[simpits-tech] Keyboard encoders

[Rob Hommel]

F-15 3 mishaps per 100,000 hrs vs. F-16 5 mishaps per 100,000 hrs. now how
does that figure into your equation? Just saw the figures last night so I
remember them quite clearly.

With the F-16 if you have even one engine failure your in trouble. The F-15
just happens to carry a spare, the B-52 carries a lot of spares .

Keep 'em Flying
Rob Hommel
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Gene Buckle" <geneb@deltasoft.com>
To: <simpits-tech@simpits.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 8:07 AM
Subject: RE: [simpits-tech] Keyboard encoders


> > Perhaps it's the location of the air intake? On the F-16 it's a single
> > intake that is much lower to the ground than the two on the F15.
Perhaps
> > FOD takes its toll, in spite of their best efforts. I know the F-15 has
> > variable geometry inlets, does it also have doors that close off the
front
> > during taxi, or is that one of the Russian fighters?
> >
> I think the intake doors are a feature of Russian fighters - they're more
> oriented towards taking off from improvised runways.
>
> I really don't think that the F-16 has more engine failures per flight
> hour than the F-15.  I think that it's the fact that when you shell out an
> engine in an F-15, you can still make it home.  Airplanes that make it
> home won't make it on the 6 o'clock news. :)
>
> g.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Simpits-tech mailing list
> Simpits-tech@simpits.org
> http://www.simpits.org/mailman/listinfo/simpits-tech
> To unsubscribe, please see the instructions at the bottom of the above
page.  Thanks!


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.484 / Virus Database: 282 - Release Date: 5/27/2003