I’m NOT a defense analyst, professional or amateur.
Me neither, not by a long shot. From the various analyses I’ve consumed over the last few months, the suggestion is that the F35 is superior if you’re attacking another country, but the Gripens just might have the edge defensively.
Our airstrips, maintenance facilities, fuel depots, all of it would be targeted and destroyed first.
This arguably gives the Gripen an edge, since its most famous feature is that it can be deployed relatively easily from highways and other non-standard surfaces.
But yeah, if you set aside the issue of American relations, there are some pretty big questions of doctrine to sort out.
but the Gripens just might have the edge defensively.
Under the very specific conditions where operating it out of the bush is worthwhile, maybe.
If we’re fighting, I dunno, Algeria or Japan in Canadian airspace, the F-35 is still much superior. We have a good chance of defending our airfields against them, and once it’s up the plane has been been compared to a soccer player that’s invisible.
It’s just that if we’re defending ourselves (as opposed to Lithuania) against anything, it’s probably against the US.
Under the very specific conditions where operating it out of the bush is worthwhile, maybe.
The idea was always that the russians will destroy our airbases first and to have the ability to use a road in the middle of nowhere with a minimal crew for maintenance. Optimized for having a large hostile country invading us. Canada currently has a large hostile country nearby, so… it makes sense.
Yes, no disagreement here. If it works in practice in a modern, sensor-rich environment is an open question, though, at least as far as the public knows. And, how much helping our European allies matters, is also a factor. So, there’s still arguments for both sides.
It’s worth mentioning there’s a third option to not buy any planes, and buy more RBS-70 MANPADs (Swedish shoulder-launched missiles for hitting aircraft) with the money. Or maybe a medium range SAM system. I don’t know who’s talking about “none of the above” right now, but if you want maximum guerilla firepower for the cost, that’s got to be up there.
Me neither, not by a long shot. From the various analyses I’ve consumed over the last few months, the suggestion is that the F35 is superior if you’re attacking another country, but the Gripens just might have the edge defensively.
This arguably gives the Gripen an edge, since its most famous feature is that it can be deployed relatively easily from highways and other non-standard surfaces.
But yeah, if you set aside the issue of American relations, there are some pretty big questions of doctrine to sort out.
Under the very specific conditions where operating it out of the bush is worthwhile, maybe.
If we’re fighting, I dunno, Algeria or Japan in Canadian airspace, the F-35 is still much superior. We have a good chance of defending our airfields against them, and once it’s up the plane has been been compared to a soccer player that’s invisible.
It’s just that if we’re defending ourselves (as opposed to Lithuania) against anything, it’s probably against the US.
The idea was always that the russians will destroy our airbases first and to have the ability to use a road in the middle of nowhere with a minimal crew for maintenance. Optimized for having a large hostile country invading us. Canada currently has a large hostile country nearby, so… it makes sense.
“Our” being Sweden?
Yes, no disagreement here. If it works in practice in a modern, sensor-rich environment is an open question, though, at least as far as the public knows. And, how much helping our European allies matters, is also a factor. So, there’s still arguments for both sides.
It’s worth mentioning there’s a third option to not buy any planes, and buy more RBS-70 MANPADs (Swedish shoulder-launched missiles for hitting aircraft) with the money. Or maybe a medium range SAM system. I don’t know who’s talking about “none of the above” right now, but if you want maximum guerilla firepower for the cost, that’s got to be up there.
Sorry yes I meant sweden.