Sunday Times Article

[Bravo20]

Disbanding the Eastern Brigade and keeping the Southern and Western Brigades is based on the recommendations in the PriceWaterhouse report if deciding on a two brigade structure. Their concept was to have a task force based in Dublin under the direct command of GHQ

[DeV]

I read on the air corps facebook page that there is a fixed wing and helicopter crew on standby 365 days a year for air ambulance. This must be a new development

No has been that way for a few years.

So 2.3% of the DF budget but this part is only a tiny percentage of running the Air Corps. For example:

Thats only the start. The prob with the Air Corps is that most of its costs are dumped in with the full DF vote which makes it very hard for outsiders to see what is and isnt Air Corps specific but believe me, its a hell of a lot more then €17m

Correct but that figure does include equipment, fuel and maintenance

Is there still a fire crew in the curragh?

Yes and it works in co-operation with Kildare Fire Service.

Why not incorporate the helicopters and maybe the pc-9's into the army and outsource the base maintenance and maybe some of the basic flying training and start using them to properly support the army and start sending them abroad. The casa's could be incorporated into the navy and the same thing done with the base maintenance and basic flying training. Scrap the glorified taxi's for government. Outsource the air ambulance and set up a dedicated air ambulance service. If all this was done you would also save on pay because presumably there would be no need for the higher ranks of the air corps anymore.

In reality you would be decentralising the AC so you would have a wing in Cork and a wing in Knock. So what would be saved at senior level would go to private companies.

If they do get rid of a brigade will this mean fewer officers and an increase on general service recruits.

Don't know where you are getting an increase in recruits from?!

I really don't see how people are so surprised at this or sure that it's rubbish. The fact is that over years the AC tasks have diminished, not because the taskings don't exist but because the AC have been in some way or another been replaced as the provider. Considering that today's AC could have 95% of it's roles civilianised / cut it comes down purely to cost benefit analysis and I wouldn't want to be on the ACs accounting team. Nearly 800 personnel and approx 1/3 of the DF budget ( please correct if incorrect) for 20 odd aircraft, many of which arent even on out of hours call, and 6000 flight hours PA just doesnt stack up.

Ah but the loss of SAR meant that aircraft and hours were/are freed up to give support to the army (especially with the helicopters).

Don't know where you are getting 1/3 of the Defence budget from? Personnel wise they only make up around 10% of the DF!

is it?

really?

when you look around the world at All-Arms Bde's which are in combat you find formations that top 7,000 men - purely because the logistic and force protection footprint of 3 inf Bn's + support is no longer a total of 2500 as it was in WWII.

the harsh truth is that the fighting power of the IA is about one Bde in real world conditions, it therefore makes no sense to operate with a makey-uppy structure that would have to be binned as soon as those real world conditions materialised. far better to grip this reality and configure the force as 1 Bde + a training, logistic and administrative support group.

That is the peacetime establishment of a DF brigade (which of course was supposed to be increased by 800+ intergrated reservists. The thing to remember is that most Western countries are more heavy than light (which means even a "light" brigade will have a fair bit of armour and/or aircraft) which means that it needs more logs support (meaning more personnel).



Without AC aircraft how does the army going overseas prepare for overseas helicopter deployments and CASEVAC?

Without basic training, the State (not just the AC) would lose a lot of its armed aerial capability.... including very light air defence.

[hptmurphy]

You do realise that a brigade is between 2,000 and 3,000 personnel, not the 500 that Shatter has suggested?!

when you look around the world at All-Arms Bde's which are in combat you find formations that top 7,000 men - purely because the logistic and force protection footprint of 3 inf Bn's + support is no longer a total of 2500 as it was in WWII.

the harsh truth is that the fighting power of the IA is about one Bde in real world conditions, it therefore makes no sense to operate with a makey-uppy structure that would have to be binned as soon as those real world conditions materialised. far better to grip this reality and configure the force as 1 Bde + a training, logistic and administrative support group.

I'm working off ropebags figures on this one, far more reflective of where are in reality.

Basic , very basic example, we have 3 PDF Cav Squadrons who can only field one squadrons worth of vehicles at any one time, so why do we have the Command and support structures for 4 units including the Tank squadron which in itself can nly supply one troop of CVRTs.

Battalions at a push that could field two companys?


and 3 reserve brigades that in extreme circumstances could probably filed an understrenght Battalion each but again have C&S structures way above their needs.

[balkanhawk]

Basic , very basic example, we have 3 PDF Cav Squadrons who can only field one squadrons worth of vehicles at any one time, so why do we have the Command and support structures for 4 units including the Tank squadron which in itself can nly supply one troop of CVRTs.

Battalions at a push that could field two companys?


and 3 reserve brigades that in extreme circumstances could probably filed an understrenght Battalion each but again have C&S structures way above their needs.

The reason a military keeps a heavy top-end structure during peacetime is that in the event of an emergency the military can be beefed up relatively quickly with cannon fodder!!

The officers and NCOs are already there with the experience to get the recruits up to scratch. It takes a hell of a lot longer to train an officer and NCOs than it does to train a private.

[Helihead]

The reason a military keeps a heavy top-end structure during peacetime is that in the event of an emergency the military can be beefed up relatively quickly with cannon fodder!!

The officers and NCOs are already there with the experience to get the recruits up to scratch. It takes a hell of a lot longer to train an officer and NCOs than it does to train a private.

A bit of thread drift here. When exactly was the last time this country was at war? What kind of emergency here as you put it would need cannon fodder? Now back on subject.

[GoneToTheCanner]

Hi there
@Dev, freeing up heli asset use for genuine Army use has been a factor since before the loss of SAR, because Ralph James, former GOC, made it so. I was a subordinate of his once and I assure you that he could kick ass and take names. He did not abide the slacker culture in the Don and made it clear to all who served in his unit that anything but a first-class work ethic wasn't good enough.
As for manning levels, all militaries are essentially overmanned by direct comparison to civilian organisations. When the Don was 1100 or so strong, you could probably have cut a few hundred and still run the place. Organisations often use 20 or 30 percent of their manpower just to serve their own people, not to mind do their job.

personally, a lot of journalism about the DF is uninformed white noise but, conversely, the DF hates to be criticised, especially when it comes to percived waste and inefficiencies.

regards
GttC

[Pure Hover]

The AC have IMO always sought to do the best with the equipment they had or what was provided to them over the years. Yeah it would have been great to have real jets , Transport a/c, Medium Lift Helicopters etc etc but that never happened -the only MLH the AC had - the Puma was returned despite pleas from the DF at the time. The options to acquire MLH for SAR for example were repeatedly stalled and then cancelled and now the Gov't is locked into a massively exp. civil SAR option. There always been a firm commitment to military support, characterised, for example by major support to border IS ops over the years with the AIII fleet. The new fleet of helicopters were bought for mil sp ops and appear almost exclusively so whereas the DH fleet was bought for SAR operations - a gov't imposed role as well as all the other Gov't tasks the AC carries out. The CASA fleet were bought for Fisheries Protection (with European dosh) etc etc. It doesn't have any real say - cannot deploy overseas much as it might want to because of White Paper commitments and unlikely to do so with the DoD drive to grind the forces into the ground.
If there's less mil support going on maybe it's because there's less of an Army to support. But as for the Times article goes - load of boll**ks!

[RoyalGreenJacket]

cannot deploy overseas much as it might want to because of White Paper commitments and unlikely to do so with the DoD drive to grind the forces into the ground.

would be good if the military maybe refocussed their efforts and pushed harder for, and the government authorised - more missions to train other nations overseas - more stuff like they are doing in Uganda for example where it would be alot easier to get troops involved without being directly involved in conflict.

half of Africa still needs training - the Irish DF could pass on a lot of expertise in this field.

[Goldie fish]

Plus, our lack of imperialist Baggage would be an asset. (except in Indiarr obviously).

[danno]

This is about the IAC rather than the Army,as before countries can send personnel here for training ,however IAC does not have wherewithall to est units abroad.

[ropebag]

This is about the IAC rather than the Army,as before countries can send personnel here for training ,however IAC does not have wherewithall to est units abroad.

they do.

if they can maintain and fly a helicopter in Ireland they can maintain and fly a helicopter in Chad, or Liberia, or Lebanon. if they don't like long hours, or sand, or working weekends, or not being able to feck off after a shift to drive a taxi, then the state has two excellent methods of persuasion - Courts Martial and the dole. there are lots of applicants who would willingly do the job the satisfaction of the military rather than to the satisfaction of the representative organisations...

[hptmurphy]

The reason a military keeps a heavy top-end structure during peacetime is that in the event of an emergency the military can be beefed up relatively quickly with cannon fodder!!

The officers and NCOs are already there with the experience to get the recruits up to scratch. It takes a hell of a lot longer to train an officer and NCOs than it does to train a private.

I'm aware of the history behind it, but one 'Emergency' in 70 years dosen't warrant what we have now and if anything one training Battalion all arms could bring a properly formed reserve up to scratch in less time it takes to train recruits.

[Truck Driver]

Yes and it works in co-operation with Kildare Fire Service....

DFTC duty ambulance also is as a back up to the HSE

[DeV]

we have 3 PDF Cav Squadrons who can only field one squadrons worth of vehicles at any one time, so why do we have the Command and support structures for 4 units including the Tank squadron which in itself can nly supply one troop of CVRTs.

With the squadrons maybe the most modern/best equipped vehicles they have other ones. Tank Squadron has its full complement of vehicles!

Battalions at a push that could field two companys?

Which with the HQ and Support Coys is their establishment! With the reductions in authorised strength and recruitment/promotion cutbacks there has been an effect.

would be good if the military maybe refocussed their efforts and pushed harder for, and the government authorised - more missions to train other nations overseas - more stuff like they are doing in Uganda for example where it would be alot easier to get troops involved without being directly involved in conflict.

half of Africa still needs training - the Irish DF could pass on a lot of expertise in this field.

Government (and UN (were required)) authorised being the problem. We could send a few more personnel to Uganda. But it may be cost effective (and profit creating) for the DF to encourage more emerging democracys to send small numbers of personnel here for training.

After all the Cadet School trained 2 (or was it 3) classes of Ghanian cadets.

This is about the IAC rather than the Army,as before countries can send personnel here for training ,however IAC does not have wherewithall to est units abroad.

they do.

if they can maintain and fly a helicopter in Ireland they can maintain and fly a helicopter in Chad, or Liberia, or Lebanon. if they don't like long hours, or sand, or working weekends, or not being able to feck off after a shift to drive a taxi, then the state has two excellent methods of persuasion - Courts Martial and the dole. there are lots of applicants who would willingly do the job the satisfaction of the military rather than to the satisfaction of the representative organisations...

The problem being:
a) logs support - getting the aircraft there, securing a supply of sufficient spares etc
b) it requires a Government decision

[ropebag]

...The problem being:
a) logs support - getting the aircraft there, securing a supply of sufficient spares etc
b) it requires a Government decision

t yout

certainly - however, who here believes that the 'the AC' is creating/suggesting solutions to its current state instead of just hiding iunder the desk and hoping that no-one in government is going to ring up and say 'hey, you know those green helicopters we bought you...'?

i don't doubt that the taskings the IA and NS have undertaken in the recent past were the result of senior officers hassling the DOD every week with 'we can do this, we've can do that - there's a job, give it to us' and changing the way the DOD/Politicians saw those organisations and widening what those politicians believed they were capable of. during the Chad helicopter debacle, do you believe that the AC was saying 'get me a big plane, and i can have three AW139's operational in Chad in a week'?

no, i don't either.

the AC appears to be the only service which is not straining at its leash to go on bigger, harder exercises and operations - the evidence for which is that the other two services have been sent on progressively harder, more complex operations, and one has stayed at home. is it because we think that cabinet likes to take members of the AC home to use as pets for their children and therefore doesn't want them in dusty places a long way away, or is it that the AC gets left at home because its head-shead aren't constantly pestering ministers to undertake operational tasks?

the real issues are around logistics and the supply chain - well, everyone else manages to put military helicopters on civil hire aircraft, and there will have been parts deliveries for every other peice of irish equipment in Chad, so whats the difference between a pitot tube for a helicopter and a motor for a UAV?