- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or # to comment.
To me it’s the fighter jet equivalent of getting a Fairphone vs. iPhone. We won’t be beholden to John Ternus and other US administration bootlickers, and in addition we’d have the ability to leverage Canadian expertise to make the Gripen better for all members. Like an iPhone, the F35 probably is a well put-together package, but we pretty much get it as-is with little control over operation and maintenance.
The f35 strikes me as being an impossible wartime asset. It’s tremendously complicated and needs a lot of support. We’re seeing in Ukraine that cheap assets can eliminate very expensive assets pretty easily, and as with previous industrialized wars, the ability to churn out many military assets beats technology.
In the current political climate, no country (except perhaps Israel) should be part of the f35 failure of a program.
It’s a long range plane. Stealth means you can gets hundreds of miles closer to long distance radar detection before they can see you, letting you see and hit the enemy plane before they can see you. You don’t see Ukraine giving up on planes just because they can be hit by a drone.
There’s a big difference between “giving up on planes” and giving up on the F35. For example, buying a simpler plane that can be manufactured in greater numbers, more quickly, at lower unit cost, that goes longer between scheduled maintenance, etc.
Keep in mind that even a US NORAD commander has said that the F-35 is not the best fighter for North American defence.
Me too, ditch the F35
How about ballistic missiles and drones?
This jet buying bullshit is porn for boomers.
