That seems like a natural response when your old military supplier has threatened annexation.
T4whereareyou on
And about time too!
Fickle_Razzmatazz664 on
This was always the balance I’d hope we would strike. We can’t go without the F-35 entirely but neither can we be almost solely dependent on it. This sends a message without totally burning the bridge.
My remaining concern is what this means for hangars and infrastructure though – do we need two parallel sets, one for each jet? That sounds expensive.
the_crumb_dumpster on
Seems to be a balanced approach and a compromise.
I’m sure the Reddit defense analysts and Saab/Lockheed marketing team will be here promptly to argue otherwise.
gwelfguy on
This is the way. Canada can neither afford to rely on the F35 exclusively nor walk away from the contract. Use the Gripens for the routine heavy lifting, and the F-35s for serious threats.
Trolkarlen on
You want to be far less dependent on the US going forward. After 16 years of Bush and Trump, the US just can’t be trusted.
MMEMMR on
Half of the original F-35 order to meet NORAD Requirements/placate the Americans; but even more Gripens to increase our airforce size beyond 88 fighters overall to boost military spending to help attain that magical 5% of GDP spend on military/defence.
nutano on
I think in any case having more than a single source – especially that comes from a nation that has shown their leadership can be flaky and unstable and has openly suggested they would take us over – is not a bad idea.
While it does bring more over head no doubt, having 2 different supply chains for parts and support is a good idea, especially when it comes to something as important as national defense.
Perfect-Cherry-4118 on
It is also a setup for local production of Grippen for export jointly with SAAB.
EmergencyWorld6057 on
As someone in the RCAF, it’s still F-35s btw.
There has been zero information said about any Gripen as if there were any changes, it would be passed onto the CO of the squadrons so we can prepare to send techs and pilots elsewhere.
Also the idea of running a dual fleet of fighters is already having techs change to another platform, nobody here wants a 4th gen aircraft, techs and pilots want to fly and work on the latest and greatest.
The idea of buying an aircraft due to politics and not based on performance is pissing off alot of military members.
DigiDAD on
Didn’t Saab want Canada to commit to 72 planes in order to enable the number of Canadian jobs they forecast?
rocketstar11 on
This is so dumb
Randolph_Jennings on
The juicy contract would no doubt go to Quebec.
Grand-Selection4456 on
Buying small numbers of a wide variety of equipment is just silly. Why would we want to have 30 American planes and 30 Swedish planes, it is a logistical nightmare. We need to buy MORE equipment, make sure it is standardized to the highest degree possible, and accept that we need to have a real military.
So why don’t we buy the original 88 F-35s and also purchase 150-200 Grippens and have a proper airforce that can ensure arctic sovereignty and fulfill all of our NATO goals?
Why stop there, while we are at it how about we build 2 nuclear powered aircraft carriers (one for each coast) and equip and train our air force to fly off them.
toterra on
I really wish the idiots at Boeing hadn’t screwed the relationship resulting in the cancellation of the super hornets. IMHO they were arguably the best solution for Canada. Two engines makes sense in the arctic. Being a Navy aircraft also meant a bit more resiliency from weather conditions. Throw in a couple of Growlers and the lack of stealthiness becomes less of an issue (see what happened in Venezuela with non stealthy helecoptors penetrating their airspace)
GHR-5H_Grasshopper on
If the government wants to cut the F-35 order as payback to political interference then the answer should be to invest in a 6th gen program, likely the GCAP, instead of wasting money on something that won’t be very useful and will cost a lot over 40 years. Cutting a squadron of F-35s and getting 64-72 planes and preparing for 3 additional squadrons in 15-20 years would be a long term plan that would benefit the RCAF instead of sticking them with 3-4 squadrons of outdated aircraft that they can only use when they’re not at any risk.
Nothing in this article is new, though, and there’s been no discussion that I’ve heard of any squadron expansions so the 40-80 mix is probably speculation.
flashtastic on
For a split second my brain always sees “Jonovision” when this guy is in the headlines 😂
Correct-Shine-1692 on
Before all the “aerospace experts” come along and explain how the f-35 is the best jet. America has used military contracts as leverage against us for ages. Lockheed Martin prices and timelines for parts from constantly increase creating perpetual delays on our current equipment. Converting our entire fleet to American jets is a security risk and they will use it as leverage against us down the road.
Bortinator on
I think we should commit to the 88 f35s and also commit to 150+ Gripens. Canada has got to stop thinking of itself as some small poor nation, we’re a world top 10 economy no reason to not spend like one.
CHoppingBrocolli_84 on
But if the USA bricks the f35 software then they are worthless.
YourLoveLife on
For a second there I thought we would finally make a good decision and just stick with the F-35, but alas, I underestimated the liberals.
Big_Option_5575 on
Make them 3/4 of the fleet and call it a deal.
NackieNack on
Was that the Swedish 4th gen FU-47? Count me in!
prob_wont_reply_2u on
Let’s just prove that Bruce Fanjoys out of context billboard of PP saying we’re stupid.
Nobody is buying the Swedish plane, except for Brazil. There will be no parts available in 50 years when we are still flying these things, but there will be thousands of F35s to get parts from.
Edit: The US also has the power to veto any Gripen sales.
Commercial_Pain2290 on
Forget these jets. Just build thousands of drones.
Perfect-Cherry-4118 on
Sell the F-35 for spares to other operators over time. Expand Grippen fleet.
Gecks777 on
I’d be happier with a lot more Grippens, but this would work. Gripens for rapid response to foreign incursions at home and force projection in the Canadian Arctic, and F-35s for foreign engagement alongside allies against tech-capable adversaries like Russia. Keeps the Americans (relatively) happy in the short term and hedges against the possibility of a friendly US government at some point in the future, while also giving us a reasonable fleet of jets that can fly and fight for Canada even if the US government is actively hostile to our objectives. Gaining the industrial benefits the Swedes are offering is no small thing either.
GetBackReality on
I like the idea of buying equipment from a country we can trust and respect!
Zulakki on
With all the talk of new weapons like missile defense Lasers, drones and LARM and such ramping up these days, are Jets really the answer they once were? after purchase, maintenance and training, all that to just get blown up in under a second by some random mishap. Maybe i’ve watched top gun: maverick too much but jets seem like their days are numbered with tech coming out
AtomicVGZ on
That math isn’t mathing guys. Saab set out a requirement for Canada to buy **72** Gripen E/F in order to qualify for a assembly plant domestically. A 44/44 split just doesn’t work.
It wouldn’t surprise me if this “source” was Joly. Her riding would reap the most benefits.
hyperforms9988 on
For folks who know better about this sort of thing… I know it’s not ideal to operate 2 completely different fighters at the same time, but because of where we are geographically, is there some sense in running 2 different fighters for 2 different climates? Like if one of the fighters were to be primarily for arctic operations and they’re spec’d out for that purpose while the other is for everything else. It’s not like you couldn’t use the arctic fighters for non-arctic missions, but the arctic’s a bit of a different use-case versus the rest of the planet. There’s not much up there. The infrastructure you need to have for an F-35 isn’t the same as it is for a Gripen. The runway needs, technicians, etc.
Gimedecash on
Ya I say we go with the grippen. F trump.
SunflaresAteMyLunch on
Most of my life was spent within earshot of the factory where they build Gripen. Whenever I hear a fighter jet fly overhead, I get all nostalgic…
SolitaryOne on
you don’t need to be a armchair general or a diehard lockheed fanboy to see how insanely effective the F35 is at its job. they are constant top contenders in war games despite using drop pods to increase their radar profile, the one time we know of they have been used by Isreal resulted in a successful mission before Iran had any idea what was happening and are designed to work in tandem by nature with older generation fighter jets.
If we are being realistic we should be buying these in tandem with the F35 but the CAF will need to commit to beefing up the operations/logistics side of the RCAF aswell given both of them likely have very different needs maintenance wise.
JC1949 on
Should be a slam dunk
tinkltinkllidlczar on
Diversifying our fleet makes a ton of sense right now given where we find ourselves with the US. The Swedes are also really sweetening the deal by cutting us into their production for overseas customers as well. This is a net positive for Canada.
boralCEO on
Trump’s Art of The Deal will be talked about for centuries.
2009impala on
By the time we get this settled we should be able to get a wonderful deal on whatever aircraft is chosen since both will be nearing the end of production by the time anyone makes up their minds.
Significant_Dot_9855 on
Do it.
Method__Man on
Stop considering.
We’ve been considering for years.
Just fucking do it
Canadianman22 on
I cant wait to see how Saab plans to get around the export ban on US controlled parts like the engine. They have draft plans to fit a non-US engine but there has been no actual redesign or testing and I suspect they want Canada to pay that cost.
I still stand by my statement that these “leaks” are being used as a negotiating tactic by the government with the US.
The cost of a dual fleet will be very high and recent history shows this bump in military spending, while awesome, will likely be temporary and at some point we will end up shuttering one of them in long term storage.
Just stick to the F-35 purchase and start looking at joining the future fighter program Europe has going.
spaceman1055 on
Good
EQ1_Deladar on
Both the Gripen and the F35 are going to be obsolete by the time our idiot government sorts this crap out.
43 Comments
That seems like a natural response when your old military supplier has threatened annexation.
And about time too!
This was always the balance I’d hope we would strike. We can’t go without the F-35 entirely but neither can we be almost solely dependent on it. This sends a message without totally burning the bridge.
My remaining concern is what this means for hangars and infrastructure though – do we need two parallel sets, one for each jet? That sounds expensive.
Seems to be a balanced approach and a compromise.
I’m sure the Reddit defense analysts and Saab/Lockheed marketing team will be here promptly to argue otherwise.
This is the way. Canada can neither afford to rely on the F35 exclusively nor walk away from the contract. Use the Gripens for the routine heavy lifting, and the F-35s for serious threats.
You want to be far less dependent on the US going forward. After 16 years of Bush and Trump, the US just can’t be trusted.
Half of the original F-35 order to meet NORAD Requirements/placate the Americans; but even more Gripens to increase our airforce size beyond 88 fighters overall to boost military spending to help attain that magical 5% of GDP spend on military/defence.
I think in any case having more than a single source – especially that comes from a nation that has shown their leadership can be flaky and unstable and has openly suggested they would take us over – is not a bad idea.
While it does bring more over head no doubt, having 2 different supply chains for parts and support is a good idea, especially when it comes to something as important as national defense.
It is also a setup for local production of Grippen for export jointly with SAAB.
As someone in the RCAF, it’s still F-35s btw.
There has been zero information said about any Gripen as if there were any changes, it would be passed onto the CO of the squadrons so we can prepare to send techs and pilots elsewhere.
Also the idea of running a dual fleet of fighters is already having techs change to another platform, nobody here wants a 4th gen aircraft, techs and pilots want to fly and work on the latest and greatest.
The idea of buying an aircraft due to politics and not based on performance is pissing off alot of military members.
Didn’t Saab want Canada to commit to 72 planes in order to enable the number of Canadian jobs they forecast?
This is so dumb
The juicy contract would no doubt go to Quebec.
Buying small numbers of a wide variety of equipment is just silly. Why would we want to have 30 American planes and 30 Swedish planes, it is a logistical nightmare. We need to buy MORE equipment, make sure it is standardized to the highest degree possible, and accept that we need to have a real military.
So why don’t we buy the original 88 F-35s and also purchase 150-200 Grippens and have a proper airforce that can ensure arctic sovereignty and fulfill all of our NATO goals?
Why stop there, while we are at it how about we build 2 nuclear powered aircraft carriers (one for each coast) and equip and train our air force to fly off them.
I really wish the idiots at Boeing hadn’t screwed the relationship resulting in the cancellation of the super hornets. IMHO they were arguably the best solution for Canada. Two engines makes sense in the arctic. Being a Navy aircraft also meant a bit more resiliency from weather conditions. Throw in a couple of Growlers and the lack of stealthiness becomes less of an issue (see what happened in Venezuela with non stealthy helecoptors penetrating their airspace)
If the government wants to cut the F-35 order as payback to political interference then the answer should be to invest in a 6th gen program, likely the GCAP, instead of wasting money on something that won’t be very useful and will cost a lot over 40 years. Cutting a squadron of F-35s and getting 64-72 planes and preparing for 3 additional squadrons in 15-20 years would be a long term plan that would benefit the RCAF instead of sticking them with 3-4 squadrons of outdated aircraft that they can only use when they’re not at any risk.
Nothing in this article is new, though, and there’s been no discussion that I’ve heard of any squadron expansions so the 40-80 mix is probably speculation.
For a split second my brain always sees “Jonovision” when this guy is in the headlines 😂
Before all the “aerospace experts” come along and explain how the f-35 is the best jet. America has used military contracts as leverage against us for ages. Lockheed Martin prices and timelines for parts from constantly increase creating perpetual delays on our current equipment. Converting our entire fleet to American jets is a security risk and they will use it as leverage against us down the road.
I think we should commit to the 88 f35s and also commit to 150+ Gripens. Canada has got to stop thinking of itself as some small poor nation, we’re a world top 10 economy no reason to not spend like one.
But if the USA bricks the f35 software then they are worthless.
For a second there I thought we would finally make a good decision and just stick with the F-35, but alas, I underestimated the liberals.
Make them 3/4 of the fleet and call it a deal.
Was that the Swedish 4th gen FU-47? Count me in!
Let’s just prove that Bruce Fanjoys out of context billboard of PP saying we’re stupid.
Nobody is buying the Swedish plane, except for Brazil. There will be no parts available in 50 years when we are still flying these things, but there will be thousands of F35s to get parts from.
Edit: The US also has the power to veto any Gripen sales.
Forget these jets. Just build thousands of drones.
Sell the F-35 for spares to other operators over time. Expand Grippen fleet.
I’d be happier with a lot more Grippens, but this would work. Gripens for rapid response to foreign incursions at home and force projection in the Canadian Arctic, and F-35s for foreign engagement alongside allies against tech-capable adversaries like Russia. Keeps the Americans (relatively) happy in the short term and hedges against the possibility of a friendly US government at some point in the future, while also giving us a reasonable fleet of jets that can fly and fight for Canada even if the US government is actively hostile to our objectives. Gaining the industrial benefits the Swedes are offering is no small thing either.
I like the idea of buying equipment from a country we can trust and respect!
With all the talk of new weapons like missile defense Lasers, drones and LARM and such ramping up these days, are Jets really the answer they once were? after purchase, maintenance and training, all that to just get blown up in under a second by some random mishap. Maybe i’ve watched top gun: maverick too much but jets seem like their days are numbered with tech coming out
That math isn’t mathing guys. Saab set out a requirement for Canada to buy **72** Gripen E/F in order to qualify for a assembly plant domestically. A 44/44 split just doesn’t work.
It wouldn’t surprise me if this “source” was Joly. Her riding would reap the most benefits.
For folks who know better about this sort of thing… I know it’s not ideal to operate 2 completely different fighters at the same time, but because of where we are geographically, is there some sense in running 2 different fighters for 2 different climates? Like if one of the fighters were to be primarily for arctic operations and they’re spec’d out for that purpose while the other is for everything else. It’s not like you couldn’t use the arctic fighters for non-arctic missions, but the arctic’s a bit of a different use-case versus the rest of the planet. There’s not much up there. The infrastructure you need to have for an F-35 isn’t the same as it is for a Gripen. The runway needs, technicians, etc.
Ya I say we go with the grippen. F trump.
Most of my life was spent within earshot of the factory where they build Gripen. Whenever I hear a fighter jet fly overhead, I get all nostalgic…
you don’t need to be a armchair general or a diehard lockheed fanboy to see how insanely effective the F35 is at its job. they are constant top contenders in war games despite using drop pods to increase their radar profile, the one time we know of they have been used by Isreal resulted in a successful mission before Iran had any idea what was happening and are designed to work in tandem by nature with older generation fighter jets.
If we are being realistic we should be buying these in tandem with the F35 but the CAF will need to commit to beefing up the operations/logistics side of the RCAF aswell given both of them likely have very different needs maintenance wise.
Should be a slam dunk
Diversifying our fleet makes a ton of sense right now given where we find ourselves with the US. The Swedes are also really sweetening the deal by cutting us into their production for overseas customers as well. This is a net positive for Canada.
Trump’s Art of The Deal will be talked about for centuries.
By the time we get this settled we should be able to get a wonderful deal on whatever aircraft is chosen since both will be nearing the end of production by the time anyone makes up their minds.
Do it.
Stop considering.
We’ve been considering for years.
Just fucking do it
I cant wait to see how Saab plans to get around the export ban on US controlled parts like the engine. They have draft plans to fit a non-US engine but there has been no actual redesign or testing and I suspect they want Canada to pay that cost.
I still stand by my statement that these “leaks” are being used as a negotiating tactic by the government with the US.
The cost of a dual fleet will be very high and recent history shows this bump in military spending, while awesome, will likely be temporary and at some point we will end up shuttering one of them in long term storage.
Just stick to the F-35 purchase and start looking at joining the future fighter program Europe has going.
Good
Both the Gripen and the F35 are going to be obsolete by the time our idiot government sorts this crap out.