Along with being far cheaper to fly the Gripen has eye popping availability (80-90%).
The main issue is that the F-35 is an intelligence gathering platform, hoovering up data…which is downloaded and processed by the USA. (Only Israel is authorized to process the data locally). This dependency on the US would be fine in the past, these days trusting the US has its risks.
Excellent video Wes, and thanks to your viewer’s request. I have to address the elephant in the room. Any bachelor, on a hunting mission, with a “faster turnaround time” has to be the envy of all current and previous bachelors! Back to aircraft…
I am a proponent of a mixed fleet - sufficient F35 for NORAD obligations and Gripen E for expeditionary and eastern Arctic protection.
You have knowledgeable readers. To me there could be an issue with the MADL and Link 16 systems interoperability? Should Canada select GlobalEye surely Gripen can communicate with AEWS.
Assuming these two systems provide complimentary coverage and in light of some “nastiness” from the US administration (not the average American) then the preponderance of Canadian citizens prefer a mixed fleet as proven in polling.
The answer is a major military needs BOTH. In a peer conflict, the Gripen is a great tool. But you will still be a PEER. The F-35 gives you advantages the Gripen cannot touch. It elevates you above your adversary so they are only a “near peer.” No contest.
There’s also the operating cost
Gripen $4.7-7k/flight hr
F-35 $33.6-41k/flight hr
Along with being far cheaper to fly the Gripen has eye popping availability (80-90%).
The main issue is that the F-35 is an intelligence gathering platform, hoovering up data…which is downloaded and processed by the USA. (Only Israel is authorized to process the data locally). This dependency on the US would be fine in the past, these days trusting the US has its risks.
Great job with this comparison, Wes, great job. Thanks always. You have a most worthy site.
Thanks Richard, much appreciated.
Excellent video Wes, and thanks to your viewer’s request. I have to address the elephant in the room. Any bachelor, on a hunting mission, with a “faster turnaround time” has to be the envy of all current and previous bachelors! Back to aircraft…
I am a proponent of a mixed fleet - sufficient F35 for NORAD obligations and Gripen E for expeditionary and eastern Arctic protection.
You have knowledgeable readers. To me there could be an issue with the MADL and Link 16 systems interoperability? Should Canada select GlobalEye surely Gripen can communicate with AEWS.
Assuming these two systems provide complimentary coverage and in light of some “nastiness” from the US administration (not the average American) then the preponderance of Canadian citizens prefer a mixed fleet as proven in polling.
Thanks again.
As always, great analysis done with a dose of humour. Thank Wez
The answer is a major military needs BOTH. In a peer conflict, the Gripen is a great tool. But you will still be a PEER. The F-35 gives you advantages the Gripen cannot touch. It elevates you above your adversary so they are only a “near peer.” No contest.