Thank you for your question.
The debate on the single-engine versus the two-engine plane is nothing new. There has already been a debate about the CF-18. It is a debate that resurfaces all the time.
There are usually two reasons why planes have more than one engine. To start with, in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s, engines didn't have the power they have today. Planes needed two engines to get off the ground. That was one of the reasons.
The other thing is that engines were less reliable. Having two engines enabled pilots to handle mechanical problems successfully. So people wanted two engines because one engine was not powerful enough to get the plane off the ground and it was also not as reliable.
We have come a long way since the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s. The same goes for today's generation of engines, like the ones in commercial planes—there used to be four, now there are two. The technology is so reliable now that, statistically, there is no significant difference between engine failure in a two-engine plane and engine failure in a single-engine plane. The fail-safe systems of F-35 engines are impressive. We have estimated that thousands of hours went into that.
We have to remember that operators around the world, who are also facing stringent conditions like ours, have opted for the single engine with confidence. Just think of Norwegian and U.S. navy operators.