary is an extra mouth, guzzling the budget. And the possibility of abuse.
  7. Prisoner
    Prisoner 26 June 2020 09: 26 New
    +1
    Do not change, do not drag, drag, do not repair.
  8. Aleks2000
    Aleks2000 26 June 2020 09: 41 New
    +6
    And, probably just clumsily translated.
    Just ask grandmas for the construction of new engines. Or for modernization. Ask Trump Putin about 5 pieces of flights along the borders to do - and it's all in the hat.

    Between the lines it reads that the engine is not bad. 500 pieces were made, 180 planes, 2 per brother + 1 total spare. And this was enough for 7 years of flights with a margin.
    1. doubovitski
      doubovitski 27 June 2020 22: 40 New
      0
      Quote: Alex2000
      And, probably just clumsily translated.
      Just ask grandmas for the construction of new engines. Or for modernization. Ask Trump Putin about 5 pieces of flights along the borders to do - and it's all in the hat.

      Between the lines it reads that the engine is not bad. 500 pieces were made, 180 planes, 2 per brother + 1 total spare. And this was enough for 7 years of flights with a margin.

      You look at the history of flights when they were practically nonexistent. Take new, fresh statistics.
      1. Aleks2000
        Aleks2000 27 June 2020 22: 48 New
        0
        This must be sought. It’s clear that rough estimates.
        However, 7 years is 7 years.
  9. silver_roman
    silver_roman 26 June 2020 09: 52 New
    +1
    that's why our Tu-95s fly there so often).
    1. doubovitski
      doubovitski 27 June 2020 22: 44 New
      0
      Quote: silver_roman
      that's why our Tu-95s fly there so often).

      Do not write nonsense. It seems that TU engines do not exhaust the resource. And they are an order of magnitude smaller, therefore, they must be protected with great care. Another disaster from the combat use of this airplane for the enemy is potentially immeasurably greater than from a fighter.
  10. Dmitry Donskoy_2
    Dmitry Donskoy_2 26 June 2020 09: 54 New
    -7
    They even fly and apply, and we all fly on the USSR, what kind of groundwork is it. But we have good promises. Putin himself promised to take at least not 50 and il 96 when he signed the contract in 2012 by 20, there were 39 of them, nooo he would not remember this and what they had done only 3
    1. Cyril G ...
      Cyril G ... 26 June 2020 12: 03 New
      +3
      50 built MiG-29SMT, 24 MiG-29KUB, 96 Su-35S, 12 Su-27SM3, 124 Su-34, 118 Su-30SM, 3 Tu-160 also built in the USSR?
      Of the fighters, for example, the Soviet-built Su-27s, there were 50 pieces left in service, 29 MiG-18s in Eribuni and 120 MiG-31s.
      1. Dmitry Donskoy_2
        Dmitry Donskoy_2 26 June 2020 22: 20 New
        -2
        Tu 160 all of the reserves of the USSR Su due to the debugged export cycle was saved. Everything else is poher with stability
        1. doubovitski
          doubovitski 27 June 2020 22: 51 New
          0
          Quote: Dmitry Donskoy_2
          Tu 160 all of the reserves of the USSR Su due to the debugged export cycle was saved. Everything else is poher with stability

          In the garden of elderberry, and in Kiev, uncle. You are talking about completely different things. The strategic arms reduction treaty concerned the TU-160, but did not concern the SU. How much did we cut them ourselves? Under the ovation of the observers? How many remained beyond the borders of Russia, and had to be pulled out of there? And how much equipment was destroyed under the same contract?
          To do from the groundwork? Yes, this is nonsense. The groundwork is old materials, components, stands, equipment, equipment. which is all poached, not released, and to restore the production of all this is now more expensive than the new manufacture of new things.
  11. Grazdanin
    Grazdanin 26 June 2020 10: 02 New
    0
    You still do not understand how they work? If you praise foreign weapons, then there is some kind of program for which you need money, so that you don’t be left behind. If they talk about problems, then there is a program that will solve them. In this case, they most likely want a new engine modification, because really why do I need bad old engines? If the problem is that the resource is lower than the declared, the supplier is put in one not convenient position and require the fulfillment of the stated obligations.
    American Generals praise foreign weapons and their new programs. As soon as new weapons in the right quantities in the army begin to scold him. Do not be like Congress, do not trust American generals))
  12. qaz
    qaz 26 June 2020 10: 24 New
    -3
    Well, there are turbo-fan engines on the B-52, and turbo-jet engines on the F-22, here's the calculation of the durability of the engines.
    1. doubovitski
      doubovitski 27 June 2020 22: 55 New
      -1
      Quote: qaz
      Well on the B-52 are turbu-fan engines, and on the F-22 torbo-reactive, here is the calculation of the durability of the engines.

      If you want to participate, do not make mistakes. To answer your stupidity ....
  13. Vitaly gusin
    Vitaly gusin 26 June 2020 10: 30 New
    -1
    There is no official information on the engine resource.
    The Pratt & Whitney F119 engine, which powers the F-22 Raptor, has successfully completed 8650 accumulated cycles, or TAC, which represents the first time a fifth generation fighter has demonstrated the ability to meet the demands of full life. Pratt & Whitney is a United Technologies Corp. (NYSE: UTX).
    The F119 has accumulated more than 300,000 hours and is the only fifth generation engine in operational use today.
    1. Cyril G ...
      Cyril G ... 27 June 2020 11: 31 New
      0
      I translate into Russian information on the resource is not here. Resource in the public form is measured in hours of flight. The accumulated cycles can and will tell some very, very narrow specialist, but no more. Above correctly said the assigned resource of the F-16 engine - 8000 hours. Assigned resource Al-41 - 4000 hours.
      In addition, I have strong suspicions that any fraud with a nozzle, such as our rotary or American flat. This same resource is cut at times.
      1. Vitaly gusin
        Vitaly gusin 27 June 2020 11: 53 New
        0
        Quote: Cyril G ...
        I translate into Russian information on the resource is not here.

        I just supplemented what was written in the text.
        "ABOUT engine resource there is no official information. "
        Quote: Cyril G ...
        Public Resource Measured in flying hours.

        This is not the same thing.
        The F-22 program included a total of about 5,200 flight test hours.
        Program F - 22 included about 5200 hours of flight tests.
        But as far as I know, only a few pilots flew 10 hours in 1000 years.
        1. Cyril G ...
          Cyril G ... 27 June 2020 11: 56 New
          0
          There is no official information on the engine resource.

          That is what I originally said.
          10 years flew 1000 hours.

          Complicating a device is not always sensible. You have to pay for everything.
          1. Vitaly gusin
            Vitaly gusin 27 June 2020 11: 58 New
            0
            Quote: Cyril G ...
            You have to pay for everything.

            Not everyone understands this and is looking for a freebie but find PROBLEMS.
            1. Cyril G ...
              Cyril G ... 27 June 2020 12: 37 New
              0
              I suppose there is a problem with the resource, if it is covered in the media and the reason is probably here

              Find out ever ....
              1. Vitaly gusin
                Vitaly gusin 27 June 2020 13: 39 New
                +1
                Quote: Cyril G ...
                I suppose there is a problem with the resource, if it is covered in the media

                In the foreign specialized media, other reasons are indicated and you indicated them in the post earlier.
                Given the costs of research and development, the price of the F-22 was 334 million US dollars. The cost of the F-22 in operation is about $ 70 per hour.
                And here all the problems come from, so that a pilot becomes a combat pilot, he needs at least 200 hours a year. And for this we need spare parts and maintenance is money, and airplanes from 2005-2010 This is the main problem.
  14. Pavel57
    Pavel57 26 June 2020 10: 51 New
    +1
    In a crisis, engine builders need to be fed.
  15. Ros 56
    Ros 56 26 June 2020 11: 30 New
    -1
    Well, to hell with them, the smaller the resource, the higher the costs for striped, although they print their candy wrappers without problems.
  16. Charik
    Charik 26 June 2020 12: 57 New
    0
    So start buying from Russia
  17. Jack O'Neill
    Jack O'Neill 26 June 2020 14: 09 New
    0
    Well, upgrading the F-22A has been asking for a long time. There the engines will be pulled up, avionics ... F-119 Block-2 will be shoved by some sort, with a thrust of 15000 kg / s and afterburner 20000 kg / s. They will deliver AN / AAQ-37, AAQ-40 (by the way, they first wanted to put OLS on the Raptor, but in the end they refused because of the total price of the aircraft). And finally, they will replace the antediluvian AN / APG-77 with a more modern AN / APG-81.

    Although, if this is the whole thing in Kota shove (engines, radar), then it would be cool.
    1. +5
      +5 26 June 2020 15: 17 New
      +1
      There, the entire board generally needs to be changed .... such an upgrade will be more expensive than the new and the whole F-35 ... if they do, it will not be soon, when it is completely out of date.
    2. doubovitski
      doubovitski 27 June 2020 23: 01 New
      -1
      Quote: Jack O'Neill
      Well, upgrading the F-22A has been asking for a long time. There the engines will be pulled up, avionics ... F-119 Block-2 will be shoved by some sort, with a thrust of 15000 kg / s and afterburner 20000 kg / s. They will deliver AN / AAQ-37, AAQ-40 (by the way, they first wanted to put OLS on the Raptor, but in the end they refused because of the total price of the aircraft). And finally, they will replace the antediluvian AN / APG-77 with a more modern AN / APG-81.

      Although, if this is the whole thing in Kota shove (engines, radar), then it would be cool.

      It remains to wish great success in budget expenditures.
  18. kamikaze
    kamikaze 26 June 2020 22: 25 New
    0
    and how they will fight in the airspace of RUSSIA, too, according to the schedule, one flight in five days. and even they have a problem with f-35 they are afraid of a thunderstorm. pilots were forbidden to fly in thunderclouds. so RUSSIA needs to create thunderclouds so that the f-35s do not fly in the airspace of RUSSIA.
  19. Dzafdet
    Dzafdet 27 June 2020 07: 59 New
    0
    Quote: voyaka uh
    Pratt & Whitney has world records for resources.
    The latest F-16s, for example, have 8000 hours. For the entire life of the aircraft - without
    engine replacement.



    This is you bent. The service life of the F-16 is short, as soon as it is taken by ours, then he and the khan ...
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 27 June 2020 11: 33 New
      +1
      It was a great opportunity to shoot down Turkish F-16s that attacked the Russian
      bombers and shot down one. At least take aim ...
    2. 3danimal
      3danimal 27 June 2020 15: 57 New
      0
      The same can be said about our Mig, where is the logic?
  20. Sancho_SP
    Sancho_SP 27 June 2020 08: 19 New
    0
    So it’s just that the engine’s manufacturing cycle is more than a year. Now we have found a shortage, placed an order, and the result will be only later.
  21. Dzafdet
    Dzafdet 27 June 2020 18: 14 New
    0
    Quote: voyaka uh
    It was a great opportunity to shoot down Turkish F-16s that attacked the Russian
    bombers and shot down one. At least take aim ...


    From a slingshot? In the F-16 sat an American pilot who shot from the territory of Turkey. Our loshars did not even include Birch. Shoigu, too, will not answer the question of why Israeli planes, which launch rockets from Lebanese territory, are not shot down. I have a couple of thoughts on how to shoe them, but a Jew will not bite a Jew out of a Jew ...
    1. doubovitski
      doubovitski 27 June 2020 23: 08 New
      0
      Quote: Dzafdet
      Quote: voyaka uh
      It was a great opportunity to shoot down Turkish F-16s that attacked the Russian
      bombers and shot down one. At least take aim ...


      From a slingshot? In the F-16 sat an American pilot who shot from the territory of Turkey. Our loshars did not even include Birch. Shoigu, too, will not answer the question of why Israeli planes, which launch rockets from Lebanese territory, are not shot down. I have a couple of thoughts on how to shoe them, but a Jew will not bite a Jew out of a Jew ...

      It’s good that the diots do not steer the Russian Ministry of Defense. We promised to protect Syria from ISIS, which we are doing. No more and no less. Fighters from Iran are fighting the ISIS. And Israel rubs their withers, which is violet for us and the Syrians. The guys just lingered a bit on someone else’s territory, and asking them to go home now is not yet timely. Until ... Let the Iranians be hollowed by their everlasting enemy Turks, and the Jews who joined them.
  22. agoran
    agoran 27 June 2020 22: 05 New
    0
    As far as I understand from the article, amers do not have such a thing as average repair, CWR (overhaul repair).
    That is, the engine worked out a resource and in the trash?
    I doubt something, here, the journalists messed up something.
    If the ancient Abrams are repaired, restored, modernized at the factories, then I don’t think that they cannot extend the BP life at the engine-building factories.