I noticed something about an engine for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) mentioned among the cuts that President Obama wants in the next budget for the US military. I hadn't paid much attention to it until I recently started noticing advertisements for the F136 all over the internet and the press. After reading Mike Boyer's Cincinnati.com article about the subject, I decided it was worth looking into.

It turns out that Congress approved and paid $2.5 Billion to have General Electric develop a second engine option for the F-35. The idea is that competition between GE's F136 and Pratt & Whitney's F135 will drive both companies to pull out all the stops and offer better products. In spite of that investment, the United States' current financial situation has policitians thinking twice about spending and the President feels that funding the F136 through the rest of its development isn't worth the cost.

P&W is naturally arguing that their engine is already operational and has been proven over thousands of hours. GE counters that a second engine eliminates the possibility of a fleet-wide grounding if a problem is discovered down the road. Boyer mentioned that GE will be able to apply the technology from the F136 to commercial aviation engines as well. However, it seems like the same would apply to P&W's engine. There is plenty of logic and popular support for each engine.

What do you think? Do we need two separate engines for the F-35? If so, what arguments for the F136 sway you the most? If not, why?

I'm also going to post a poll for open voting. Leave your comments here or on the poll page after you vote.