Canada’s F-35 Procurement Is Moving Forward
While a review of the 2023 decision to procure 88 F-35A Lockheed Martin-produced fighter jets to replace the Royal Canadian Air Force’s (RCAF) obsolescent fleet of Boeing CF-18 jets, all signals point to the $27.7 billion1 procurement continuing as planned. On February 10, 2026 the CBC reported that according to a source, speaking conditional on anonymity, the government has begun making payments towards the acquisition of an additional 14 F-35A jets to the 16 jets that are already on order; despite Minister of Defence David McGuinty stating that additional purchases were “still under review” at the end of January. The report signals a potential close to a year-long saga, from when Prime Minister Mark Carney first requested a review of the purchase in March of 2025 amid a “rupture” in American-Canadian relations defining the Carney government’s foreign policy posture.
Why Fighter Procurement Has Become a Sovereignty Debate
Carney’s May 21, 2025 “Mandate Letter” contains a notable statement of intent that inspired the debate that has ensued since procurement was placed under review: “We must redefine Canada’s international, commercial, and security relationships. In the process, we need to develop a defence industrial policy that secures Canada, fulfills our responsibilities to our allies, and helps build our economy.” He went on to list the following as his government’s first priority: “Establishing a new economic and security relationship with the United States and strengthening our collaboration with reliable trading partners and allies around the world.” The context of these statements is of course, American President Donald Trump’s widely publicized provocative statements made towards Carney, referring to him as “Governor” of a Canada labelled “the 51st state”, and other NATO allies, particularly Denmark threatening on multiple occasions to “acquire” its Greenland territory. Trump’s anti-free trade tariff policies (including US-Canada trade disputes), suspension of new military aid to Ukraine, and demanding that NATO allies spend 5% of GDP on defence have contributed to declining trust in US security commitments among Canadians and other allies. Carney explicitly stated a month after his letter: “We should no longer send three-quarters of our defence capital spending to America.”
Saab’s Gripen E: The Only Serious Alternative Considered
Enter Swedish defence manufacturer Saab with its updated Gripen E fighter jet, the only other 2021 finalist in the Department of National Defence’s (DND) Future Fighter Capability Project (FFCP) that selected the F-35A. Saab and the Swedish government collaborated on a campaign to sell the Canadian government on a proposal to assemble the Gripen E in Canada if a purchase of 72 jets was made. The campaign included a visit by the Swedish royal family to Ottawa and a promise of 12,600 jobs.
It took well advantage of Canadian-American tensions: a poll by Ekos suggested 72% of Canadians were in favour of making a Gripen purchase. Also, the new Canada-EU Security and Defence Partnership is aimed at increasing interoperability and supply-chain integration with Canada and its European NATO allies. Saab has already integrated with Canadian supply-chains through its GlobalEye Airborne Early Warning & Control (AEW&C) system based on Bombardier’s Global 6000/6500 aircraft.
Why the Royal Canadian Air Force Still Prefers the F-35
However, the RCAF has been clear that, according to its standards and testing, the Gripen E is an inferior aircraft to the F-35A . Not only did the F-35A beat the Gripen in 2021, it dominated the FFCP across all categories, earning a total rated score of 95% to the Gripen’s 33%. Immediately following the initial announcement of procurement review, a dozen former high-ranking RCAF officers sent a letter to the Prime Minister defending the F-35A as the best choice for Canada. The defence did not only come from Canadians, US Ambassador to Canada, Pete Hoekstra, was quick to label the Gripen “inferior” and suggested that if Canada were not to procure the full order of 88 F-35As, it would affect Canada’s role in the binational North American Aerospace and Defense Command (NORAD). He alluded that it might force the US to order more F-35As and take on more responsibility defending North America’s northern aerospace.
In the government’s Our North, Strong and Free national defence policy, 88 F-35As are presented as the premier equipment investment into the RCAF to enable it to meet the increasing demands of defending Canada’s arctic airspace and maintain interoperability with the USAF under NORAD. Industry is also a key stakeholder: Canada has participated in the global F-35 development program since 2002, and while Lockheed Martin assembles all of the jets in the US, each one contains $3.2 million worth of Canadian components. 30 Canadian companies are current contractors in the program, and in total 110 companies from across Canada have been contracted by Lockheed Martin during development and production of the F-35. That amounts to ~2,000 jobs currently and $13.9 billion in total economic benefits to the Canadian economy.
Interoperability with NORAD and NATO
In fairness to Saab, they have emphasized that the Gripen does meet Canada’s necessary interoperability requirements with NORAD and NATO because these were assessed during the FCCP prior to the final round in which it competed with the F-35A. Currently, Gripens and F-35s are proving mission interoperable capability in the Arctic theatre as Swedish Air Force Gripens and Danish Air Force F-35s are carrying out a joint NATO air defence rotation in Iceland. Their interoperability relies upon the American-owned Link-16 terminal that enables the aircraft to share data and communicate with each other. So, while the Gripen is not an American aircraft, Canadian Gripens would still be subject to American approval of Link-16 installation and data sharing.
The most recent developments in Canada’s F-35A program include two multi-million dollar contracts to build dedicated F-35A sustainment infrastructure at CFB Cold Lake Alberta and CFB Bagotville Quebec, and the arrival of RCAF personnel at the Australia, Canada, United Kingdom Reprogramming Laboratory (ACURL) at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida where they will co-develop mission data files for all three air force’s F-35 fleets. Saab has offered full-sovereign control of the mission data system on Canadian soil as part of its Gripen pitch, and partnered with Canadian industry for production and sustainment: IMP Aerospace and Defence (assembly and service support), CAE (training), Arcfield (avionics), and GE Aviation (engines).
Gripen E vs. F-35A: Availability, Arctic Performance, and Combat Design
The question leftover is what could Canada gain from a potential mixed fleet of Gripen E’s and F-35As? While the RCAF’s current serviceability rate is an estimated 40%, Canada’s Defence Industrial Strategy sets an ambitious future target of an 85% serviceability rate for aerospace assets. The US Congressional Budget Office (CBO) reports the mission availability rate of the USAF F-35A fleet has been 50-60% since 2015. Comparable numbers for the Gripen are reported to be 80-90%. The Gripen was designed with efficiency as a priority[PDF]: it can operate in extreme environments (the Arctic included) using unprepared roadways as airstrips if necessary and can be re-fueled and re-armed in ~15 minutes with a small ground crew. Canada’s F-35As will incorporate a drag chute to enable extreme environment operations but cannot compete on ease of maintenance. The cost per flight hour of the Gripen E is a reported $22,174 USD [PDF], compared to ~$47,000 USD for the F-35A. The CBO also notes that the USAF’s F-35As have on average flown 40-50% less flight hours compared to non-stealthy fighter aircraft of the same age. That is an important distinction between the F-35A and Gripen E: the F-35 is built with stealth technology that includes specialized shapes, an internal weapons bay, and a radar-reflective coating all designed to reduce its visibility on enemy radar sensors. Saab instead has integrated advanced electronic warfare (EW) offensive and defensive capabilities into the Gripen E as an alternative to stealth design. But again, the F-35 also integrates equivalent capabilities into its own avionics.
The availability and efficiency of the Gripen E should be attractive to a RCAF that is being asked by DND to meet an 85% serviceability requirement and increasingly operate in Canada’s Arctic airspace. Additionally, the offer from Saab to assemble the jet in Canada aligns with the government’s stated objectives to reduce its concentrated defence spending on American-owned products, while increasing its supply-chain integration with European NATO allies, and creating jobs for Canadians in the defense industry. The likely reason that the RCAF and DND are hesitant to commit to a mixed fleet of F-35As and Gripen Es comes down to the added operational costs of an additional aircraft system. Even if the Gripen is rugged enough to operate almost anywhere, it will still require its own training program for both pilots and maintenance technicians, and its own sustainment contracts for replaceable parts and munitions.
Could Canada Operate a Mixed Fleet of F-35s and Gripens?
Canada has now committed to at least 30 F-35A’s; based on the Parliamentary Budget Office’s estimated total lifetime cost of $56.5 billion for 88 jets (excluding infrastructure support and disposal costs), 30 should cost only $19.26 billion. Saab claims the Gripen E’s total lifetime cost [PDF] per jet is $323.6 million, so 72 jets should have a total cost of $23.3 billion. Meaning, a mixed fleet’s estimated total lifetime cost is $19.26 (30×F-35As) + $23.3 (72×Gripen Es) = $42.56 billion, a savings of $13.94 billion compared to a full fleet of 88 F-35As [all values 2023 CAD]. What the DND is likely still reviewing, is whether the potential increased flight hours, economic benefits, and diversification of relationships offered by the Gripen are worth the likely significant added costs of infrastructure support excluded from this cost analysis, and sacrificing procurement of at most 58 F-35A jets that the RCAF considers the superior system.
Lessons from the United Kingdom’s Mixed Fighter Fleet
To understand what challenges the RCAF might encounter when operating a mixed fleet of F-35s and Gripens, a good case study is offered by the UK’s Royal Air Force (RAF) that currently operates a mixed fleet of 37 F-35s and 107 Eurofighter Typhoons (a non-stealth European fighter). First, a small stealth fleet can be a decisive sensor-and-strike multiplier in principle, but only if it is sufficiently numerous and sustainably available. Limited F-35 numbers combined with maintenance, parts, and personnel shortfalls have reduced mission availability rates and constrained how often the RAF’s F-35s can lead high-risk air-dominance missions. Second, the F-35’s current weapons suite is skewed toward US-standard ordnance while Typhoons (and the Gripen) rely on European munitions – a mismatch that creates supply-chain complexity across two different sustainment systems. For Canada, the UK’s recent experience is a cautionary tale of challenges a potential 30×F-35A and 72×Gripen E mixed fleet might face.
However, if the DND believes that Canada will need to defend its airspace in the Arctic with increased flight hours from the RCAF, and more sovereign control and domestic defence-industrial-base growth is a top priority, a mixed fleet based on Saab’s offer is the only option available.
