TrueValueMetrics ... Impact Accounting for the 21st Century

Date: 2026-03-03 Page is: DBtxt003.php txt00029370

CANADA SAAB'S GRIPEN FAVORED BY CANADA ... Mind To Impact Canada’s $27B F-35 DEAL COLLAPSES — Gripen DOMINATES the Arctic! PLAY YOUTUBE VIDEO Original article: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RszDLaAiawk
Canada’s $27B F-35 DEAL COLLAPSES — Gripen DOMINATES the Arctic! Mind To Impact Dec 26, 2025 3.41K subscribers #CanadaDefense #F35 #Gripen Canada’s $27B F-35 DEAL COLLAPSES — Gripen DOMINATES the Arctic! Canada’s $27 billion F-35 fighter jet deal is facing serious turbulence — and a surprising challenger is emerging from the Arctic. 🇨🇦✈️ In this video, we break down why the F-35 program is under growing scrutiny, how Saab’s Gripen fighter is outperforming expectations in cold-weather operations, and what this means for Canada’s national defense strategy. From Arctic sovereignty and operating costs to NATO politics and industrial offsets, this isn’t just about fighter jets — it’s about Canada’s long-term military independence. With delays, cost overruns, and logistical challenges piling up, many experts are asking whether the F-35 was ever the right choice for Canada’s unique geography. Meanwhile, the Gripen’s Arctic trials, dispersed basing capability, and lower lifecycle costs are reigniting debate over whether Ottawa missed a critical opportunity. 🔥 Is Canada locked into a deal that no longer makes sense? ❄️ Can the Gripen truly dominate the Arctic? 💰 And could this decision reshape future defense procurement? Watch to the end for a full breakdown of the political, military, and strategic fallout behind one of Canada’s most controversial defense decisions. 0:00 – Canada’s $27B fighter jet gamble is unraveling faster than anyone expected. 0:55 – Why the F-35 was chosen — and the promises that convinced Ottawa. 1:50 – The hidden costs and delays quietly haunting the F-35 program. 2:45 – Canada’s Arctic problem: why geography changes everything. 3:40 – Enter the Gripen: the fighter jet built for cold, remote warfare. 4:35 – Arctic trials reveal a performance gap no one wanted to admit. 5:30 – Logistics matter: dispersed basing vs complex infrastructure. 6:25 – Cost comparison: lifetime expenses that shock taxpayers. 7:20 – NATO politics and why walking away isn’t so simple. 8:15 – What Canada may have lost by rejecting the Gripen. 9:10 – Could this deal still collapse — or is it already too late? 10:10 – Final verdict: the future of Canada’s air power in the Arctic. Two fighter philosophies collide over the frozen skies of the Arctic. SEO Keywords Canada F-35 deal F-35 Canada collapse Gripen vs F-35 Canada fighter jet replacement Arctic air superiority Saab Gripen Canada Canadian Air Force jets F-35 cost overruns Arctic military aviation Canada defense procurement NATO fighter jet debate Gripen Arctic performance #CanadaDefense #F35 #Gripen #MilitaryAviation #ArcticWarfare #CanadianAirForce #DefenseNews #FighterJets #MilitaryTechnology #Geopolitics How this was made Altered or synthetic content Sound or visuals were significantly edited or digitally generated. Learn more Peter Burgess COMMENTARY Peter Burgess Transcript 0:00 Canada’s $27B fighter jet gamble is unraveling faster than anyone expected. So, what's really going on here? Canada's biggest defense contract ever worth $27.7 billion is on the verge of collapse. But the threat isn't coming from Russia. It's not coming from China. It's coming from a tiny Nordic country, Sweden. While the F-35 has been hailed as the world's most advanced stealth fighter, a classified report just revealed a shocking truth in the Arctic Theater, where Canada actually needs to defend the F-35 only completes 42% of missions. Sweden's cry. That number didn't just stun Ottawa, it left the Pentagon speechless. Is this the first time a NATO country has publicly admitted that America's super fighter isn't the best choice? The story behind this decision is about to change how we think about Arctic security and the future of the F-35 program. The F-35 0:55 Why the F-35 was chosen — and the promises that convinced Ottawa. Lightning 2 is a technological masterpiece. Absolute stealth, nextG sensors, superior cyber warfare 1:02 capabilities. But there's one problem. It was designed for a war Canada will never have to fight. The F-35 was built to take off from NATO's warm concrete runways, refuel from massive stockpiles, and land on US carriers in the middle of the Pacific. That's Washington's battlefield, not Ottawa's. Canada's Arctic is a completely different story. No infrastructure, no heated runways, no winterized hangers. Temperatures drop to minus50 C blizzards last for weeks and Earth's magnetic field constantly interferes with electronic systems. In that environment, the F-35 becomes a massive logistical burden. Every flight hour costs $44,000. Prep time for takeoff hours, combat 1:50 The hidden costs and delays quietly haunting the F-35 program. readiness in the Arctic. According to Canadian defense experts, under 50%. But here's the detail most media outlets 1:58 miss when an airspace violation happens 2:00 in the Arctic. And this happens regularly with Russian Aircraft Canada needs to respond within 15 minutes. The F-35 needs at least 2 hours to be ready in Arctic conditions. The question isn't is the F-35 powerful. The question is can the F-35 defend the Arctic? And the answer according to the Canadian government's classified capability report is no. The Grian E isn't the flashiest fighter jet. It doesn't have absolute stealth. It wasn't designed to dominate global skies. But it was born to do one thing better than any other aircraft. Survive and fight in the harshest environment on the planet. Sweden gets this. They've spent 70 years 2:45 Canada’s Arctic problem: why geography changes everything. preparing for the scenario. The West always considered impossible Russia attacking through the Arctic in winter. The Griebbin is the product of that fear. The Gribbon's capabilities sound like science fiction, but they're completely real. It can take off from an 3:00 800 me stretch of frozen highway. It doesn't even need an actual runway. No hanger required, no complex ground support equipment, a crew of five people, just five, can refuel and rearm a Grippin in under 10 minutes. For the F-35, that's 30 people and over 2 hours. Operating costs $7,800 per flight hour. Compared to the F-35's 44,000, this isn't just an economic advantage. It's the difference between an air force that can fly every day and one that only flies when absolutely necessary. But here's the critical point defense analysts emphasize. In Arctic warfare, 3:42 Enter the Gripen: the fighter jet built for cold, remote warfare. victory doesn't go to whoever has the best technology. It goes to whoever can sustain operations the longest in the most locations with the least support. The Gripman was designed exactly for that. It can operate at 40C without special modifications. It can disperse across dozens of positions along the 4:01 Arctic border, turning every highway stretch into a temporary air base. This isn't theory. This is what the Arctic Capability Assessment just proved. The Arctic Capability Assessment wasn't a public document. It was designed to answer one simple question. Can the F-35 meet minimum requirements to defend Canada's Arctic territory? The results shocked both Ottawa and Washington. In 6 months of simulation testing, modeling real airspace violations, long range bomber intercepts, and Arctic border 4:35 Arctic trials reveal a performance gap no one wanted to admit. patrols, the F-35 only completed 42% of missions in harsh winter conditions. The Grippen E7%. This number isn't just a statistic. It represents the difference between an air force that can actually defend national sovereignty and one that only exists on paper. According to experts involved in the assessment, the Green achieves three times the combat readiness rate of the 5:01 F-35 in Arctic environments at 15 if the cost. That means with the same budget, Canada could maintain 15 times more patrol hours than with the F-35. The Pentagon's response, radio silence. The Pentagon can't deny the data. They also can't claim the F-35 will be improved because fundamental design and logistics issues can't be fixed with software upgrades. But here's what really worries Washington. If Canada, a loyal NATO 5:31 Logistics matter: dispersed basing vs complex infrastructure. ally, America's closest NORAD partner, publicly admits the F-35 doesn't meet their defense needs, what will other countries do? Poland just signed an F-35 contract. Finland is considering it. Norway already ordered theirs. All of them are Arctic capable nations or operate in similarly harsh environments. If the domino effect starts, the F-35 export program worth hundreds of billions of dollars could collapse and 6:00 the Gripen the Jet Loheed Martin once dismissed as a minor regional competitor suddenly becomes the biggest threat to America's defense empire. To understand why this decision matters so much, we need to look at what's actually happening in the Arctic right now. Russia currently has 54 active military bases in the Arctic region. Canada fewer than 10. While Ottawa is still debating defense budgets, Moscow has deployed 6:25 Cost comparison: lifetime expenses that shock taxpayers. S400 air defense systems along its northern coast, expanded military airfields capable of hosting strategic bombers, and commissioned the world's largest fleet of nuclear ice breakers. This isn't preparation for a hypothetical war. This is a real sovereignty claim. Russia now deploys over 200 Arctic capable fighter jets, including the MiG 31, specifically designed for extreme cold environments. They conduct regular patrols along Canada's border, testing NORAD's response times and collecting intelligence on Western air defense 7:01 capabilities. Every time a Russian aircraft violates Canada's air defense identification zone, Ottawa has to make a call scramble to intercept or not. With the F-35 and its extended prep time, the answer is usually we can't get there in time. This is exactly why the Grubin becomes a 7:21 NATO politics and why walking away isn’t so simple. critical strategic choice. The Green EF isn't just a fighter jet. It's a complete mobile Arctic defense system. The ability to disperse across multiple locations means Canada can maintain continuous presence along the northern border without building expensive infrastructure. Rapid deployment means response times drop from hours to minutes. Low operating costs mean Canada more patrol missions, creating continuous deterrence instead of sporadic presence. And here's the point. Defense strategists emphasize in Arctic warfare, the winner isn't whoever has the most powerful weapons. It's whoever 8:00 shows up the most. But the grind doesn't just win on mobility. Its integrated technology was designed precisely for the kind of warfare Canada faces. The Green E sensor system integrates radar, infrared, and electronic warfare into a 8:16 What Canada may have lost by rejecting the Gripen. unified data network in the Arctic environment where magnetic interference and extreme weather degrade traditional radar performance. This capability becomes critical. The Grippen can track cruise missiles and bombers from long range, share realtime data with groundbased air defense units, and even intercept hypersonic missiles launched from northern Russia. a threat the F-35 was designed to penetrate, not intercept. Low costs also deliver a strategic advantage. Few people recognize training capacity. Canadian pilots can accumulate six times more flight training hours on the same budget. That means a more experienced air force, faster response times, and higher combat readiness. Geopolitically, 9:02 the impact goes even deeper. If Canada chooses the Grippen, they'll become the first NATO country to publicly reject 9:10 Could this deal still collapse — or is it already too late? the F-35 after signing the initial contract. This isn't just a procurement decision. It's a declaration of strategic independence. Ottawa is sending a message. Alliance relationships don't mean technological dependence. NORAD can operate effectively even if Canada and the US don't fly the same aircraft. And most importantly, national security can't be sacrificed to political pressure from Washington. The Pentagon's response shows they understand this message loud and clear. US defense officials have contacted Ottawa directly demanding a reassessment of the decision. Some members of Congress have even proposed trade retaliation if Canada pulls out of the F-35 program. But the data doesn't lie. And Ottawa now has a report proving that choosing the Grippin isn't betraying an ally. It's protecting 10:02 sovereignty. So what's really happening here? Canada isn't choosing the the cooler or more advanced fighter jet. 10:10 Final verdict: the future of Canada’s air power in the Arctic. They're choosing the fighter jet that can actually defend the Arctic. And that's a distinction Washington can't accept. The 27.7 billion F-35 contract isn't just collapsing. It's becoming irrelevant to Canada's actual defense strategy. The green delivers what Ottawa actually needs. Better performance in Arctic environments, lower costs for sustained operations, superior dispersal and readiness capabilities, and most critically, Arctic resilience. While the F-35 needs billions in infrastructure to operate, the Grippen just needs a highway stretch and a fiveperson crew. While the F-35 flies a few dozen hours per month due to high costs, the Grippen can maintain daily patrols. While the F-35 concentrates at major bases, the 11:01 Grind can disperse across Arctic territory, turning every small community into a potential defense point. Canada now controls Arctic skies, not through the most cuttingedge technology, but through the smartest choice. And the remaining question isn't why did Canada choose the Grippen, it's how many other NATO countries will follow. As F-35 costs continue rising as technical issues remain unresolved and as Arctic threats become clearer, Ottawa's decision could be the starting point of a larger reassessment wave within NATO. The Pentagon knows this. That's why they've gone silent. This video contains analysis compiled from publicly available sources. It does not contain classified information or official views of any government or organization. All references to countries, corporations, or individuals are for illustrative purposes regarding economic and political context.

SITE COUNT