this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2026
37 points (95.1% liked)

Canada

12365 readers
399 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 Sports

Baseball

Basketball

Curling

Hockey

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


🌐 Other Relevant Communities


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] justOnePersistentKbinPlease@fedia.io 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The gen 4 Gripen would maybe lose.

The F-35 is a missle/sensor truck.

The in-planning Gen5 Gripen would almost certainly win.

[–] sudoshakes@reddthat.com 7 points 1 day ago (2 children)

You can’t hit what you cannot see.

The F-35’s radar and EOTS make it so it sees anything less stealthy than itself first.

If you can see first and shoot first, you win the BVR fight. Full stop.

Not that this matters since if F-35s and grippens are shooting one another, the western world has ended as we know it.

Either way, Canada needs a homeland defense fighter, not a “join in and be part of coalitions that fight away from its shores” fighter.

The downside of not having the F-35 is mostly in not being able to effectively fly the same 5th generation tactics, and be part of the same deployments as the countries using them.

In Canada’s case, I don’t see them forming an armed coalition with the US so… not much lost.

[–] justOnePersistentKbinPlease@fedia.io 1 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Canadian companies alledgedly played large roles in the development of the F-117 and the B-2, so we potentially have knowledge of weaknesses unannounced to the world.

Russia/China have claimed multiple times that the frequencies they use on their tech defeat US stealth coatings, but personally I question their truthfulness.

The only time I am aware of US tech fighting a peer was the defence of Kosovo, and the Serbs had no trouble shooting down an F-117. In the current Iran war, the US seems to only do sorties with overwelming airpower, so we don't see stealth tech in action.

[–] sudoshakes@reddthat.com 1 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (1 children)

Man. This is why I shouldn’t engage in conversations with people on the internet. They think their uninformed ideas had in the moment behind a keyboard are equitable to people who have the head of the program’s business card on their desk.

The F-117 downing in Kosovo was due t mission planning failures. They flew the same routes, repeatedly, so the ground commander would know when and where to switch on radar as they opened their bomb bay doors. If you fly the same path at the same times you are going to get shot down when employing munitions. They also did have a very hard time defeating their effectiveness as it was the sole shoot down of the campaign in what was one of the most contested SAM airspace’s of the modern era.

That addressed, the technology in the have blue program is 20 years behind what originated the F-35 program. I have EOTS “glass” on my book shelf. I have written chapters of books on the plane, and had my hands inside the airframe. Believe me, it is not sensical to compare these things, nor does any knowledge of previous generations help you defeat it in the air.

When the US went to red flag the first time with F-35s, they scored a kill rate of 145 aircraft to 7 losses. This was with giving the enemy side a respawn protocol where they could fly back to a waypoint and then rejoin the the fight after dying to put further pressure on the F-35 blue team aircraft. It was a one sided slaughterhouse and all 7 kills on the F-45s occurred inside visual range. Literally nothing could beat it in beyond visual range combat.

This is an aircraft that can trap on a carrier deck at night in a storm automatically and did so in 27 repeated landings on a carrier during the program.

It has the most socialites data fusion of anything out there, letting it sort, weight, and analyze tract data from hundreds of sources simultaneously to then present the pilot with a singular picture. It supports complete off bore AICS shots with look through airframe capability, and an optical passive targeted suite that lets it detect adversary aircraft by the heat friction on their wings up to 35 miles away without radiating any energy limits own.

The radar when turned on can act as its own electronic warfare suite jamming, searching, and targeting hundreds of assets at once in both air and ground search. A ground based radar or AWACS, local other fighters, and even satellites can link to its sensor fusion package that automatically evaluates each piece of data to decide which is most correct to unify that display to the pilot without any pilot workload. This means you go from track to identify to target to shoot far faster than any other cockpit.

The F-35 even supports towed decoys to mimic a phantom airframe and lure missiles that do manage to target it. It is the single most advanced weapon to exist to date and the stealth piece of the puzzle is not its primary selling point.

It will see you, and shoot you down, before you can get a target lock on the airframe. By the time you detect it on search band radar you will be evading incoming missiles and it has already notched out of the fight and range of your missiles.

I cannot begin to illustrate how dominate the platform truly is in a short social media post.

All that however is irrelevant to the MISSION the Canadians need their air frame to fly. The budget point doesn’t justify the purchase for their lack of need of those features and being in bed with a bad actor government makes it worse.

As for utilization rate, during the above red flag exercise the airframes were at 90%.

The current CF-18s flown by Canada are at a 40% utilization rate and F-35As across the Air Force have a 48-55% utilization rate for single mission flight. Much of the limitations there are from the technology refresh 3 and 4 parts availability and service validation ongoing for retrofitting the older airframes to the TR3 and 4 hardware.

I will close by saying the Gripen is the best choice for Canada’s needs and budget and current geopolitical position, but comments like yours remind me how far remove most people behind a keyboard are from the aircraft.

[–] justOnePersistentKbinPlease@fedia.io 1 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah fair.

The thing about the war games is an interesting one though.

The kill ratio you noted is only when the US networked systems are allowed to exist in full. Once you take it out of that role, which is the explicit role it is built for, it loses.

[–] sudoshakes@reddthat.com 1 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (1 children)

Again, comments without understanding coming from you.

The blue team of F-35s had only eachother to datalink to.

The red team had F-16, F-15s with AESA radar, ground stations, and targets that were part of the strike package target list.

The F-35 blue team had to defeat air to air defenders, who knew where they would be coming from, when, and had overwhelming numbers advantage. The red team still died in BVR combat before they saw the F-35s.

Not the one I an talking about

[–] matlag@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago

You certainly can't see the F35 given they're not delivered, and when they are, their availability is so low there's few chance you'll see them in the sky. /s