F-35 vs. Gripen

MaynardKrebs · 2025-11-01T03:43:33+00:00

I thought I’d start an entirely new thread to discuss the F-35 versus the Gripen so as to not hijack the submarine thread where some of the stuff has been discussed. We had spirited discussions about Gripen vs. F-35 in the old DSLReports forums. The version of the F-35 Canada has contracted for is called the Block 4 model. It is in deep trouble right now. The F-35’s critical Block 4 upgrade package is now five years behind schedule, expected in 2031, and $6 billion over budget, according to a scathing US Government Accountability Office (GAO) report. The update includes over 75 major improvements like increased missile capacity and advanced electronic warfare. Facing these massive delays and cost overruns, the F-35 program now plans to reduce the scope of the vital Block 4 modernization. Why the F-35 Fighter Block 4 Upgrade Is Slipping The Pentagon’s modernization program for its flagship fifth-generation fighter, the F-35 Lightning II, is in trouble. The long-planned Block 4 upgrade, intended to equip the jet with new weapons, sensors, and computing power, is now running years behind schedule and billions of dollars over budget. The Block 4 package is central to keeping the F-35 effective against emerging threats from China and Russia, whose advanced aircraft and integrated air defenses are closing the technological gap with the West. Without this program, the jet risks falling behind before the next war even starts. UNDERSTANDING THE BLOCK 4 UPGRADE In fighter jet terms, a “block” refers to a generation-wide package of hardware and software improvements. Block 4 is designed to deliver expanded weapons options, improved electronic warfare systems, and next-generation networking and sensor fusion—all aimed at maintaining air dominance well into the 2030s. The upgrade depends on the Technology Refresh 3 (TR-3) – a step that preceded the upgrade and outlines plans for installing a new computer in the plane, along with the software architecture that will power it and handle all the added capabilities that come with Block 4. Without TR-3, Block 4 simply cannot function. The original idea was that TR-3-equipped jets would have rolled off the production line in 2024, paving the way for a full modernization some two years later—but software integration issues have substantially slowed TR-3 deliveries. Originally, Block 4 promised more than 60 new capabilities for the jet—from the ability to fire longer-range air-to-air missiles to carrying new precision bombs internally. The upgrade would also include new radar systems and electronic-attack capabilities, as well as improvements to data sharing with other aircraft and network - much of which the Gripen E already has. Together, the improvements are designed to turn the F-35 into a networked combat hub that shares information and improves situational awareness, as well as a formidable stealth fighter - much of which the Gripen E already has - except the stealth bit. But if Canada is not a First-day-of-war combatant, which it is unlikely to be, then stealth is not as critical an issue for us as we are not going to be the ones beating back an adversaries air force In the first instance. Most of our effort is going to be done for sovereignty patrol on all our coasts, and possibly ground attack, Events in Ukraine show some of the futility of conventional ground attack aircraft of any type versus portable missile air defense systems, and much of the ground attack role has been taken over by long range missiles and a myriad of drones. More than likely, the bulk of our use will be maritime patrol and interdiction. THE DELAYS, COSTS, AND CAUSES According to the GAO, Block 4 costs have ballooned by more than $6 billion since the last estimate, bringing the total expected price tag to around $16.5 billion. Completion is now expected at least five years later than initially planned. First, there are the TR-3 delays. Hardware and software integration problems in Technology Refresh 3 have prevented the F-35’s onboard systems from running the new Block 4 applications. Until those computers are certified and fixed, the new jets cannot be delivered with full capability. There are worsened supply chain issues. that are contributing significantly more than previous delays. Then there’s the issue of power and cooling constraints. The additional electronics and weapons envisioned for the Block 4 upgrade require more power—and therefore more cooling. The current Pratt & Whitney F135 engine cannot fully support the new system without an upgrade program of its own, and that planned upgrade has been delayed until around 2031. The currently cut-backed version of Block 4 will include only a fraction of the original 66 capabilities, with the rest deferred for future increments of the upgrade. And this carries serious consequences. For F-35 operators, it means a growing capability gap. Without Block 4, the F-35 cannot integrate some of its most advanced new munitions and datalink systems that would allow this fifth-generation platform to counter next-generation Chinese and Russian defenses. Did I mention that Gripen E already has this operational and baked into its DNA? With every delay in the F-35, allied countries suffer setbacks to their operational plans, thereby complicating interoperability and increasing costs for training, sustainment, and logistics. I will fault Trudeau for not choosing the Gripen five years ago. By this point in time we would’ve had production happening in Canada, and our factory most likely would be contributing aircraft to Ukraine and other customers within a year or two of today. Having our own production line means that maintenance, repair, and overhaul could easily be done domestically. Canada has had a long history of both design development and productionOf indigenous aircraft, as well as production of fighter aircraft under license, Most notably, the F-86 Sabe and the F104 Starfighter. The Canadian produced Sabres and Starfighters were widely recognized as being better built than the ones produced in the United States.

HELLFIRE

GrumpyCanadian I would be interested in what others think of Hoekstra’s threats against NORAD.

My response to that definitely falls into out-of-bounds topics for BBB, so I can’t respond to that. 😠 😠

GrumpyCanadian Your option 4 doesn’t really work any more. We’ve waited longer than we should have as it is, and a decision needs to be made.

Ain’t that the truth, but since when has the ol’ military adage “An imperfect response NOW is better than a perfect response too late” applied to political decisions?

/sarcasm

MichelR Not saying that’s the case here, but…

“Doveryay, No Proveryay?”

Regards

taraf

GrumpyCanadian The former Canadian General is back in the act, as well, singing about the horrors of a mixed fleet, and “yesterday’s technology tomorrow”.

As I understand it, the only real advantage the F-35 has over the Gripen is stealth technology. That’s really only more of an advantage as an attack craft. And it looks like the Russian “stealth” fighters aren’t stealthy at all, so it’s not like it would give us an uneven playfield. (it’s also questionable whether stealth is an advantage at all in defense - if the bad guys know a response is coming they’re more likely to turn back and not attack in the first place)

The Gripen is more agile and has lower operating costs. And with the technology transfer being offered? It doesn’t strike me as a good idea to ignore it.

Hydraglass

taraf The Gripen is more agile and has lower operating costs. And with the technology transfer being offered? It doesn’t strike me as a good idea to ignore it.

We could always take the 16 F-35’s and then re-sell them to one of the other countries that does want to stay with them if someone’s really worried about us having a “mixed fleet” - no one said we have to use and keep them - we just have to take delivery and pay for them. I’m sure one of the other players who are still committed and in love with getting them would like advanced procurement of 16 units. We could use them for a year, claim they don’t meet our needs, and sell them off at a small loss.

Sweden is a lot like us - they are a smaller nation, arctic, surrounded by a lot of bigger players like the UK, France, and Germany, but they have good technology for a country of only 10 million people and they are chomping at the bit to work with and partner with other like minded people. I see us as having a natural synergy with Scandinavia far more than with the US in the long run.

taraf

Hang on to them. Stealth is actually a significant objective advantage when we’re talking about a mission that involves strike against enemy targets, and we have participated in UN & NATO missions in the past that involved that.

But when we’re talking about interceptors for arctic defense or enforcing a no-fly zone, you want the enemy to see you and know you’re there.

MichelR

taraf You’re assuming the planes can get off the ground. 😃

Flight availability of a 6-year-old F-35 is roughly the same as a 36-year-old F-16.

If they can’t get off the ground, you can’t beat that level of stealthiness.

HELLFIRE

taraf As I understand it, the only real advantage the F-35 has over the Gripen is stealth technology.

The link I provided earlier may be a place to start for a layman comparison, FWIW.

Plus there’s the arguement a war isn’t an organized sport, it’s pure violence to win. And if you intend to win, you should give yourself every advantage, while denying any to your opponent(s).

shrugs

Regards

taraf

HELLFIRE Plus there’s the arguement a war isn’t an organized sport,

There’s a counterargument which says that if the bullets are flying you’ve already lost. War should be a last resort, and while we should absolutely plan and prepare for it, it needs to be the last thing in our toolkit not the first.

HELLFIRE

https://militarywatchmagazine.com/article/sweden-incentives-canada-f35-gripen – Sweden Offers Growing Incentives For Canada to Cut F-35 Orders and Buy Gripens

… The firm has accordingly offered not only to build an assembly line for the aircraft in Canada, but also to finance a full manufacturing centre and a research and development facility. … Replacing a portion of the F-35 fleet with the Gripen E/F will provide the Royal Canadian Air Force with a high-low combination of fighters, with the Gripen being a very lightweight aircraft with a much more limited combat potential, but with much lower maintenance needs and sustainment costs and higher availability rates. …

FWIW. Again, the ink on that agreement likely hasn’t even dried yet, but I’m personally curious the specifics of what the Swedes offered us… and is it a Best And Final Offer (BAFO)? Or – even better – a proposed starting point?

I’ll repeat again my favor for the hi-low / “not all eggs in one basket” mix, especially with the questions surrounding Block 4.

Regards

Dks01

Although the RCAF wants the F-35 and only the F-35, they may not get it for other reasons. From Hill Times this morning.

Trade consultant Eric Miller, president of the Washington, D.C.-based Rideau Potomac Strategy Group, said a decision to not pick the F-35 would be met with ire by the Trump administration, noting that the F-35 is structured as a global partnership since one country cannot afford the program on its own. “Once you start taking partners out of that, it means the unit cost for the U.S. goes up per plane,” he said.

He said that there would be questions about whether Canada is getting the right plane, but also noted that the promised industrial benefits are hard for the federal government to ignore. Miller said that if a trade deal with the U.S. is on the table in the coming months, then buying the F-35 becomes more attractive for Canada.

“But if the trade talks remain broken down and there is no pathway back, then I find it unlikely that Canada is sitting > where it would be next summer— if there is still massive uncertainty about Canada’s trading relationship with the U.S.—I find it hard to imagine that they would not want to take the Swedish offer,” he said.

“The determining factor—putting aside the performance characteristics of the aircraft—it could ultimately come down to a decision on whether the U.S. is willing to make a deal and to have a reciprocal agreement that would extend the … tariff exemption into the future in perpetuity,” Miller said.

Currently, the Trump administration has levied 35-per-cent tariffs on all Canadian goods under the guise of dealing with the fentanyl emergency. Goods that are compliant with the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement are exempt.

“If we’re not in that position, by that point Canada would definitely be looking at alternatives. And will find it politically > very difficult to explain why it is spending billions of dollars on U.S. fighters when the U.S. is undermining—from the perspective of many officials in Ottawa—the Canadian economy,” he said.

Miller said that could mean that a decision would not come anytime soon.

Hydraglass

Dks01 Its absolutely going to be used as a bargaining chip. We’ll have the Gripen all lined up and ready to purchase and the F-35 all ready to cancel come CUSMA negotiation time. The Canadian gov’t if smart will say something along the lines of “So we renew CUSMA and get rid of the 35% tariff crap and we’ll not only buy the dozen and a half F-35’s, but we’ll buy All of the F-35’s we originally said we would, and we’ll complete the deal. If we don’t get what we want, we’re buying zero F-35’s and we’ll be spending all our money with Sweden, and they’ll bring manufacturing here to Canada and we’ll make them for the rest of the world too and undercut your precious F-35 and make all of the rest of your customers think twice about buying them too”.

taraf

Hydraglass Its absolutely going to be used as a bargaining chip.

The thing is… him musing that it could be used as a bargaining chip is why countries are looking elsewhere in the first place. If he hadn’t been stupid enough to joke about there being a killswitch (and erratic enough to make the world think he’d actually use it), nobody would be second guessing the decision to buy it in the first place.

So if the US actually does try to use it as a bargaining chip? That’s not going to win them any friends.

HELLFIRE

taraf ~~So if~~ the US actually does ~~try to~~ use it as a bargaining chip? That’s not going to win them any friends.

FIFY. Personally I’ve been waiting for news that the AUKUS deal – and the SSNs within – to be used in the same way…

/cynical

Regards

HELLFIRE

https://nationalsecurityjournal.org/whats-the-difference-between-the-us-f-35-swedish-jas-39-gripen-jet-fighters/ – What’s the Difference Between the US F-35 & Swedish JAS 39 Gripen Jet Fighters?

Sections “Avionics: Where the F-35 Shines” and “EW and Sensor Fusion” is probably what interests me the most from a military tech geek POV, and gives information and material beyond “2second media soundbyte” and “marketing slideware.” Whether the author (un)intentionally neglected to mention about Block 4 or not, I cannot definitively say – especially as alot of the “nuts-and-bolts” details are classified.

Regards

InternetJeff

HELLFIRE Sensor Fusion

This.
This and UCAV controller capability.

taraf

That’s an avionics upgrade away. The secret sauce for 5th gen fighters is information management, but that type of information integration isn’t impossible in other platforms, it just wasn’t a consideration in earlier generations (well, to an extent - it’s the reason AWACS exists).

It’s worth noting that the Gripen E/F has data sharing links and sensor fusion as well.

digitalfutur

Hydraglass That ship has sailed. Even CUSMA is successfully renegotiated, the current USA govt has proven, by actions, that it can’t be trusted. There’s nothing preventing them from simply imposing sectoral tariffs, which even a negative SCOTUS tariff decision can’t stop, regardless of any trade “deal”. Congress, which is supposed to review such tariffs every 6 months, has been effectively sidelined by the current Speaker.

Once broken, trust must be regained by legally enforceable actions. Without that there’s no trust. Public policy does not operate in a vacuum.

Dks01

O to be a fly on the wall. From Hill Times. Links inserted.

Also at 9 a.m., Defence Minister David McGuinty will deliver a keynote speech at a conference on continental defence hosted by the Canadian Global Affairs Institute. Other notable speakers at the event include Stephen Fuhr, the secretary of state for defence procurement, Lt. Gen. Jamie Speiser-Blanchet, the commander of the Royal Canadian Air Force, and a collection of other senior military officers and defence department officials.

GrumpyCanadian

taraf This is almost starting to sound like Lockheed Martin has taken a page out of the Apple playbook. Give something, that others already have or can just as easily add, a clever marketing name, then use that trademark in arguments; it’s not just information management, it’s Sensor Fusion.

Much like the old, never-ending smartphone argument:

Apple fan: Yeah, but your Samsung doesn’t have a Retina Display.
Andoid fan: No, my Galaxy S70 has a 3200 ppi display. That’s even better than the iPhone 65.
Apple fan: But it’s not a Retina Display.

Avernar

GrumpyCanadian Much like the old, never-ending smartphone argument:

Apple fan: Yeah, but your Samsung doesn’t have a Retina Display.
Andoid fan: No, my Galaxy S70 has a 3200 ppi display. That’s even better than the iPhone 65.
Apple fan: But it’s not a Retina Display.

While I prefer Apple devices, I do find Apple fans annoying. 😄

HELLFIRE

https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/f-35-clear-winner-canada-fighter-evaluation – Data shows F-35 was clear winner over Gripen in Canada’s fighter evaluation

… The FFCP restarted the process with new requirements, independent scoring and a commitment to a competitive open tender. … According to the Radio-Canada documents, the F-35 scored 57.1 out of 60 points (95%), while the Gripen E achieved 19.8 points (33%); both aircraft met Canada’s mandatory requirements, but their performance diverged sharply once rated operational criteria were applied. …

Article also notes under the same criteria :

Dassault [Rafale] withdrew due to Five Eyes interoperability and security constraints
Airbus [Eurofighter Typhoon] exited, arguing the terms favored the F-35
Boeing’s Super Hornet was later disqualified
“Several experts, along with representatives from both competing manufacturers, told Radio-Canada they had never seen the precise evaluation figures before their release.”

Mind you, beyond the table, there’s literally zero context to each of the categories, and how scoring was determined, but rightly so voices are going to use this as evidence for the F-35 to continue. Originally found out about this from this article : https://nationalsecurityjournal.org/the-canada-f-35-fighter-debate-is-over/ – The Canada F-35 Fighter Debate Is ‘Over’

I’ll have to dig again what avionics fit the Israeli F-35s have; I want to say Israel put their own kit inside? But I could be wrong.

Also worthwhile within said article is this link about sensor fusion and MADL v Link 16, dated from Sep 4, 2018 : https://www.aviationtoday.com/2018/09/04/f-35-data-fusion/

Same source had this, FWIW : https://nationalsecurityjournal.org/forget-the-f-35-stealth-fighter-why-the-jas-39-gripen-might-be-better/ , quoting a $5800/flight hour cost for the Gripen v $35K for the F-35.

Hope people find this information useful, and while I’m just Joe Taxpayer, I’d hate to be in the hotseat right now…

Regards

« Previous Page Next Page »