84
$30,000,000,000 Question: Canada’s F-35 Debate Seems Paralyzed (www.19fortyfive.com)
submitted 4 months ago by to c/canada@lemmy.ca
62 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Archived link

  • While 16 F-35 fighters remain contractually committed for delivery starting this year, the full 88-jet procurement is stalled amidst trade friction with the Trump administration.

  • Rising program costs—now estimated at $30 billion—have reopened the door for Saab’s JAS 39 Gripen E.

  • The Gripen offers superior industrial benefits, including 12,600 domestic jobs and Arctic-optimized maintenance.

  • Ottawa must now balance the F-35’s unmatched NORAD interoperability against the Gripen’s economic sovereignty as the aging CF-18 Hornet fleet reaches its structur

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 55 points 4 months ago (3 children)

Buying F35, at this point, is a bribe to appease impetulent Trump

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 21 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Imagine being dumb enough to invest into the military industrial complex of a country that's actively threatening to invade you.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 13 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Imagine being dumb enough to invest into the military industrial complex of a country that's actively threatening to invade you.

    And to buy defensive weapons that can be summarily and remotely shut down by that invading country.

    That would be the most moronic decision possible.

    The Gripen may not be a 1:1 match with the F-35, but neither was the Sherman a 1:1 match with the Nazi Tiger tank. It took an average of 8 Shermans being KO’d to take out a single Tiger. But when 10, 20, or even more Shermans could be fielded for every Tiger that hit the field, victory came down to numbers, not technological superiority. As has been copiously demonstrated across nearly every conflict of the 20th and 21st centuries.

    And instead of 88 F-35 aircraft, that exact same dollar value could buy us 420 Gripen aircraft, at even less on-going maintenance costs on an overall basis.

    True, even with 420 Gripens we don’t stand any chance of defending ourselves. But effective defense is not the goal… the goal is to make any invasion as prohibitively expensive for America as possible. And 420 Gripens that cannot be remotely shut down is that answer.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    As we're seeing in Iran, you don't actually need jets to take on F-35s at all. You just need a lot of missiles and targeting systems that home on the giant heat signature.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    This! Swarms of FPV drones is what Russia and Ukraine use. Even at 10% target hit because of defense systems, you can inflict considerable damages.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 4 months ago

    Yeah, it looks like the whole 20th century military doctrine is obsolete now. Investing in expensive toys like jets makes little sense especially if the goal is self defense.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 4 months ago

    Yeah besides jets are basically obsolete now. Drones and missiles are the current state of the art and they can be manufactured in Canada. Canada should be taking notes from Iran and Ukraine for dealing with a larger belligerent. The F16s Ukraine got were hit by drones. Anything above ground is not safe from enemy bombardment due to satellite etc.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent