this post was submitted on 21 Mar 2026
44 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

11769 readers
902 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 Sports

Baseball

Basketball

Curling

Hockey

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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

top 30 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Smaile@lemmy.ca 1 points 30 minutes ago

its not, were not buying those fucking planes

[–] BinzyBoi@piefed.ca 7 points 6 hours ago (3 children)

I will never understand what the hell went through Trudeau's mind when he thought going through with the F-35 deal was a good move.

He literally told Canadians that the Liberals would never go ahead with buying F-35s, and then trapped us into this predicament by going back on his word when it was clear as day how hilariously unreliable the aircraft were.

[–] Smaile@lemmy.ca 0 points 28 minutes ago

Justin was neither competent nor as straight laced as he seemed, quite a few times his admin was caught doing really shady shit, stealing gov money, mispending budgets, giving friends contracts for nothing. so im not going pretend this decision was made with any real thinking in mind.

[–] CanadaPlus@futurology.today 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

They're exceptionally reliable, and better than anything else at what they do. He went back on this word because he was actually put into rooms with airforce experts who made that clear, and he didn't expect the US to turn evil at the time.

[–] Reannlegge@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 hours ago

I understand the whole Norad interoperability, but I truly agree with your thought.

[–] Reannlegge@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 hours ago

The 12600 jobs should be the only number the government should take into account.

[–] TribblesBestFriend@startrek.website 37 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

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

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 9 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

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

[–] rekabis@lemmy.ca 5 points 7 hours 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.

[–] DarylInCanada@lemmy.ca 3 points 4 hours ago

If Ukraine had 420 Gripens and the trained pilots to fly them, their war would be a totally different scenario.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 5 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

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.

[–] matlag@sh.itjust.works 1 points 58 minutes ago

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.

[–] kat_angstrom@lemmy.world 12 points 11 hours ago

And the appeasement will only last a few weeks Max, before he gets distracted by something else

[–] Ariselas@piefed.ca 5 points 8 hours ago (1 children)
[–] CanadaPlus@futurology.today 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

I'm not even sure that's a good deal, honestly. They wouldn't be any good on missions abroad, and would they actually last long if the US invaded? Hopefully the military is thinking it through carefully, and the politicians are listening.

Maybe we buy 30 billion in RBS SAMs from Sweden instead.

[–] Ariselas@piefed.ca 1 points 1 hour ago

I don't think our conventional military would last long if the US invaded regardless of the F35 or Gripen. The only hope in that situation is that the US sucks at occupying territory, and they would double suck in winter. That is if Daniel Smith, Scot Moe, Ford and their followers don't just roll out the red carpet.

[–] shittydwarf@sh.itjust.works 22 points 12 hours ago
[–] DarylInCanada@lemmy.ca 0 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

The Iranians shooting down an F-35 is a game changer. The F-35 is almost invisible to AMERICAN technology, but they never tested it against FOREIGN technology. And if the Iranians have technology to track it, guaranteed the Russians and Chinese have the technology.

The TLDR: it is now official - the F-35 is obsolete.

[–] matlag@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 hour ago

Iranians have used conventional optical tech. The promise of the F35 is to be detected late by conventional long range radar. They were never supposed to be invisible or quiet.

Granted that makes the stealth advantage very limited in terms of usage: coming from far away undetected. Then be very visible.

Besides yes, China claims they can detect them with their satellites network and a France military equipment maker is apparently developing a radar that detects stealth jets. So that advantage is apparently not going to last.

[–] CanadaPlus@futurology.today 2 points 2 hours ago

No, the Iranians haven't discovered a kind of radio wave that the rest of us just missed. The "almost" in almost invisible means something, and there's a variety of situations that can dramatically increase the radar signature, or that can make radar not the important consideration at all.

[–] Thedogdrinkscoffee@lemmy.ca 15 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (3 children)

A mixed fleet is probably optimal. The Grippens are far more pragmatic to form the bulk of our fighter capability. A stealth fighter has unique benefits so keeping the 16 already committed to isn't unreasonable until 6th gen and beyond can be procured from actual allies.

The big mistake here is going all in on 88 F-35, when the future of aerospace defense is AI drone and missile/counter-missile defense. Not just because of American backstabbing. It's costs far exceeds its strategic value and in true Canadian fashion our defense paradigms are always one to three steps behind.

Edit: Militaries win with effective + cheap + scale. Not ultra-expensive showpieces (heh) with critical flaws that do not scale.

[–] anachronist@midwest.social 4 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

It'd be way more expensive to split the order. Canada needs arctic recon and interception. That's all it has ever needed. Gripen was built to do that mission. Going with Gripen would both put Canada with a cheaper platform that fulfills the mission, and it sticks a thumb in the eye of Trump's war machine.

[–] Thedogdrinkscoffee@lemmy.ca 2 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

That's all it has ever needed.

I appreciate the truth of your comment, but respectfully disagree.

  1. You don't build a defense force and strategy for the conflict you hope happens.

  2. Our needs include all of NATO's needs, and to a far far smaller degree, any UN peacekeeking or similar function.

A 5th gen stealth fighter presents desirable attributes for specific purposes, but to your point they aren't the bulk of the work to be done.

The cost saving of a single fleet also inject various fragilities of their own. Not the least of which is the catastrophic losses from a single plane going down from anything ranging from enemy action to training accident to supply chains fuckery.

I won't shed a single tear for the F-35 if we cancel the whole lot. But having some 5th gen makes sense. We should be going with the Brit or French led consortiums of middle powers, not US, Russia or China.

[–] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 3 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

Exactly, there may be times a topline fighter is needed, but most missions for air superiority aren't going to be best plane vs. best plane.

We've seen in WWII, and we see in the asymmetric age of Ukraine and Iran wars, that a horde of thousand dollar problems wear down a million dollar problem solver.

[–] teyrnon@sh.itjust.works 5 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

The f-35s have kill switches in them. A fusible link that bricks them. Do not buy them.

[–] Reannlegge@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 hours ago

I wanna say the Danish have already jail broken theirs, not saying we should get them and jail brake them just saying it is possible.

[–] panda_abyss@lemmy.ca 5 points 9 hours ago

I’m also not convinced their stealth capability is that great.

It wouldn’t surprise me if the US knew of flaws and that’s why they’re fine selling them.

[–] smuuthbrane@sh.itjust.works 9 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (1 children)

Have the Iranians shot down a Gripen yet?

[–] bus_factor@lemmy.world 8 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Have they ever had a Gripen within missile range?

[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 9 points 11 hours ago

Grippens flying over Canadian airspace are outside of Iran's range, so we should be fine there.