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

[Oldgateboatdriver]

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.

 

[suffolkowner]

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.

theres some numbers in that thread for the RCN too. Time will tell if the numbers for the F-35 (+4300) and River's (+1400 for 3 ships) are reasonable?

 

[dimsum]

theres some numbers in that thread for the RCN too. Time will tell if the numbers for the F-35 (+4300) and River's (+1400 for 3 ships) are reasonable?

I think @Oldgateboatdriver was referring to the support pers for Naval Air rather than the RCN.

But from Wiki, it looks like the number of fighter aircraft per Carrier Air Wing has decreased. I don’t think the number of pers on that carrier has decreased.

Carrier air wing - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Quirky]

4300 personnel for f-35

Most of which will go to the manning and moral killer of cold lake Alberta. I wish them luck.

 

[suffolkowner]

Most of which will go to the manning and moral killer of cold lake Alberta. I wish them luck.

yeah 4300 extra people if you believe the numbers. 52/88 or 2500/4300

 

[KevinB]

I find those numbers to be highly suspect. Furthermore in the USAF the support trades aren’t as broadly trained. Generally across the CAF the positions are occupied by less personnel than would be standard for US Mil positions.

 

[Good2Golf]

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.

Policy Hawk did…….and PBO……

I find those numbers to be highly suspect. Furthermore in the USAF the support trades aren’t as broadly trained. Generally across the CAF the positions are occupied by less personnel than would be standard for US Mil positions.

Yup. RCAF does not have a CF-18 jacking tech jack the plane so an CF-18 wheel tech can remove the wheel for a CF-18 brake tech to then fix the brakes and they all sequentially reverse their individual task…

 

[suffolkowner]

I find those numbers to be highly suspect. Furthermore in the USAF the support trades aren’t as broadly trained. Generally across the CAF the positions are occupied by less personnel than would be standard for US Mil positions.

as do I.

49 extra personnel per F35 over the F18 or 81 using straight USAF numbers?

for the ships

467 extra personnel per River or 778 using straight US numbers

That just seems like a huge amount. I know we are understaffed and that the Leo2's use up a lot more man hours than the Leo1's (10x?) but still

 

[markppcli]

some interesting tidbits

36 for Bagotville and
52 for Cold Lake

https://twitter.com/x/status/1823101325388677144

"The new 7,400 m2 QRA facility at CFB Bagotville will include aircraft hangar bays, office space and sleeping quarters for personnel, and a 17,000 m2 secure fenced compound surrounding the facility. Once completed, it will help CAF personnel support Canada and the NORAD mission and quickly respond to any threats in North American airspace."

pretty big in addition to the standard building

Construction begins on new $131 million Air Force Expeditionary Capability facility at Canadian Forces Base Bagotville - Canada.ca

"The main building in the new facility will measure approximately 15,000 m², which is roughly three football fields in size. Additional exterior space double the size will be reserved as part of the fenced compound for use as personnel parking, exterior storage, and staging space for deployments."

https://twitter.com/x/status/1822818561422749960

anyone have a feel for the personnel requirements stated here?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1822818568402026778

Oh god damn it the Gripen crew is all over an commented, I’ll have to leave for a week.

 

[dapaterson]

There are increased support demands for more technically advanced platforms. To say nothing of the increase in demand for network management and for intelligence work because of the sensor data.

 

[Good2Golf]

There are increased support demands for more technically advanced platforms. To say nothing of the increase in demand for network management and for intelligence work because of the sensor data.

You’re pushing for just more Army PRes, aren’t you? Then we just have to buy a few thousand more toques and gloves for them…

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Most of which will go to the manning and moral killer of cold lake Alberta. I wish them luck.

Are you saying people posted to Cold Lake become less moral over time?