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

Dks01 The real problem was there was no existing missile for the Arrow save the AIM-4 Falcon “Hittile”. The Sparrow had been cancelled

Yeah, I remember about the AIM-4 and how the US Navy wouldn’t touch that with a 10m pole.

The Sparrow being “cancelled” I don’t get… to my knowledge, the USN was actively using and developing Sparrow into the current Sea Sparrow / RIM-7 models… unless I’m missing something (else) here…

I also recall VELVET GLOVE – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadair_Velvet_Glove – but beyond the Wikipedia article, I don’t have much more in the way of details.

Bottom Line™, yeah the CF-105 was an attempt to do ALOT of firsts, but it’d barely had a chance to line up at the gate for a conclusion to be jumped to whether it was a failure / all hype… My Useless 00000010bits anyways…

shrugs

I do have your recommendation from Dr Shawn Maloney to look into still, my time permitting.

Regards

Dks01

HELLFIRE The Arrow was a victim of cost overruns, nuclear politics and internal fights between soldiers, including the Chief of Defence Staff, and diplomats at External Affairs on the role of nuclear weapons in Canada; a fight that had been ongoing for a decade at the time of the Arrow cancellation. The US, with the active collusion of the RCAF (nudge, nudge, wink, wink) through the XYZ arrangement, had stationed nuclear weapons (without initiators) in Canada since 1950. The first and fifth BROKEN ARROW events (an unexpected event involving nuclear weapons that result in the accidental launching, firing, detonating, theft, or loss of the weapon) happened in Canadian airspace. Canada was concerned that there was no arrangement for cleaning up BROKEN ARROW events.

With respect to the Sparrow missile, you are referring to the Sparrow III. The Sparrow I was adopted by the USN. The Sparrow II was the version planned for the Arrow. Wikipedia says it well.

B y 1955, Douglas proposed going ahead with development, intending it to be the primary weapon for the F5D Skylancer interceptor. It was later selected, with some controversy, to be the primary weapon for the Canadian Avro Arrow supersonic interceptor, along with the new Astra fire-control system. For Canadian use and as a second source for US missiles, Canadair was selected to build the missiles in Quebec.

The small size of the missile forebody and the K-band AN/APQ-64-radar limited performance, and it was never able to work in testing. After considerable development and test firings in the U.S. and Canada, Douglas abandoned development in 1956. Canadair continued development until the Arrow was cancelled in 1959.

HELLFIRE

Dks01 The Arrow was a victim of cost overruns, nuclear politics and internal fights between soldiers, including the Chief of Defence Staff, and diplomats at External Affairs on the role of nuclear weapons in Canada;

To that much, I can agree and has always been the lens I’ve viewed the Arrow and never in dispute.

Dks01 Wikipedia says it well

Thanks for the TL;DR version of it.

Regards

HELLFIRE

https://www.twz.com/air/swiss-poised-to-slash-f-35-order-as-costs-mount – Switzerland’s repeated efforts to induct a new fighter have hit a hurdle, with the planned 36 F-35As judged to be no longer affordable.

Switzerland will cut back its order for 36 Lockheed Martin F-35A Lightning II fighters in response to the program’s ballooning costs. … The original Swiss budget for a new fighter was narrowly approved by the public in a 2020 referendum. …

FWIW.

Regards

bjlockie

Why doesn’t Switzerland buy the Gripen?

InternetJeff

HELLFIRE F-35As judged to be no longer affordable

Anything can be judged as “unafforable” until you realized you needed it. Then it’s too late. There’s an old adage about knowing the cost of everything and the value of nothing.

HELLFIRE

https://www.twz.com/air/canadian-norad-commanders-view-on-future-f-35-fighter-force – Canadian NORAD Commander’s View On Future F-35 Fighter Force

… Though a $30 billion deal to buy 88 of these stealth aircraft is being reviewed by Canadian officials after U.S. President Donald Trump initiated what has become a spiraling trade war, McKenna does not have time to wait for a final decision. There are too many moving parts to put in place not to be ready for their arrival. … On Tuesday, McKenna sat down with us for an exclusive hour-long interview, talking about F-35s and other aircraft, new radars and other sensors, space-based platforms, Golden Dome and even how he had to ruin a golf course to ensure that RCAF planes can receive fuel at one of its main operating bases. …

FWIW… and a very good look operationally what the RCAF wants to do with the F-35… trick always is the resources and the budget …

Regards

HELLFIRE

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/pentagon-watchdog-criticizes-lockheed-f-35-maintenance-failures-bloomberg-news-2025-12-23/ – US watchdog says F-35s flew half the time in 2024 due to Lockheed maintenance issues

… According to the report, the average availability rate of F-35s was 50% because “(the Pentagon) did not always hold Lockheed Martin accountable for poor performance related to F-35 sustainment.” …The audit found that the Pentagon paid Lockheed about $1.7 billion without any economic adjustment even though the aircraft were unavailable to fly about half the time and failed to meet minimum military service requirements. …

If my google-fu isn’t mistaken, here’s the report in full : https://www.dodig.mil/reports.html/Article/4367088/audit-of-the-dods-oversight-of-contractor-performance-for-the-f-35-joint-strike/

Finding
The DoD did not adequately oversee contractor performance on the June 2024 air vehicle sustainment contract. Although the F-35 JPO monitored Lockheed Martin’s performance, it did not always hold Lockheed Martin accountable for poor performance related to F-35 sustainment. This occurred because the F-35 JPO did not include aircraft readiness performance or other measurable contract requirements and did not enforce material inspection and government property reporting requirements in the air vehicle sustainment contract. In addition, the F-35 JPO did not effectively use contracting officer’s representatives to oversee performance requirements at sites with F-35 aircraft. As a result, by July 1, 2025, the DoD had
paid Lockheed Martin $1.7 billion on the June 2024 air vehicle sustainment contract, without economic adjustment, although
the Full Mission Capable, Mission Capable, and Air Vehicle Availability rates did not meet the minimum requirements of the Military Services.

Some other interesting tidbits I pulled out reading through this :

… the F-35 JPO used the following incentive metrics to determine the amount of the incentive fee
Lockheed Martin would receive.
• No One Left Behind. This incentive metric tracks whether all F-35 stakeholders receive equal support from the contractor.
• Customer Wait Time. This incentive metric tracks how quickly the supply chain can respond to operational demands when an item is not available at a base.
• Air Vehicle Gross Issue Effectiveness. This incentive metric measures how effective the base inventory is in supporting operational demands.
• Supply Rate Mission Capability. This incentive metric tracks the time an aircraft is degraded from FMC due to outstanding supply requests.
• First Pass Effectiveness – Timed. This incentive metric tracks the response time of the supply system. …

and the associated Table 2.

… According to an F-35 JPO official, it was not realistic or possible to incorporate all Military Service performance requirements in a contract. F-35 JPO officials stated that including performance requirements as incentive metrics introduces factors that are outside of Lockheed Martin’s control. For example, aircraft may be unavailable due to maintenance or shipping delays that are not Lockheed Martin’s fault, and the F-35 JPO cannot penalize Lockheed Martin for events that are out of its control. …

… Instead of including aircraft readiness performance requirements from the PBA in the June 2024 AVS contract, the F-35 JPO included the Air Vehicle Gross Issue Effectiveness supply incentive metric. However, this metric does not evaluate whether the aircraft is available to fly or perform its mission. …

Take what you will from this.

Regards

Xstar_Lumini

MaynardKrebs

Gripen is old technology.

Like buying windows 95 for a modern computer.

HELLFIRE

https://en.defence-ua.com/news/what_significant_problem_helped_lockheed_martin_deliver_a_record_number_of_f_35s_in_2025-17113.html – What Significant Problem Helped Lockheed Martin Deliver a Record Number of F-35s in 2025

In 2025, American defense giant Lockheed Martin delivered 191 fifth-generation F-35 fighter jets to customers, an all-time record and 51 more than the 142 aircraft produced in 2024. … Thanks to this backlog [from delayed TR3 aircraft], Lockheed Martin was able to deliver a record number of aircraft in 2025. …

Lockheed : “Look, we delivered the most aircraft ever this year!”

Taxpayer : “…aircraft with capabilities that were supposed to be delivered 2years ago…” 🙄 🙄

Article provides delivery numbers for 2021 (142), 2022 (141), and 2023 (98) for comparison, as well as pricing and caveats for the next batches of F-35s.

Article also notes Lockheed’s closest military competitor Dassault “produced 26 Rafale aircraft, exceeding its target by one.”

Take what you will from this…

Regards

HELLFIRE

https://toronto.citynews.ca/2026/01/10/rcaf-wants-more-than-1200-security-personnel-to-protect-f-35s-other-planes/ – RCAF wants more than 1,200 security personnel to protect F-35s, other planes

… Internal documents from spring 2025, obtained by The Canadian Press through the Access-to-Information law, show the Air Force drafted a plan to first hire 199 new security personnel by 2028, then expand that security force to 747 in 2029 and 1,227 by 2030. … Defence Minister David McGuinty’s office said the RCAF is working on adding 140 new aircraft to its fleet — including the F-35 stealth fighters, CC-330 Huskies, P-8A Poseidon maritime patrol craft and long-range remotely piloted aircraft such as the MQ-9B SkyGuardian drones. …

I’ll have to do some digging around as I don’t recall the RCAF putting out a tender / procurement for the P-8A or the MQ-9B, offhand… but I do get WHY the RCAF would want them.

ADDENDUM: yeah, I’m 2 years behind on this, as the P-8A amd MQ-9B was spec’d out in 2023 :

https://canadiandefencereview.com/p-8a-poseidon/

… According to a press-released issue by National Defence, Canada has finalized a government-to-government agreement with the United States (US) government for the acquisition of up to 16 P-8A Poseidon aircraft for the Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF). … The first P-8A should be delivered in 2026, and with an average of one aircraft delivered per month, all of the aircraft could be delivered as early as fall 2027. …

https://www.cfc.forces.gc.ca/259/290/950/305/Malmstrom.pdf

… In December 2023, the federal government announced that it would acquire eleven MQ-9B SkyGuardian from General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. (GA-ASI). The first two entered production phase in 2024 with expectations of delivery by 2028 following extensive testing and customization to operate in the North.14 …

Regards

GrumpyCanadian

After some reports claimed that a firm order for the Gripen was not required for the Swedish partnership and production in Canada, the numbers have been shared. Indeed, a purchase is required: 72 Gripens and 6 GlobalEye aircraft to secure a partnership leading to a claimed 12600 jobs in Canada.

The article also presents the on-going F-35/Gripen debate, and polling numbers suggesting that buying the F-35 is not a proposition that is well-received by the majority of Canadians surveyed, especially not as the only jet ordered. The only exception is among Conservative supporters, where that approach is supposedly viewed more positively.

Saab wants Canada to buy 72 Gripens and 6 GlobalEyes to fulfil promise of 12,600 jobs

HELLFIRE

For now, Canada is preparing to receive 16 F-35s starting this year …

Not sure how “this year” got into the mix. IIRC ANYONE who wanted an F-35 at BLOCK 4 standard was looking at 2030 at least.

To create more than 10,000 direct and indirect jobs in Canada, Saab plans production centres in Ontario and Quebec with a pan-Canadian supplier network.

Quebec and Ontario : “SURE! Sign Us Up!”

Rest Of Canada : “What Are We, Chopped Liver?”

/Canadian snark

Inspite of the higher margin of error, I’m mildly curious about how the numbers broke down regionally.

https://militarywatchmagazine.com/article/deliveries-f35-fuselages-1500-fleet-expansion – Deliveries of F-35 Centre Fuselages Reach 1500 as Fleet Expansion Accelerates: Export Demand Key to Sustaining High Production

… This was reportedly achieved as a result of major improvements to the application of more advanced factory automation and advanced manufacturing technologies. The firm’s Integrated Assembly Line now produces one centre fuselage every 30 hours, allows seamless production across all three variants …

FWIW.

Regards

GrumpyCanadian

HELLFIRE “What Are We, Chopped Liver?”

No, you’re the:

HELLFIRE pan-Canadian supplier network

It is relevant to remember that during Avro’s heyday, its tentacles extended to virtually every province; it really was a corporate behemoth.

Dks01

HELLFIRE Rest Of Canada : “What Are We, Chopped Liver?”

/Canadian snark

Nothing but Canadian ignorance. Here are the facts.

Xstar_Lumini

This Gripen thing is a mistake and the wrong road to go down. Hopefully saner heads prevail.

HELLFIRE

Dks01 Nothing but Canadian ignorance.

Thanks for that link, will look into it.

Got a way to distill it into a (catchy) 2second soundbyte to counter the inevitable “This is pandering to the Ontario and Quebec voting blocks again!”

/cynical

Regards

Dks01

HELLFIRE Bullsh**. Think big.

HELLFIRE

@Dks01
Again, thx for the link but I take the saying “politicians the day before an election will kiss your a **, the day after will run your a ** over” to heart… 🙄 🙄

/cynical

We’ll See How It Goes.

Regards

Dks01

The world has changed.

« Previous Page Next Page »