this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2025
72 points (100.0% liked)

World News

840 readers
515 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be a decent person
  2. No spam
  3. Add the byline, or write a line or two in the body about the article.

Other communities of interest:

founded 5 months ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
72
Canada reconsidering F-35 purchase amid tensions with Washington, says minister (www.cbc.ca)
submitted 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) by Timbits to c/[email protected]
12 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Canada is actively looking at potential alternatives to the U.S-built F-35 stealth fighter and will hold conversations with rival aircraft makers, Defence Minister Bill Blair said late Friday, just hours after being reappointed to the post as part of Prime Minister Mark Carney's new cabinet.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] PerogiBoi 6 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Americans will activate the kill switch on F-35s, along with all of their allies. US technology should not be trusted.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (2 children)

According to the subject experts I've heard on French news, there is no kill switch to immediately lock the engines or weapons. But, they can lock the software maintenance that is required at least one month and the flight planning software because both are centralized in the US, effectively crippling the planes.

Edit: detailed article https://theaviationist.com/2025/03/10/f-35-kill-switch-myth/

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 days ago (2 children)

So instead of some cartoonish “kill switch” that instantly bricks the plane, the U.S. can simply stop updating and supporting them… and the only thing stopping them from doing so is words on paper.

If I was Canada, I’d go for the Gripen.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 days ago

I don't think America withdrawing support would actually "turn off" the planes.

Switzerland general guy was saying that manufacturing parts and updates and so on is done in partnership, with many countries sharing the responsibility.

That makes complete sense when you think about it. If your country is paying billions to some american company, firstly you don't want them to be able to turn you off any time, and secondly you want some local manufacturing to improve your own economy and train your own people.

Any reporting I've read says the US withdrawing support would be painful but wouldn't ground fleets.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago

the only thing stopping them from doing so is words on paper.

I mean, ultimately, that's all that any contract is.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 days ago

Also, even if both were offloaded, maintenance requires a long supply chain leading to the US. (Which is fine and dandy if you are the US—after all, the US military’s world-spanning logistics, which in peacetime can famously keep troops in the farthest corners of the world supplied with the comforts of home, is a marvel—though not so good if you’re an ally with any doubts about your standing with the US.) Now that the US’s reliability as a partner is in question, so is the safety of relying on such an arrangement.