Finland has decided to buy 64 F-35As for 10 Billion Euros with weapons and training included in the package. According to the Finnish government press conference transcript, translated into English, https://www.defmin.fi/en/topical/press_releases_and_news?11662_m=12335#ccf08a71. (sorry…I have never been able to even come close to understanding or speaking Finnish):
“The F-35 solution achieved the highest operational effectiveness and future growth potential in the capability assessment.”
“The F-35 has the lowest procurement costs while considering all aspects of the offer.”
Why does this matter in Canada with only 2 competitors for the new fighter selection left standing? As I have stated many times (and Americans still don’t believe me), the Canadian procurement system is not focused on strategic benefits or capabilities of a weapons system to protect Canada, North America or to project Canadian interests abroad. Instead, this is a hot potato portfolio that no one has ever wanted to touch, even less so in the middle of the pandemic recovery where spending billions of dollars on a new fighter will not get broad approval from the electorate. Yet the long-delayed decision needs to be dealt with. The 40-year-old CF-18s are desperately old, tactically irrelevant and falling apart. The time to buy new jets, build them, train personnel, and prepare the facilities needed will take years so delaying this decision any longer is not an option.
Getting beyond Justin Trudeau’s 2015 election promise not to select the F-35 will be hard. But, if the Finns, who conducted the most comprehensive capability assessment of any competition to date picked the F-35, the Liberals should take notice. The operational assessment scored the F-35 higher than Gripen and the other competitors. This result reflects what was reported after the Swiss chose the F-35 earlier this year. In the case of Finland, the threat of Russia and their shared 1400 km border, means that operational capability, effectiveness, and survivability are critical issues. Finns have been invaded twice and are not nearly as complacent about protecting themselves as Canadians are.
So, F-35 is the most capable operating in a cold, austere climate (hmmm…. sound vaguely Canadian?), better than Gripen.
OK…but so what? No one in Canada really cares about capability and only a few Canadian news outlets even reported that Finland had selected the F-35. The Canadian news media is fatigued with the fighter conversation after a decade plus covering this saga and after all these years, there is a very real media bias against the F-35. Besides, so many Canadians think that Big Brother, south of the border, will save us from the Russians and Chinese, especially in the arctic. Let’s just buy the least expensive option, especially if it gives a boost to industry in regions historically hard hit.
“No offer was significantly less expensive than others in operating and sustainment costs.” (according to the official Finnish government response).
What? Impossible. We have heard about how much cheaper Gripen would be to purchase and operate. How is this possible? The answer from the Finns is that the F-35 is not more expensive to procure and operate after all. Denmark reported this years ago, lately Switzerland and now Finland. Armchair quarterbacks, critics funded by competitors and F-35 haters have been corrected yet again.
How will the new minority Liberal government stickhandle through the contradictions and untruths that they were told over the past 6 years in power? F-35 is the best choice in Finland, a climate like Canada’s, but in an operating theatre far more deadly. F-35 is the most cost effective for the Finnish Air Force, cheaper than the Swedish-built Saab Gripen. Note that the Finland F-35 price was higher than what Canada will pay because Finland is not an F-35 partner and is subject to a US government Foreign Military Sales service fee, somewhere near 5-10% applied to the contract. Even still, the F-35 was cheaper than Saab’s Gripen…. wow.
Oh….and we did not figure out what would be the logistical mess of trying to buy airplane parts for Canadian Gripen fighters, ship them across the ocean in peacetime and then likely be paralyzed during wartime / operational deployments with no supply chain infrastructure. I will buy stock in the shipping firms linked to any Gripen contract with Canada because those companies will be very busy over the years shipping material back and forth from Saab in Sweden and their stock prices will soar as a result.
So better capability, lower cost…seems like best and cheapest option is the F-35. And don’t forget 3000+ F-35s to be built with enduring work for Canadian companies that contribute to the F-35 partnership. That economic impact will go far beyond the 88 jets and short-term ITB work with a Gripen selection that will come and go, atrophying in a couple of years.
If Gripen cannot win against F-35 when it shares a border with Finland, how can it win in Canada when it is an ocean apart, not aligned with NATO, and has no existing defense agreements with Canada? If Gripen was ever going to win, it had to be in Finland, creating a partnership with 2 non-NATO nations and sharing defense of the Scandinavian region. But Gripen lost again. Now F-35s from the US Air Force, Denmark, Norway, and Finland will patrol the arctic and keep the Russians at bay. That is a formidable deterrent and needs Canadian F-35s to complete the alliance.
It certainly doesn’t help that Canadian media ignores this Finnish F-35 decision preventing the Canadian public (and politicians) from understanding the bigger picture. Context and parallel conditions (cold, austere) would help Canadians understand why F-35 really needs to be their future fighter.
Let’s see how the noose closes on the Gripen idea, shutting it down and how the conversation changes about F-35 in Canada. It will be interesting to see how the minority Liberal government softens the ground in the coming weeks / months to make an F-35 decision palatable to their governing partners as well as the rest of Canada.
If Trudeau had done his homework years ago before shooting the F35 down, it might make its selection more palatable to the Liberal loving media and thus help to educate the public.
Trudeau used the F-35 as a weapon to attack the Conservatives. He didn’t care what was best for the Canadian Military or Taxpayer. (and still doesn’t)
You are correct in stating that capabilities are not the selection driver in Canada.
The recent rejection by Canada of the Boeing F-18, yet retention of the eligibility of the Gripen, makes no sense. Unless of course Sweden understands the underworld of Canada/Quebec politics better than Boeing.
The deal will go to whoever buys off Quebec for production offsets and sustainment work.
Quebec is no doubt ensuring the two finalists understand what corruption will carry the day.
Gosh Billie, for a minute there I thought you weren’t going to mention the Swiss purchase of the F-35. This is just as significant as the Finnish purchase and, once again, for all the right reasons.
Well said Billie! The most concise, accurate and timely piece to have been written by anyone in regards to this never ending procurement program.
I have read every article on your blog and you make the most compelling points for the F-35. The only problem is that the Trudeau government and the vast majority of Canadians would love to not spend a dime on either aircraft if given their druthers. Personally I have little to no faith that they will make the smart choice of the F-35. Instead I fear they will choose the Gripen in order to appear to make the better choice and also send their often typical anti American sentiment. Whether Pentagon and NORAD chiefs would want or allow this is up for question. Unfortunately the four years of Trump and the recent economic actions of the Biden administration have been difficult for Canada with the cancellation of pipelines and the effect to the oil and gas industry as well as the emerging tariffs to be imposed on Canadian softwood lumber, EV’S and cars. If the Liberals can say “Hey, we can build Gripens in Halifax and Montreal” that plays very well to traditionally strong Liberal voter bases. Look no further than the Bell 412’s and Bombardier Iltis programs as past examples of intentionally purchasing less than capable fleets for the CF that they need to utilize for unrealistically long periods.
Your messaging is bang on and uniquely informed without bias. I think there was a case to be made prior to 2015 that the F-35 program had severe growing pains and was notably the most US expensive fighter program to date with intense scrutiny placed on any failings. Such is the danger of the social media age where “facts” taken out of the bigger context get widely spread and taken for truth. If critics cared to do some actual research on the F-14, F-15, F-16 and F-18 programs in their first decade of development they would see very similar growing pains existed then. The pre 2015 F-35 and the state of the current program are very different. Capability has increased and costs have decreased due to economy of scale. That same economy of scale can’t ever be achieved with Gripen.
These excellent blog articles need to be viewed by a wider sector of the public. I only stumbled across them due to your episode on The Fighter Pilot Podcast. When I look at Skies magazine there are several well written articles advocating the Gripen. In the comments everyone supports the Gripen with the same flawed points regarding cold weather ops, made in Canada, cheaper etc. If you submitted an article to them highlighting your well made points and highlighting what the Swiss and Finns have both concluded I would think they would publish it. Let’s hope the folks in charge of the acquisition project and the Trudeau brain trust will chose with accurate facts and not blatant political bias and misdirection.
Germany is said to be reconsidering the F-35A to replace their Tornados in the Nuclear Strike Role. While Spain has long expressed an interest in both the F-35A and F-35B. The former would replace their remaining Hornets. (Air Force) While, the F-35B’s would of course replace their Harriers. (Navy) Rumor is both would have already selected the F-35. If, not for pressure from France! Billie what are your thoughts on the F-35 prospects in either country???
Scott – I think the prospects of F-35 for Spain are quite good as the only replacement for their Harriers would be the F-35B. As an Airbus nation, there will be considerable pushback against any F-35 purchase which would threaten Eurofighter and the chances of FCAS. However that project has yet to get off the ground and time ay run out which would give F-35A a chance after all.
Germany and F-35 is a conversation about political will. The French insistence that F-35 be dropped if the combined effort of FCAS was to go forward is why F-35 was pushed out 4 years ago. However the Super Hornet / Nuclear delivery option has run into problems and time is running out for Tornado as a viable airframe. Add into the equation Dassault issues of proprietary information / lack of sharing plus a new German defense minister and there is a window for F-35 to sneak in. Never under-estimate the power of German industry and how hard they will fight for some form of workshare from any Lockheed Martin / F-35 deal. If LM can find a way to make Airbus whole in this, then F-35 has a chance to slip back into the discussion, especially at $78M USD per jet, dramatically cheaper than any other option.
Honestly, I don’t see the F-35 as a competitor to the FCAS in the case of Germany and/or Spain! Why? Because FCAS would be lucky to enter service by 2040. Even then they would start by replacing the oldest Typhoons first. Which, would start off slowly and take many years to complete. In short by the time they got to the F-35. They to would need replacing and the whole process would start all over again. As for any workshare between Airbus and the JSF Program. I’ll have to yield to you on that one….
F-35 is not a competitor to FCAS. However, Germany would not have the same incentive to invest and pursue FCAS if it was procuring F-35s to fill the nuclear delivery role. There is huge technical risk to FCAS, especially since neither country has any experience developing a stealth platform or any other of the 5th Gen attributes that would be included in a ‘6th Gen’ platform.
Then the F-35 could be a stepping stone to the FCAS??? (or at least could be)
How would you sell the F-35 to the German Government? If, given the opportunity to do so….
It’s a funny thing you know… NOBODY who supports the F-35 has read the DOT&E reports about it written by Robert Behler. Some don’t even know what it is. Everyone talks about the F-35’s “capabilities” but nobody seems to know that, at last count, it had 871 uncorrected defects. That’s right, EIGHT HUNDRED AND SEVENTY-ONE, ten of which are as serious as it gets.
People are so lacking in knowledge about aviation that it blows my mind. This plane is STILL not ready. The proof of that is that the Director of Testing and Evaluation for the US Department of Defense, a man who reports DIRECTLY to the Secretary of Defense, Robert Behler, is the only one who can give the green light on full-rate production. We should realise that since he hasn’t done this, the F-35 is not only unready for full-rate production, it’s also unready for actual service (which comes AFTER full-rate production has been authorised).
I’m kind of shocked that Billie Flynn has also ignored this truth because anyone who claims to be an expert in military aviation would consider this to be rather elementary. Anyone who is a real military aviation expert would read that Finland called the F-35 “the cheapest option” would know that something was up because there’s no chance that the F-35 is cheaper than either the JAS-39E or the F-16V, both of which were in the competition.
Don’t take my word for it, take Robert Behler’s words. If you don’t know who he is, here’s his US government biography:
https://www.defense.gov/About/Biographies/Biography/Article/1514675/robert-f-behler/
As you can see, this is not a man whose word should be ignored. Thanks to the US “Freedom of Information Act”, Robert Behler’s reports are in the public domain. It’s a very long report (34 pages) and quite scathing. As proof of what I said about the 871 defects, here’s a little excerpt from the report:
“The JSF program continues to carry a large number of deficiencies, many of which were identified prior to the completion of System Development and Demonstration
(SDD) in April 2018. As of October 2, 2020, the program had 871 open deficiencies, 10 of which were designated Category 1. Although initial development in Block 4 has focused on addressing deficiencies while developing some new capabilities, the overall number of open deficiencies has not changed significantly since the completion of SDD due to ongoing discoveries of new problems.”
– Robert Behler, Director of Testing and Evaluation, 2020 JSF report, page 19, paragreph 7.
Note that a “Category 1” deficiency is the worst kind because it can lead to the loss of the plane, the pilot or both. It is the most serious category of defect and the F-35 still has TEN of these. I don’t feel comfortable putting the fine men and women of the RCAF into planes with 10 dangerous and potentially deady defects EACH. It’s no surprise that two have already crashed and one pilot (from the Japanese Air Self-Defence Force) has already died.
Now, as I had said, it’s pretty long and if you want the Coles Notes version, FlightGlobal, a very well-known and respected site covers the report here:
https://www.flightglobal.com/fixed-wing/dotande-delivers-another-scathing-report-on-f-35-progress/131231.article
Or if you prefer, feel free to read the report in its entirety here:
https://www.dote.osd.mil/Portals/97/pub/reports/FY2020/dod/2020f35jsf.pdf?ver=C5dAWLFs4_N3ZLrP-qB0QQ%3D%3D
You’ll see just how BAD the F-35 is, how it’s not going to get better, may never have all of the capabilities that Lockheed loves to squawk about and you’ll also see why so many people favour the JAS-39E Gripen.
Whether you like what I have to say or not, you cannot accuse me of lying or presenting useless rhetoric. I have backed up everything I have said with an official US government document written by a man whose credentials make Air Force pilots look like schoolchildren in comparison. I have no agenda, I just want the best for my country and that means dodging a bullet called the F-35A.
I know how we can get Germany to acquire the F-35A as a replacement for their Tornados. Just tell them we’re going to give the Nuclear Strike Role to Poland!
It’s a funny thing you know… NOBODY who supports the F-35 has read the DOT&E reports about it written by Robert Behler. Some don’t even know what it is. Everyone talks about the F-35’s “capabilities” but nobody seems to know that, at last count, it had 871 uncorrected defects. That’s right, EIGHT HUNDRED AND SEVENTY-ONE, ten of which are as serious as it gets.
People are so lacking in knowledge about aviation that it blows my mind. This plane is STILL not ready. The proof of that is that the Director of Testing and Evaluation for the US Department of Defense, a man who reports DIRECTLY to the Secretary of Defense, Robert Behler, is the only one who can give the green light on full-rate production. We should realise that since he hasn’t done this, the F-35 is not only unready for full-rate production, it’s also unready for actual service (which comes AFTER full-rate production has been authorised).
Don’t take my word for it, take Robert Behler’s words. If you don’t know who he is, here’s his US government biography:
https://www.defense.gov/About/Biographies/Biography/Article/1514675/robert-f-behler/
As you can see, this is not a man whose word should be ignored. Thanks to the US “Freedom of Information Act”, Robert Behler’s reports are in the public domain. It’s a very long report (34 pages) and quite scathing. As proof of what I said about the 871 defects, here’s a little excerpt from the report:
“The JSF program continues to carry a large number of deficiencies, many of which were identified prior to the completion of System Development and Demonstration
(SDD) in April 2018. As of October 2, 2020, the program had 871 open deficiencies, 10 of which were designated Category 1. Although initial development in Block 4 has focused on addressing deficiencies while developing some new capabilities, the overall number of open deficiencies has not changed significantly since the completion of SDD due to ongoing discoveries of new problems.”
– Robert Behler, Director of Testing and Evaluation, 2020 JSF report, page 19, paragreph 7.
Note that a “Category 1” deficiency is the worst kind because it can lead to the loss of the plane, the pilot or both. It is the most serious category of defect and the F-35 still has TEN of these. I don’t feel comfortable putting the fine men and women of the RCAF into planes with 10 dangerous and potentially deady defects EACH. It’s no surprise that two have already crashed and one pilot (from the Japanese Air Self-Defence Force) has already died.
Now, as I had said, it’s pretty long and if you want the Coles Notes version, FlightGlobal, a very well-known and respected site covers the report here:
https://www.flightglobal.com/fixed-wing/dotande-delivers-another-scathing-report-on-f-35-progress/131231.article
Or if you prefer, feel free to read the report in its entirety here:
https://www.dote.osd.mil/Portals/97/pub/reports/FY2020/dod/2020f35jsf.pdf?ver=C5dAWLFs4_N3ZLrP-qB0QQ%3D%3D
You’ll see just how BAD the F-35 is, how it’s not going to get better, may never have all of the capabilities that Lockheed loves to squawk about and you’ll also see why so many people favour the JAS-39E Gripen.
Whether you like what I have to say or not, you cannot accuse me of lying or presenting useless rhetoric. I have backed up everything I have said with an official US government document written by a man whose credentials make Air Force pilots look like schoolchildren in comparison. I have no agenda, I just want the best for my country and that means dodging a bullet called the F-35A.
Thomas – I recognize that you are very passionate about your responses based on your posting the same comments two days apart with lots of Capitalizing print to emphasize your points. Let me help you with some context. First, Bob Behler is a long time personal friend and test pilot colleague. We are both Fellows in the Society of Experimental Test Pilots (SETP). He retired from the USAF as a Major General with an extraordinary career served as an operational SR-71 pilot, test pilot and senior leader. Bob Behler was the second test pilot in history to be offered the position of Director of Operational Test and Evaluation where he directed all OT&E for the armed services, not any one program in particular. I am very proud of his efforts to ensure that the men and women who serve in the US Forces have the best equipment and capability to take them into battle to win and come home every time.
I trust that you have read the OT&E evaluations of other major weapons systems, like submarines, naval vessels, Army tanks and helos, Air Force refuelers, B-2 bomber and even the Super Hornet so that you have context. For anyone who is not a test pilot, test engineer, OT&E evaluator, reading these reports will certainly highlight issues that they would not have ever noticed or imagined. It is the job of test pilots, like myself and those who I flew with to be brutally honest about what we expect these systems to perform, not just now but into the future. Never in history has any vehicle performed as desired or expected in the beginning. F-16, F/A-18, F-15, F-22 and F-35 all had growing pains yet all became very successful fighter aircraft over time. The OT&E report highlights many issues but less than the equivalent report said about the F-22 when it was first fielded. Developmental test, which I specialized in for F-35, focused on getting the airplane safe to fly the full envelope and mature the systems so they could be used in real world combat. The F-35 has been in combat already and proven itself remarkably capable. The jet has the lowest loss rate of any fighter in modern history which is also remarkable considering there are 750+ F-35s flying all over the world. The CF-18 and F-16 had far higher loss rates. Two Gripens crashed in the early days of that program, as reference.
The OT&E report highlights a number of issues that are Cat 1 deficiencies that must be corrected and will be, without adjudication, much as was the case for F-22 and other weapons systems. If this is your first time reading one of these reports, the results may surprise you however test pilots and test engineers live in a world where these reports are commonplace. The task is to fix those deficiencies and make the fighters better. If you feel the F-35 is ‘BAD’, please talk to anyone of the 1500+ men and women who have flown the F-35 from any of the 13 Air Forces that have operated it thus far. I can tell you that not a single one of those fighter pilots would ever want to go back to their older legacy fighters and give up flying the F-35. It is lethal, effective and survivable on a scale that eclipses any legacy fighter.
The full rate production decision will be authorized after a large scale simulator event is completed which has yet to happen because the simulator facility needed at NAS Patuxent River where I live has yet to be completed and readied. Lockheed Martin continues to produce large numbers of F-35s (140+) without the full scale approval which would allow the company to buy with long lead time and garner better pricing which would help keep the cost of the fighter as low as it is now.
Bob Behler’s report did not state that the F-35 was dangerous to fly or unfit for combat, a significant distinction that you failed to make.
I would offer you the change to post the Saab Gripen E deficiency reports to help educate Canadians on how well the Gripen flight test program is coming along (since that aircraft is still in development). I would be very surprised if Saab would ever permit the public to know how many issues that the Gripen E program is dealing with and how long it will be to resolve those before that aircraft is ready for operational use or more importantly, ready for combat.
I look forward to your reporting on the Gripen E.
I am very concerned that a future Major Weapons Program could be canceled not because of a major design flaw but from bad “press”. The media and political attacks on such weapons programs are getting worse by the day! Hell, how long have we fought against the misconception, exaggeration, and downright lies about the F-35? Only to get up the next day and fight them all over again! With Canada being a good example of this….So, how do we change that???
Finland Formalizes Deal for 64 Block 4 F-35s
Feb. 11, 2022 | By John A. Tirpak
Finland finalized its $9.4 billion purchase of 64 Lockheed Martin F-35s and support services, signing a letter of offer and acceptance, announced Feb. 11, that calls for the jets to be delivered before the end of 2030. The agreement provides Finland with industrial participation on the program.
The F-35A conventional-takeoff jets will be of the Block 4 configuration and replace Finland’s F/A-18C/D fighters, which will be phased out as the new aircraft arrive, starting in 2025. In addition to providing Finland with a fifth-generation fighter, the deal will provide Finnish companies “high technology engineering and manufacturing economic benefits,” Lockheed Martin F-35 vice president and program manager Bridget Lauderdale said in a press statement.
“The production work will continue for more than 20 years, and the F-35 sustainment work will continue into the 2060s,” Lauderdale said. Finland will produce significant portions of the F-35’s forward fuselage for itself and other customers. It will also produce structural components and “equipment testing and maintenance capability,” the Finnish defense ministry said in a Dec. 10 release. Finnish industry may also be involved in final assembly of the fighter’s F135 engine.
Industrial participation was a contingency of the sale. Finland told fighter competitors in 2018 that the acquisition had to include industrial offsets valued at 30 percent or more of the eventual contract……………https://www.airforcemag.com/finland-formalizes-deal-for-64-block-4-f-35s/?fbclid=IwAR0d3yXkINEFSNZ3PdIc1wn9rQviW9VpxQwV8eG5M6Uhyn8oyLGSJ_FZK7w