Essentially. More specifically, we don’t even need to go faster. We are already at our material limits (to my knowledge), and need to worry more about making new ceramic blends or finding new materials to build out of. If we go much faster than we already do, our jets would just rip apart and exhausts would melt.
@@InvestIntelShortsI doubt that the materials now aren’t able to go faster, rather the engines capability isn’t at its full potential. Obviously I’m not saying 3 engines is good, but the world can go a little longer developing engines before they need new materials for fighter.
Fun fact: naval fighters usually have 2 engines because if one engine fails there is still one engine left(and single engined fighters would go for a dip if that happens)
@@America_757 Dude, go back to school. F35B (VSTOL version), is flying not only off of US Navy carriers (Marines), they are flying off of the the QE. No cannon. F35C is the built for carrier ops for arrested landings and catapult launch version. They have larger wings to carry more payload and fuel, no cannon. Easiest way to spot them is 2 front LG wheels vs 1 for A&B models.
Wouldn’t work on f14,cause tf30 huge has thrust and the design of the f14 results in a large distance between the two engines.if one fails,the large distance of two engine would cause f14 start flat spinning.Tf30 is used to install on f111 fighter bomber,which when f14 did an high angle attack would cause”Surge in compressors”
@@MattKearneyFan1Nope. If i remember correctly. That plane had 4 outtakes which can be controlled achieving hovering capabilities. Yak series however got 2 behind the pilot and 1 at the rear. The F35 got a single engine and an another outtakes behind the pilot and other 2 under its wings
SR71.. baddest of the bad... 2 engines.. and designed in the late 50s... and still holds the record ( although rumor has it, a hypersonic plane has been in the skunkworx black bag arm of the USAF - DARPA )
If true that's a dangerous design I wouldn't want to be in. When you have one well-functioning engine it keeps all afloat evenly. With 3 engines to manage there's a small exponent of 3 indicating many more possible single failures. Losing 1 of 3 on a VTOL equals sudden and certain flip over death.
@@michaelmappin4425 Engine out scenarios for USMC F-35B and USN/USMC F-35C are the same as the multitude of other single engine naval fighters/attack aircraft that came before them. The pilot ejects, parachutes to the water, crawls into their liferaft and awaits rescue. The major difference is that modern turbine engines such as the F-35's Pratt & Whitney F-135 turbofan go so much further between such engine failures..
@hoghogwild Naval air forces went away from single engine for a very long time. Carrier ops cause an awful lot of engine stalls. Turboprops are extremely reliable too, but I can tell you that I've seen plenty of single engine Hawkeyes on the boat
I did make a 5.5th generation CAS jet concept, and while i gave it a single engine configuration, i included 2 turbofan non afterburning engine, so small and light that it can he hidden within the fuselage and only used if afterburners are not enough or if your main engine is down, but it may affect manuverability, but it's survivability will be insane, so we can't make 3 main engines, only 2 smaller lightsr backup engines, and that alone can be too much
Unless you are the f35 and have a flameout. Lol That said bigger engines are more complex, but more efficient. It's why modern passenger planes use 2 engines instead of 3 or 4.
The performance increase lessens with each additional engine. For example the F-15 and F-16 use the same engine. The F-15 has twice the maximum thrust of the F-16 but cannot go twice as fast. The relationship is not linear.
The Navy's F-35B variant is the exception to the two-engine rule of fighters that extensively fly over water, and/or are assigned to a carrier. The F-22 is another exception to the rule b/c it has 2 engines, however, is incapable of carrier landings.
The F-35 is NOT the most advanced fighter in the world. Do you really think we'd share the most advanced fighter in the world with other countries? Think about it man. F-22 is ours alone, F-35 is ours along with seven different countries.
@@MikeDCWeld it doesn't matter. Only thing better in f-35 is new radar and ability of communication and linking between planes in formation. And technically VTOL in some versions. Except for VTOL those possibilities would be added with modernisation packet as f-22 was designed with modernisation in mind. ALL of other capabilities are superior in f-22, from speed, supercruise, stealth, or agility to amount of ammunition it can carry. In the end it wouldn't be even more expensive, as price of f-22 is bloated because there is much less units produced than initially assumed, only air force can operate it, as both navy and marines don't have it (version for carriers was initially cancelled, WHILE proposed) and it's locked against selling to allies. F-35 should be version that would be multirole and cheaper, but as for price in the end is expensive AF.
Thrust needs to be balanced in an aircraft and even with 2 engines sitting either side of dead centre requires precise and even running to prevent uneven load on the airframe. It is almost impossible to 1. Fit three engines in a fighter and maintain balance and weight targers 2. Control the pitch / yaw of the plane effectively and maintain reliability 3. Achieve range and performance characteristics with the weight and armaments required for the mission objectives
But thinking about it the control factor shouldn't be much of an issue, no? Because Of fly by wire. Although it is possible that the thrust will cause more disturbance than the control surfaces can correct. Other than that...
Also, with 3 engine means more fuel consumption equalling an even more heavy aircraft with increased fuel capacity or a very small mission time with out aerial refueling.
The Me series were the first were they not? That line ran twin engine mounted on the wings. They were fast for the time and used as interceptors as they couldn't turn worth a damn compared to a Mustang or Spitfire
i can explain it. if the jet wants a thrust vectoring, it cant. and the if there’s actually a fighter jet with 3 engines it would be easier to detect it than a c-130 because of the heat signature
Modern Fighter jets can already send people to space... nasa just needs to build a jet that specializes to sending only people to space(other than the decomissioned space shuttle). It's a lot cheaper than building a massive rocket that comsumes a lot of fuel
Of course it would, because the F-22 is an air superiority fighter and the F-35 is a Joint strike fighter. Air superiority was never in mind when it came to the F-35s doctrine.
In a Dogfight or long range? Cause in both the F-35 is better, it has similar RCS and better radar so it would see the F-22 sooner and shoot it down. in a dogfight the F-35 pilot has way better spatial awareness, they can just look at the F-22 behind them, lock onto them and send an AIM-9X 180 degrees to kill the F-22 that's still trying to lock with the Missiles seeker.
Modern fighters are going to 1 engine due to reliability and maintenance costs of using just 1 engines. Aircraft in general at moving to less engines in general for the same reasons and for fuel efficiency. What currently produced commercial aircraft has more that 2 engines? Maybe some junk in Russia.
if one fails... oops, Sorry F16s,, we loved having you around.............same for you F35s... yea,, the 2nd engine isnt planned or designed to meet survivability its designed for war.. not so they can land safely if one engine is shot out..many a top fighter still have 1 engine.. French Mirage is a top gen fighter, still one engine..F16, F35.. all one engine.. Harrier- 1 engine..so yea.. its what it needs to DO, that dictate 1 or two engines..
Right. There's only so much room internally and another engine wouldn't fit along with taking up valuable fuel capacity. You could hang engines on the wings and one in the fuselage...but there's no need as modern engines can make over 1:1 T/W and external engines would greatly increase the RCS and thermal signature which isn't desirable.
I think the F-35 was a pointless design! Why design a 5th generation fighter with one engine? I'm sure it had something to do with the aircraft carrier and the jets size, as well as it being a jump-jet, but it's still dumb to me.
Twin engines are mainly popular for take off while carrying a lot and being more reliable in the case of an engine malfunction. By now, American jet engines have gotten extremely reliable and the stealth jet with internal bomb bays don't need that much take of weight, so one engine is enough(it's also cheaper and allowed the mass producing that was achieved).
No! The F-35 is, the F-22 has a lower RCS but less advanced technology implemented into it because of its age, the F-35 is constantly being modernized and gets updated technology unlike the F-22
Because there was no need for a third engine given how fast aircraft tech was progressing. Not to mention the greater heat signature such would produce. Heat seeker missiles would be drooling all over themselves ready to go to work.
WRONG!!! 1. It had ONE engine, and a ROCKET engine at that. 2. It wasn’t a fighter, it was a kamikaze (suicide) flying bomb with no weapons. 3. It doesn’t fall into the category of this video, as it’s talking about MODERN fighters. 🤦🏼♂️🙄
Basically, a third engine would be more of a hassle than a blessing
Probably. The Swat Kats made it look awesome, but they're mechanical engineers as well as pilots.
Essentially. More specifically, we don’t even need to go faster. We are already at our material limits (to my knowledge), and need to worry more about making new ceramic blends or finding new materials to build out of.
If we go much faster than we already do, our jets would just rip apart and exhausts would melt.
true
@@InvestIntelShortsI doubt that the materials now aren’t able to go faster, rather the engines capability isn’t at its full potential. Obviously I’m not saying 3 engines is good, but the world can go a little longer developing engines before they need new materials for fighter.
McDonnell Douglas knows 😂😂😂😂
Fun fact: naval fighters usually have 2 engines because if one engine fails there is still one engine left(and single engined fighters would go for a dip if that happens)
Our newest deployed fighter has one engine. F35B&C doesn't even have a gun.
@@x-man5056it’s not a naval fighter ( Meaning it can’t land on aircraft carriers)
@@America_757 Dude, go back to school. F35B (VSTOL version), is flying not only off of US Navy carriers (Marines), they are flying off of the the QE. No cannon.
F35C is the built for carrier ops for arrested landings and catapult launch version. They have larger wings to carry more payload and fuel, no cannon. Easiest way to spot them is 2 front LG wheels vs 1 for A&B models.
@@America_757the F35C can
Wouldn’t work on f14,cause tf30 huge has thrust and the design of the f14 results in a large distance between the two engines.if one fails,the large distance of two engine would cause f14 start flat spinning.Tf30 is used to install on f111 fighter bomber,which when f14 did an high angle attack would cause”Surge in compressors”
"The reason for this isn't what most people think."
** Proceeds to describe the exact reason i thought.....
🤣🤣🤣
Another reason no fighter has 3 engines…. Fuel capacity is limited on fighters and adding more engines would increase fuel consumption.
There is at least 1 fighter with 3 engines, the original "Viper" from Battlestar Galactica.😂😂😂
bruh💀
Don't forget about the Mk 2, Mk 7, and pretty much everything in between from the reimagined series.
Yak-38 and yak 141 had 3 engines technically
And the harrier
@@MattKearneyFan1Nope. If i remember correctly. That plane had 4 outtakes which can be controlled achieving hovering capabilities.
Yak series however got 2 behind the pilot and 1 at the rear.
The F35 got a single engine and an another outtakes behind the pilot and other 2 under its wings
@@MattKearneyFan1 harrier only has one engine it's trust is simply redirected by 4 nozzles
Incorrect the Yak 38 had either one or two Turbo Jets and the Harrier had only one.
@@theelf152 Yak 141 had 3 all together. The italian jet "Ariete" technically got 2 as well. 1 main and 1 booster
SR71.. baddest of the bad... 2 engines.. and designed in the late 50s... and still holds the record ( although rumor has it, a hypersonic plane has been in the skunkworx black bag arm of the USAF - DARPA )
There is an aircraft with 3 engines,it's called The Turbokat.Its a VTOL aircraft with a swingwing design.90s kids will agree with me
First thing that came to mind haha
I was thinking yak 38 lmao
@@johndanormalone but the yak38 is a single engine aircraft
If true that's a dangerous design I wouldn't want to be in. When you have one well-functioning engine it keeps all afloat evenly. With 3 engines to manage there's a small exponent of 3 indicating many more possible single failures. Losing 1 of 3 on a VTOL equals sudden and certain flip over death.
@@Barefoot433 It's from the cartoon Swat Kats, epic overpowered plane from an epic series
However, if the engine on an F 35 fails, the pilot is screwed.
The pilot ejects or lands the jet like every other single engine fighter.
@@hoghogwildExcept at sea, then it's not like every other fighter.
@@michaelmappin4425 Engine out scenarios for USMC F-35B and USN/USMC F-35C are the same as the multitude of other single engine naval fighters/attack aircraft that came before them. The pilot ejects, parachutes to the water, crawls into their liferaft and awaits rescue. The major difference is that modern turbine engines such as the F-35's Pratt & Whitney F-135 turbofan go so much further between such engine failures..
@hoghogwild Naval air forces went away from single engine for a very long time. Carrier ops cause an awful lot of engine stalls. Turboprops are extremely reliable too, but I can tell you that I've seen plenty of single engine Hawkeyes on the boat
The tech that goes into fighter jets and carriers is so damn cool. Always has blown me away from a young age.
I did make a 5.5th generation CAS jet concept, and while i gave it a single engine configuration, i included 2 turbofan non afterburning engine, so small and light that it can he hidden within the fuselage and only used if afterburners are not enough or if your main engine is down, but it may affect manuverability, but it's survivability will be insane, so we can't make 3 main engines, only 2 smaller lightsr backup engines, and that alone can be too much
F35 in some versions has 2 “engines” main, and Fan for vertical takeoff
Little Timmy's design let the chat㏒
B-1 with 4 engines:
*Laughs in A-10 (SR72 with engine pod drone)
You mean M-12, SR-71 with a drone?
Yak-38,Yak-141 and F-35B
Harrier joines the chat
The harrier has 1 engine and 4 nozzles
@@Zoard1404 oh yeah
Explained nearly exatly what i thought, ty lol
Swat Cats Jet Fighter has three engines..
I love swat cats!!!
You all haven't seen SwatKats 🔥
N they where able to do it with junkyard parts lol. I miss that show.
this is why a fighter with no engine is necessary 😂😂😂there wiil be no engine to cause problems 😂😂😂
the North American NR-349 had 3
I did not know that plane existed until i looked that up
This is a case of answering a question that has not been asked.
Correct.
And by some clown who has no idea what he’s talking about.
Idk how many engines the B-2 have.
Its a bomber
@@larsr8566 welp thanks btw i wanna know the engine count too... if you can help.🤔
@@ninja6._ 12 i guess
The B-2 has four General Electric F-118-GE-100 jet engines, each of which generates 17,300 pounds of thrust.@@ninja6._
@@humblejunior29748 it has 4/wing
As far as I know Skyfighters has 4 engines that allow them to go in Max Speed which is beyond hypersonic speed
The F-35 only has one engine. What if its engine should go tits up ?
I should not have said that. I SHOULD NOT HAVE SAID THAT !!
Unless you are the f35 and have a flameout. Lol
That said bigger engines are more complex, but more efficient. It's why modern passenger planes use 2 engines instead of 3 or 4.
APU: sad start up noise
It's up to the engineers to get what equates to the performance and efficiency of 3 engines, using only 2
Swatcatz Turbockat has 3 lol, looked cool too.
Ok why not no engines?
🧠
Funny. I've been around military aviation for the last 56 years, and this question never crossed my mind once.
XB-70 Valkyrie: hey i have 6 engines dude?!
The performance increase lessens with each additional engine. For example the F-15 and F-16 use the same engine. The F-15 has twice the maximum thrust of the F-16 but cannot go twice as fast. The relationship is not linear.
This is true, but the F15 is 25% faster, while carrying over 50% more load.
The Navy's F-35B variant is the exception to the two-engine rule of fighters that extensively fly over water, and/or are assigned to a carrier. The F-22 is another exception to the rule b/c it has 2 engines, however, is incapable of carrier landings.
Because only the Swat Cats are allowed to have 3 engines.
The F-35 is NOT the most advanced fighter in the world. Do you really think we'd share the most advanced fighter in the world with other countries? Think about it man. F-22 is ours alone, F-35 is ours along with seven different countries.
But aren't the export versions of the F-35 somewhat neutered?
@@MikeDCWeld it doesn't matter. Only thing better in f-35 is new radar and ability of communication and linking between planes in formation. And technically VTOL in some versions. Except for VTOL those possibilities would be added with modernisation packet as f-22 was designed with modernisation in mind. ALL of other capabilities are superior in f-22, from speed, supercruise, stealth, or agility to amount of ammunition it can carry. In the end it wouldn't be even more expensive, as price of f-22 is bloated because there is much less units produced than initially assumed, only air force can operate it, as both navy and marines don't have it (version for carriers was initially cancelled, WHILE proposed) and it's locked against selling to allies. F-35 should be version that would be multirole and cheaper, but as for price in the end is expensive AF.
Same basic idea as why you don't usually see 5 or 6 valve per cylinder engines. After 4, any gains decrease while taking on multiple problems.
6 Engines of XB-70 jas entered the conversation 😂
Japanese anime jet designers: "Hold my jensing tea..."
Thrust needs to be balanced in an aircraft and even with 2 engines sitting either side of dead centre requires precise and even running to prevent uneven load on the airframe. It is almost impossible to 1. Fit three engines in a fighter and maintain balance and weight targers 2. Control the pitch / yaw of the plane effectively and maintain reliability 3. Achieve range and performance characteristics with the weight and armaments required for the mission objectives
But thinking about it the control factor shouldn't be much of an issue, no? Because Of fly by wire. Although it is possible that the thrust will cause more disturbance than the control surfaces can correct. Other than that...
I didn’t hear a single damn good reason for not having that sweet trio of thrust pumpers on the back of my jet.
I honestly thought cause of fuel consumption and too much stresss on air frame integrity.
Also, with 3 engine means more fuel consumption equalling an even more heavy aircraft with increased fuel capacity or a very small mission time with out aerial refueling.
Also I would like to remind you that the jets have the afterburner that expands when you turn them on
I guess this guy doesn't remember the Cold War
what plane are you talking about? Genuinely curious
4 engine fighter; try XF-87
First flight on my birthday 🎂
'Modern fighter jets are built with 2 Engines in case one fails' F35 has 1 engine
French Mirage IIIV had 9 jet engines, 8 for VTOL.
“The most advanced fighter in the world” according to the American point of view
It truly is though. You can cope, and seethe about it all you want, but it won't change the facts.
No other 5th gens can compare, J-20 and SU-57 both suck ass
modern fighters no but back when they called prop fighters jets there were 5 engine jets
The Me series were the first were they not? That line ran twin engine mounted on the wings. They were fast for the time and used as interceptors as they couldn't turn worth a damn compared to a Mustang or Spitfire
Two engine are better than one
First of all has expenses and also F-22 would look ugly asf if it had three engines
i can explain it. if the jet wants a thrust vectoring, it cant. and the if there’s actually a fighter jet with 3 engines it would be easier to detect it than a c-130 because of the heat signature
Actually there was a bomb plane called the ohka by the japan and it was made to crash into a battle ship
Then what happens if the engine fails on an F35? There is no back-up there
Good point
The F-16 has 1 engine...
New Aircraft have really reliable engines, the engine malfunction problem was when jet tech was still new and not super safe.
They call triple a
USA 🇺🇸 #1 I love the Airforce
Summary: a 3rd engine is like adding chores to your “do things just bc I’m that nice list” waste of time money and more importantly my time
Interesting generalizations. Surprised vehicle size was not mentioned, unless this would be negligable?
Also you can make 2 engines counter rotating to eliminate the torque on the aircraft you can't do that with an odd number of engines
Modern Fighter jets can already send people to space... nasa just needs to build a jet that specializes to sending only people to space(other than the decomissioned space shuttle). It's a lot cheaper than building a massive rocket that comsumes a lot of fuel
Jets only work up to a certain altitude…then there’s not enough oxygen in the air to fuel combustion
The F22 would easily stomp the F35. There's zero comparison to the F22 with anything in the world.
Of course it would, because the F-22 is an air superiority fighter and the F-35 is a Joint strike fighter. Air superiority was never in mind when it came to the F-35s doctrine.
@carlosorellana989 assuming it could see the f 35 fr (I don't know shit ab planes)
@@Ki1ler_Kitten_the f22 is stealther than the f35
In a Dogfight or long range? Cause in both the F-35 is better, it has similar RCS and better radar so it would see the F-22 sooner and shoot it down. in a dogfight the F-35 pilot has way better spatial awareness, they can just look at the F-22 behind them, lock onto them and send an AIM-9X 180 degrees to kill the F-22 that's still trying to lock with the Missiles seeker.
Designed not to fail. Just like the NAVY.
XB-70 Valkyrie prototype had SIX engines allowing for Mach 3+ speeds!
Modern fighters are going to 1 engine due to reliability and maintenance costs of using just 1 engines. Aircraft in general at moving to less engines in general for the same reasons and for fuel efficiency. What currently produced commercial aircraft has more that 2 engines? Maybe some junk in Russia.
The concept of the NR-349
the valkrye be like: i didnt know more than three cann be expensive
I guess the engine in the middle of the F35 is just called a turbine ..??
Why would you want 3 main engines. Technically the hornet has three jet engines. 2 main engines and a APU
Oh! It wasn’t what I think. I didn’t see that coming.
Even the SR-71 only had 2 engines
F-22 Raptor BETTER THANK YOU UNCLE SAM NEW UPGRADES
Only except Turbokat
The SwatKatz Jet had three engines
if one fails... oops, Sorry F16s,, we loved having you around.............same for you F35s... yea,, the 2nd engine isnt planned or designed to meet survivability its designed for war.. not so they can land safely if one engine is shot out..many a top fighter still have 1 engine.. French Mirage is a top gen fighter, still one engine..F16, F35.. all one engine.. Harrier- 1 engine..so yea.. its what it needs to DO, that dictate 1 or two engines..
Technically there are fighter jets have 3 ""engines"" the 3rd one is called auxiliary power unit... For example, the F/A Hornet has an APU
Fuel and range is the main reason. So say LM
One advantage of a fighter jet having three engines would be if two fails it still can return back to base safely.
What I want to know is: Will they be able to deliver me “pizza” when all the food is gone??😅
Also, wouldn't that mean the body would be needing to be bigger and the space interior payload would be smaller?
Right. There's only so much room internally and another engine wouldn't fit along with taking up valuable fuel capacity. You could hang engines on the wings and one in the fuselage...but there's no need as modern engines can make over 1:1 T/W and external engines would greatly increase the RCS and thermal signature which isn't desirable.
The B-2 has 2 engines as well.
I think the F-35 was a pointless design! Why design a 5th generation fighter with one engine? I'm sure it had something to do with the aircraft carrier and the jets size, as well as it being a jump-jet, but it's still dumb to me.
Twin engines are mainly popular for take off while carrying a lot and being more reliable in the case of an engine malfunction. By now, American jet engines have gotten extremely reliable and the stealth jet with internal bomb bays don't need that much take of weight, so one engine is enough(it's also cheaper and allowed the mass producing that was achieved).
Fuel. Next.
Xb1: Really
Xb70: Really
Neither of those are fighter jets
Those are bombers
There might not be a fighter jet with 3 engines. But there are military aircraft with 3 engines.
GN DRIVES-SOLAR FURNACE!
The f 35 is not the most advanced fighter jet. F22 is, get your facts straight
No! The F-35 is, the F-22 has a lower RCS but less advanced technology implemented into it because of its age, the F-35 is constantly being modernized and gets updated technology unlike the F-22
@@Cheeseburger168.96 The stealth claim has been kinda disputed, some people have said the F-35 is stealthier than the F-22
@@alexanderd6793 ok, thanks for that information. But these are claims are not proven
Wish F35 had 2 engine as option.
Guys loads of vtol planes have 3 engines
its not because of the DC-10, its because of cost
u said something very obvious without needing too... like why dont honda civics come with v10s?
Because there was no need for a third engine given how fast aircraft tech was progressing. Not to mention the greater heat signature such would produce. Heat seeker missiles would be drooling all over themselves ready to go to work.
Battlestar Gallatica Viper Pilots enter the chat....so say we all!😅
It would be useless to have more speed, and you also forgot about the G force
Some men like drag
Cause more weight and the size
Because the torque and momentum would be all out of whack. My friends who works in engines amu would be able to tell you better.
You forgot fuel consumption
Turbokat had 3 engines and was the best fighter
Wasn’t even real
Are you saying the Swat Cats were idiots ?? 🙄
The Japanese ohka had three
WRONG!!!
1. It had ONE engine, and a ROCKET engine at that.
2. It wasn’t a fighter, it was a kamikaze (suicide) flying bomb with no weapons.
3. It doesn’t fall into the category of this video, as it’s talking about MODERN fighters. 🤦🏼♂️🙄