You must log in or # to comment.
Only 40% of F-35 planes are currently operational during non war times.
Now imagine how difficult it would be to keep this in the air during war when US keeps the parts for their own planes.
Now even further, imagine a world when the US is either a neutral party or an enemy, and zero of those planes are flying.
Can’t believe 12% chose North Korea
This is the way! Not as technologically advanced as the F-35, but much better than a switched-off F-35 anyway.
Of course they do. They don’t want to be the 51st state of the USA. Chances of that becoming true increase the more they have planes that can be disabled remotely by the imperialistic Trump war machine.
I’m kinda shocked people have strong opinions on fighter planes of all things. I barely know those two models of plane exist. I would answer “don’t know”.
Do you know that the aircraft need servicing after every flight, otherwise it’s grounded, and that supplies would come from the country of origin? US for F35. Sweden for Grippen.
Does that change your outlook?
I guess, but I still wouldn’t feel qualified enough to offer a confident answer. There are lots of factors.
Big investments like this are often very politicized-even before Trump and all-because it’s to a large degree just geopolitics. Gripen is in all likelihood the better alternative, but F35 has been considered an excellent choice for countries wishing to suck up to America. Until recently sucking up to America was considered good defense policy among parts of the political spectrum.
The question isn’t as much “Which of the two fighter jets are better suited for service” as it is “Do you want our military to be dependent on the US military-industrial complex or on the European?”
The question was not only about the fighter jets themself. The participants got the necessary information in the question, see the caption in the graphics.
Come on mate. Elbows up
Someone hasn’t been paying attention.
