Procurement lifecycle-cost verification & benchmarking platform

It’s official: I support the Gripen for Canada. It will be hilarious. They’ll get stuck w/ it for 30 years, practicing getting shot down & avoiding any airspace that might have basic, modern air defenses, let alone future tech. It will unify NATO in laughter, then Canada will find out Saab lied (like they did on the first competition, where they were disqualified for submitting falsified lifecycle costs & the F-35 won). Maybe they can have an exchange program w/ Brazil, where production of the Gripen only actually resulted in 200 or so jobs. I honestly don’t care if they buy the F-35 or not. I’m not pushing for that…I’d like to see Canada have an Air Force that will be able to adapt to new threats over the lifecycle of whatever jet they choose, but it really doesn’t affect me. If they want to cut off their nose, I say do it in style. Give us all a laugh! It will be historic & in 15–20 years, it will still be funny when Canada shows up to Red Flag in Gripens, asking the rest of NATO to “pretend your radars are broken, you’re out of missiles (presumably used them all on Gripens), your VUL replacements haven’t arrived, the AWACS somehow didn’t see us to direct an intercept & we surprise you with a merge. Pretty please? We really need this!” Team Gripen! It’s cheaper (except that’s not actually clear & Saab got caught fabricating that data once before, but otherwise, definitely) and will produce a lot of jobs (except it didn’t in Brazil).

@MCCCANM If only they had gone with something useful, like F-16’s.