• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)

Can someone explain to me why the Air Forces always seem to need more personnel to support the "next" generation of fighter aircraft, while the Navies and Marines who fly next gen jets are capable of doing so with just about the same number of support personnel? I mean, the USN and the Marines don't seem to need more people on the aircraft carriers or the amphibs to support he F-35 B's and F-35 C's when replacing the Harriers AV-8B's or the F-18E/F's.
Contractors, contractors, contractors the US uses lots of them for shop maintenance.
 
Contractors, contractors, contractors the US uses lots of them for shop maintenance.
Those aren't actually calculated in that number, as the USAF isn't as addicted to the contract support as the Army, USMC or USN.
When you look at the numbers I pulled from CBO, the indirect PY are your support infrastructure for maintenance etc.
The Squadron size is 353 which is the Pilots, direct maintenance, Operations etc.
The 1,287 is Indirect - which will mean 2nd and 3rd line maintenance, shares of fueling, tankers and other USAF assets to assist in the direct mission, USAF Security Forces for the home base etc.
Overhead is where it gets weird, as there will be a portion of USAF Security Forces for deployed operations, C-17 support for movement, the pay, contracting etc folks who keep the DoD moving etc.

Also when you add up Indirect and Overhead from CBO you will see that there is some tomfoolery in a way, as some units get double counted as they have their own direct unit that is accounted for - but that unit is also used for Indirect and Overhead - to wit, when I started adding PY up I got 207% of the USAF authorized PY :unsure: (which I would assume is explained somewhere else as to why that is but...)
 
I would have thought that, in this day and age, we would start to build QRA facilities out of concrete and steel. Maybe partially underground. But what do I know…

does it say that somewhere? I missed that. I would think it would be steel framed for sure. 7500m2 and 15000m2 are big buildings. I wonder whats in store for Cold Lake?
 
I would have thought that, in this day and age, we would start to build QRA facilities out of concrete and steel. Maybe partially underground. But what do I know…

does it say that somewhere? I missed that. I would think it would be steel framed for sure. 7500m2 and 15000m2 are big buildings. I wonder whats in store for Cold Lake?
They’re not that large, TBH.

For comparison, here’s a 50,000m2 hangar at another base…3.5x larger than the largest F-35 facility mentioned.
IMG_4787.jpeg
 
I would have thought that, in this day and age, we would start to build QRA facilities out of concrete and steel. Maybe partially underground. But what do I know…

does it say that somewhere? I missed that. I would think it would be steel framed for sure. 7500m2 and 15000m2 are big buildings. I wonder whats in store for Cold Lake?
Just a guess but if an adversary can precision strike that deep into our territory, losing a hangar is the least of our problems. Construction a shed sufficient to withstand the yield of aforementioned long range strike might be a challenge. The NORAD 'hole' in North Bay was reportedly designed to take a 4 megaton hit - but its 600' underground.
 
Just a guess but if an adversary can precision strike that deep into our territory, losing a hangar is the least of our problems. Construction a shed sufficient to withstand the yield of aforementioned long range strike might be a challenge. The NORAD 'hole' in North Bay was reportedly designed to take a 4 megaton hit - but its 600' underground.
Fortunately Russia and Precision Strike don’t go together.
 
If a QRA facility is struck with aircraft and crews in it, it's incentive for the next crews up to be a bit Qer.
 
Alberta, versus other provinces…
Nah. The Bagotville QRA is its own project that was started before FFCP was approved. The Cold Lake QRA is part of FFCP or DCFI (can’t remember which). The way Fighter infrastructure is organized at the project level is pretty confusing. The Fighter Squadron Facility (which will house the Squadrons, the Operational Support Squadrons and the Air Maintenance Squadrons) are part of FFCP. The Hangarettes which will house the aircraft themselves are part of DCFI.
 
Last edited:
Nah. The Bagotville QRA is own project that was started before FFCP was approved. The Cold Lake QRA is part of FFCP or DCFI (can’t remember which). The way Fighter infrastructure is organized at the project level is pretty confusing. The Fighter Squadron Facility (which will house the Squadrons, the Operational Support Squadrons and the Air Maintenance Squadrons) are part of FFCP. The Hangarettes which will house the aircraft themselves are part of DCFI.
DCFI. There's money from multiple sources floating around - the good news is that the reinvestment into necessary infra to support the fighter fleet domestically is happening.
 
They’re not that large, TBH.

For comparison, here’s a 50,000m2 hangar at another base…3.5x larger than the largest F-35 facility mentioned.
View attachment 87229
15,000 sq meters does not include all the hangarettes that will house the F-35s and where minor maintenance will be conducted. That’s just offices, sims and some specialized maintenance bays. When you include hangarettes, it goes up to 60,000 sq meters or so.
 
Last edited:
15,000 sq meters does not include all the hangarettes that will house the F-35s and where minor maintenance will be conducted. That’s just offices, sims and some specialized maintenance bays. When you include hangarettes, it goes up to 60,000 sq meters or so.
But not a single hangar…
 
Back
Top