The F-35 program has failed to achieve its goals. Its mission capable rate is 69% well below the 80% requirement. The F-35 costs $30,000 per hour to operate, compared to the F-15EX at $20,000 with 2 engines or the Gripen at $5,000.
Every dollar spent on the F-35 is one less dollar Canada will have to spend on other military needs. What we need is a platform for standoff missiles, that is capable of arctic patrols/intercepts for NORAD and enforcing peace resolutions agreed upon by UN or NATO. We need an interceptor capable of Mach 2 not a ground strike fighter. The F-35 is a money pit the Canadian taxpayers cannot afford.
This plane is already being cut back by DoD from 1,700 to just 1,000 planes because of high maintenance costs, poor performance, ongoing software issues and the list goes on and on. So if the Americans cannot afford it, maybe Canada should give it a pass.
One of the biggest problems with the F-35 is its lack of ability to carry any standoff missiles. Its internal bays can only carry 4 AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles or 4 smaller missiles. If it is willing to give up some of its stealth, it can carry one short range AIM-9x on each wingtip. Which is to say it cannot carry any long range standoff missiles such as the Meteor or future Hypersonic missiles. This alone is a big enough reason not to want this fighter.
The other main drawback is the F-35’s lack of modular software for updating its system. It is plagued with software problems and is slow to adapt to the pace of hardware that needs updating. Only United States can touch the code so all allied partners are stuck with what they got, unless it comes from the United States. This stops development of most hardware outside of USA.
image sources
- F-35_wiki: MSgt John Nimmo Sr. | Public Domain,