By Lee Berthiaume
OTTAWA — Government records show Canadian
CF-18 pilots shut down one of their aircraft’s two engines in midflight
more than 200 times since 1988 because of safety concerns.
The
revelation highlights a key aspect of the debate over whether the
single-engine F-35 stealth jet is not only the right aircraft for
Canada, but also the safest — or whether the air force would be better
off with another dual-engine jet.
Critics of the Harper
government’s plan to purchase the F-35 stealth fighter have long
maintained that a dual-engine fighter is better suited and safer for
Canada’s air force pilots — particularly so they will have a backup
while patrolling the country’s vast north.
That was one of the
main reasons given by the federal government and military for choosing
the twin-engine CF-18s as Canada’s main fighter jet in the 1980s.
In
a report filed in Parliament this week, National Defence says it does
not officially known how many times CF-18 engines have failed since
1988.
“With two engines, pilots are trained so that when an engine
malfunction occurs or is suspected,” the report reads, “they complete
an early precautionary shut-down of the affected engine and return to
base using a single engine.”
Between 1988 and March 31, 2012,
there were 228 precautionary engine shutdowns, the report reads, though
it emphasizes that “a precautionary engine shut-down is not an engine
failure.”
“Since this is a precautionary measure, there is no way
to know if the engine would actually have failed or not, had it
continued to be used.”
That caveat did little to calm opposition
critics and experts, who were alarmed by the average of about 10 engine
shutdowns per year for more than two decades — and what it could mean
for the F-35.
“They’re not shutting down the engine because they
think it’s a great idea,” said NDP defence critic Jack Harris, who
requested the information from National Defence. “They’re shutting it
down because they have to.
“This means 228 times they had an
opportunity of getting a plane back to base when it could have resulted
in an engine failure of significant proportions.”
Liberal defence
critic John McKay said the figures are concerning not only from the
perspective of pilot safety, but also the potential cost of losing a
multi-million-dollar F-35 due to engine failure.
“Say there’s one failure a year, not only is the life of a pilot at risk, but you lose one of your fleet,” he said.
“I think they’d better start teaching our F-35 pilots some gliding and some ejection skills.”
The
Harper government, Defence Department officials and F-35 manufacturer
Lockheed Martin have previously downplayed the significance of moving
from a twin-engine fighter to one.
They say there is no statistical evidence to indicate single-engine fighters are any less safe than those with two engines.
They also say today’s jet engines are much more reliable than previous generations, while maintenance costs are cut in half.
Alan
Williams, who was responsible for military procurement until 2005, said
National Defence had little doubt the Defence Department has studied
whether one engine is as good as two.
The problem is that it continues refusing to come clean with what it knows.
“Whether
we should buy the F-35 because it has only one engine is a legitimate
question to ask,” he said. “And this is one more issue that we should
have the information for.”
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment