Thanks Thanks:  116
Likes Likes:  268
Dislikes Dislikes:  4
Page 7 of 10 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 175 of 246

Thread: Pilatus PC-9M

  1. #151
    Space Lord of Terra morpheus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Metropolis
    Posts
    3,132
    Post Thanks / Like
    Invest in multi role aircraft which have a decent lift capability and not just 2 examples
    invest in military helis and not just 4 or 5
    FFS cop on and sign up a lease deal on the Gripen. 100m pa over 10 years would see us with a squadron available and not just a token intercept capability.

    Finally, quit videos of us tootling around dublin bay or landing on roadside. let the HSE F**k off an buy choppers and let the gardai do same and then .....

    D E P L O Y_____________A S S E T S_______________O V E R S E A S
    "He is an enemy officer taken in battle and entitled to fair treatment."
    "No, sir. He's a sergeant, and they don't deserve no respect at all, sir. I should know. They're cunning and artful, if they're any good. I wouldn't mind if he was an officer, sir. But sergeants are clever."

  2. Thanks apod thanked for this post
    Likes Sparky42, EUFighter, Herald, apod liked this post
  3. #152
    Sergeant Claudel Hopson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    89
    Post Thanks / Like
    The legacy PC9's are already plumbed for underwing tanks. The ones that arrived with 269 are belonging to the Air Corps with 3 more pairs to be delivered. The PC21 is not armable as they are currently fitted out, but never say never. The initial certification and trials of our PC9 in the armed role was carried out in Austria by FN and IAC, Ord Corps and Pilatus representatives.

  4. Thanks Tempest, ias, DeV thanked for this post
    Likes Jetjock, DeV, Sparky42 liked this post
  5. #153
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    21,187
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by paul g View Post
    Leo’s pronouncement on neutrality this month was so interesting and will feed into the PC-9 replacement, he essentially said that Ireland would not join any military alliance, but that we were not neutral when it comes to issues like terrorism and human rights. In other words, EU defence will have two strands, there will be those who understand that Russia poses a threat to Western democracy and thus will co-operate to contain it, and there will be those who will co-operate to carry out peace support and HADR missions in regions like the middle east and Africa; some countries will opt to do both. Ireland will be in the second group, which poses problems as it means that with America disengaged, and other countries defence spending focused on containing Russia we will have to be more expeditionary. It means we’re going to have to work more with Germany, Austria the Nordics, Malta, Spain, Italy and Portugal
    so as is stated in WP15

    So, if we look at the need for fixed wing aircraft to replace the PC9 that will have a utility in joint operations, the main expeditionary units we have are the ranger wing and ISTAR company, and of real importance to both is the ability to work with strike aircraft in the air to ground role delivering precision munitions. The standoff reconnaissance platoon in istar company for example is geared towards delivering artillery and mortar fire, (no secret its capabilities were published in an cosantoir September 2012) .In future to meet the requirements of Battlegroup exercises and deployments they’ll have to train to the same standard as other European armies, and train extensively in coordinating with aircraft in delivering precision guidance munitions and thus will have to be more like the Joint fire support teams deployed by the German army (heer). It’s also an important part of the ranger’s conventional role as in Chad. Before shinners and FF scream about UN missions only, have a look at un peace keeping, where attack helicopters are increasingly used (Mali and DRC to name but two) and precision munitions are deployed; the UN have even published a manual about the utility of special forces in peace support operations.
    all correct but doesn't necessarily need to be an AC aircraft

    Secondly the Air defence requirement existed when the PC9 were conceived in 1998 are totally different. The biggest target in Ireland in 2025 will be the old Jacobs factory in Tallaght and places like it because of the massive number of Data centres being built here, hybrid warfare means that destroying one of these will mean international chaos, there is a recognisable need therefore for improved air defence to guard against these threats.

    So, the way I see it there are five options.

    (A) Admit that the Bluffwaffe’s argument since 1956 that we need Vampires/Fougas/PC9 to train pilots so if there is an emergency then we have the pilots and only need to buy the planes made sense when the hawker hunter was the height of sophistication but is total bollix today. If we still want the state to train pilots for the airlines that are no longer national flag carriers but part of a multi-billion-euro multi national business then we should look at replacing the PC9 with a very limited Grob G115 type aircraft that is an elementary trainer. Believe it or not least likely option come 2025, but was what the Department wanted in 2003.
    (B) Buy 8 PC 21 to replace the PC9. A totally feasible option and one that has a lot of merit. The PC21 would allow the bluffwaffe to continue to train its own pilots to a high standard. Retains the existing air defence ability. But the real capability shifts it offers which is going to be more important is the improved software. They designed it from the beginning to act as a trainer for Joint Fires Support Team training. It might not be able to carry the weapons, but it is able to simulate during exercises the delivery of a range of precision guided ordnance guided by JFST on the ground, and would revolutionise the ability of the army to train for overseas missions. Alternatively, the M345HET shown at Paris might be a contender.
    (C) Train fast jet pilots through MOU with the UK or in Sweden. Reconstitute light strike squadron and replace the PC 9 with 8 M346FA, the light strike version of the family, just shown in Paris. The Italians are sure to buy some to replace their AMX and Austria are likely follow suit to replace its Eurofighters. A lot of F35 operators will want something less expensive to run for less intensive combat missions it’s got seven hardpoints, and is fitted from the start with a Radar, the grifo 346, which offers a capability that is in line with realistic air defence needs for the state. It’s got far more capability than the PC21 in simulating JFST training in delivering air to ground ordnances. Buy a limited number of sidewinder missiles and 30 mm cannon pods for the air policing role, along with fuel tanks to extend its range. A viable alternative around 2025 might be a similarly equipped version of the Saab/Boeing T-X.
    (D) An enhanced light strike squadron with the ability to deploy a detachment overseas on crisis management tasks. Stick with the M346FA, but instead buy 12, and develop the ability to deploy overseas a force of 4 aircraft during an international crisis. Buy 8 Reccelite Reconnaissance Pods, 8 Targeting pods and DAS. Along with sidewinders and cannon pods arm them with Brimstone missiles, SDB and GBU 12 500lb bombs; build a munitions stock sufficient to sustain two combat missions per day by two aircraft for a 14 day period. Google “Italian air force AMX Crisis management” and see how the from the Balkans to Afghanistan the AMX has been the true workhorse of the Italian air force, use the proposed PESCO arrangement to build a crisis management capability in conjunction with another air force. . Even within limited Rules of Engagement that Irish politicians are likely to impose it offers a real capability to the state in overseas operations in all but the very high intensity combat and the most sophisticated Air defence systems. Think again of Chad, only possible because of French Mirages overhead with similar reconnaissance capabilities to the Reccelite pod.
    (E) Contribute to a pan European fighter squadron capable of engaging in high intensity warfare. Bite the bullet and buy a squadron of Gripens and work with the Eastern Europeans in contributing through EU defence by engaging in a PESCO arrangement to assist in manning a joint squadron as a sign of pan European resolve. The most expensive and the politically the least likely option
    Realistically.....

    Quote Originally Posted by Charlie252 View Post
    Interesting Options,

    In reality the PC-21 is only marginally better then the PC-9 for Air Policing, its main design brief is to make it a better Lead in Fighter Trainer for 4th and 5th Gen Fighter Aircraft.

    Did Light Strike Squadron ever exist to be reconstituted?? My understanding is that it was really only ever the AFTS!

    Lets be somewhat realistic we aren't getting Front Line Fighter Aircraft even at the M346 level..

    A truck is as much of a threat to a large data centre as a hijacked aircraft and arguably has an even better terror effect..

    .
    +1

    Quote Originally Posted by Charlie252 View Post
    Not sure I agree, the 66m spent on the PC-9's was the biggest ever expenditure on the AC, and we ended up with a training aeroplane. Without a credible threat its hard to justify an even bigger expenditure on a higher end training Aircraft albeit with Light Strike Potential. It would still not offer any credible intercept capability.

    Funds are always going to be limited therefore whatever is purchased must offer far more credible capability in its chosen role.
    +1
    But why did we get a training a/c?

    Because that's what we needed to replace a larger number of Warriors and Fougas with a smaller number of much more capable a/c of a single type.

    Quote Originally Posted by paul g View Post
    if the other choice is leaving the eu then they'll find the money. Nobody apart from that ****wit Ed horgan writing in todays times and his ilk would like class.
    Quote Originally Posted by Charlie252 View Post
    , I think that sort of money would be better spent on achievable military capability.

    At the moment what is the AC's conventional military role? Enhancing and expanding that should be the focus..

    HEMS and Fish Patrols are great but don't really move the AC forward.
    and realistically the better option is tactical (possibly medium lift) helos. If for no other reason than CASEVAC overseas.


    Quote Originally Posted by morpheus View Post
    Invest in multi role aircraft which have a decent lift capability and not just 2 examples
    invest in military helis and not just 4 or 5


    D E P L O Y_____________A S S E T S_______________O V E R S E A S
    with the right resources (equipment, spares, support, money, regulations, personnel, etc) nothing to stop it happening now. At the minute issue is primarily personnel and money.

    Quote Originally Posted by Claudel Hopson View Post
    The legacy PC9's are already plumbed for underwing tanks. The ones that arrived with 269 are belonging to the Air Corps with 3 more pairs to be delivered. The PC21 is not armable as they are currently fitted out, but never say never. The initial certification and trials of our PC9 in the armed role was carried out in Austria by FN and IAC, Ord Corps and Pilatus representatives.
    so like the Cessnas not every a/c in the small fleet are the same?!

  6. #154
    C/S
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    328
    Post Thanks / Like
    The PC-9's were purchased to replace the SF-260/Fouga, however they were also bought/sold/marketed as having some limited air defense capability and this definitely helped their cause.

    This has had some negative outcomes as I see it, Firstly they ticked the conventional "Air Force" capability for the AC, this I think was wrong, the AC was able to trumpet the PC-9's military capability while the much of the rest of the roles were paramilitary at best.
    Secondly they were way over the requirement as a training aircraft for pilots that would Fly, Multi Pilot Aeroplane's and helicopters.
    And most pertinently they swallowed up a huge chuck of the capital monies available to the AC for that period, and meant the "operational fleet" aged and became less relevant over the past decade.

  7. Likes Tempest, EUFighter liked this post
  8. #155
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    21,187
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Charlie252 View Post
    The PC-9's were purchased to replace the SF-260/Fouga, however they were also bought/sold/marketed as having some limited air defense capability and this definitely helped their cause.

    This has had some negative outcomes as I see it, Firstly they ticked the conventional "Air Force" capability for the AC, this I think was wrong, the AC was able to trumpet the PC-9's military capability while the much of the rest of the roles were paramilitary at best.
    In exactly the same way as the a/c they replaced.




    The US is buying turboprop light attack a/c for COIN type ops

  9. #156
    C/S
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    328
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    The US is buying turboprop light attack a/c for COIN type ops
    Can't really compare, the US see's these aircraft as a low cost option in a low threat environment, they will however still integrate into the full USAF battle space management system and therefore have significant support from all the force multipliers they can bring, to purchase them to operate alone in even a lowish threat environment would be Madness.

  10. Likes EUFighter, ropebag liked this post
  11. #157
    2/Lt Bam Bam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    The rich side of town
    Posts
    2,024
    Post Thanks / Like
    Turboprop can linger in an area for longer than a jet too.
    It is only by contemplation of the incompetent that we can appreciate the difficulties and accomplishments of the competent.

  12. Likes DeV liked this post
  13. #158
    BQMS EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    586
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Bam Bam View Post
    Turboprop can linger in an area for longer than a jet too.
    Loiter time depends on fuel carried and consumption. It is not a given that a turboprop is better than a jet. But loiter is not the only criteria for CAS. Transit time, rough field capability, range of armaments, sensors etc need all be combined into the evaluation.

  14. #159
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,573
    Post Thanks / Like
    One of the criteria for the purchase of the PC-9s was EFIS instrumentation and a simulator, so that a trainee got a credible, up to date training system in his face from day 1, just like an airline pilot doing a Type in a simulator and spending his life on EFIS equipped aircraft. No raw data needles, no need to go to Dublin airport to do ILS approaches,etc,etc... Another criteria was a turbine, to get the piston out of the training cycle and get more flights per aircraft per day (which was a carry over from the original Marchetti tender). Yet another box to be ticked was the provision of multiple pylons, so the pilot could theoretically fly a gunnery flight and an RP flight in one go, or tow a target banner or drop tanks, which the single-pylon Marchetti and Fouga could not do. As a potential combat aircraft, weeeelll, that's alright if the enemy has no more than rifle-caliber weapons, no SAMs, no AAA and is a bad shot, because a PC-9 has no armour for the important bits and no defensive aids and no datalink or precision guidance, so it's neither capable of credible defence or offense. It's doing what it's capable of, which is sortie generation and churning out fresh pilots, no more and no less. If you want a proper combat capable turboprop, you need a Super Tucano as a minimum. As an example or real world use of small aircraft, the Phillipines are using our old friend, the SF 260, albeit in turboprop form, in it's current war against insurgents, as well as Vietnam era Broncos and the SF 260's big brother, the S.211 but they have taken losses of those airframes and they are using some precision guided bombs and rockets. They even fitted cannon to the S.211s. Further West, countries like Nigeria and other in Central Africa are using Alpha Jets and PC-7s for air strikes, but they are more traditional guns, RP and light bombs, aimed by a basic gunsight, limited to daylight operations .

  15. Thanks Shaqra, EUFighter, DeV thanked for this post
  16. #160
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Baltinglass
    Posts
    406
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    In exactly the same way as the a/c they replaced.




    The US is buying turboprop light attack a/c for COIN type ops
    Are they? So far I have seen a lot of talk and no action.

  17. #161
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Baltinglass
    Posts
    406
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by paul g View Post
    (D) An enhanced light strike squadron with the ability to deploy a detachment overseas on crisis management tasks. Stick with the M346FA, but instead buy 12, and develop the ability to deploy overseas a force of 4 aircraft during an international crisis. Buy 8 Reccelite Reconnaissance Pods, 8 Targeting pods and DAS. Along with sidewinders and cannon pods arm them with Brimstone missiles, SDB and GBU 12 500lb bombs; build a munitions stock sufficient to sustain two combat missions per day by two aircraft for a 14 day period. Google “Italian air force AMX Crisis management” and see how the from the Balkans to Afghanistan the AMX has been the true workhorse of the Italian air force, use the proposed PESCO arrangement to build a crisis management capability in conjunction with another air force. . Even within limited Rules of Engagement that Irish politicians are likely to impose it offers a real capability to the state in overseas operations in all but the very high intensity combat and the most sophisticated Air defence systems. Think again of Chad, only possible because of French Mirages overhead with similar reconnaissance capabilities to the Reccelite pod.
    (E) Contribute to a pan European fighter squadron capable of engaging in high intensity warfare. Bite the bullet and buy a squadron of Gripens and work with the Eastern Europeans in contributing through EU defence by engaging in a PESCO arrangement to assist in manning a joint squadron as a sign of pan European resolve. The most expensive and the politically the least likely option
    I really like this idea. Very useful looking plane. And it might just politically fly.

  18. #162
    C/S Tempest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Surrey, UK
    Posts
    258
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Graylion View Post
    I really like this idea. Very useful looking plane. And it might just politically fly.
    With pylons it won't go supersonic, so limited intercept capability.

  19. #163
    C/S
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    3,066
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Tempest View Post
    With pylons it won't go supersonic, so limited intercept capability.
    But like the amx ideal for crisis management roles, like monitoring a ceasefire, no fly zone etc. With a reconnaissance pod like reccelite it's a real force multiplier

  20. Likes EUFighter, Graylion liked this post
  21. #164
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    21,187
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Graylion View Post
    Are they? So far I have seen a lot of talk and no action.
    A-29 is in demo phase

  22. #165
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Baltinglass
    Posts
    406
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Tempest View Post
    With pylons it won't go supersonic, so limited intercept capability.
    ASRAAM on the wingtips?

  23. #166
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,573
    Post Thanks / Like
    Well, if an M346 won't flush with DoF,(it won't...it's too new and you'd be stuck in a stupendous contract), buy a few retreaded AMXs from Embraer directly with a modest support package instead and leave the intercepting to the RAF with Typhoons. AMXs can readily be ferried to anywhere the Irish might go, within reason and they can operate off basic airstrips. Imagine the influence a couple of AMXs would have had on Irish operations in Liberia and Chad, especially backed up with a French overwatch system.

  24. Likes Graylion liked this post
    Dislikes DeV disliked this post
  25. #167
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    21,187
    Post Thanks / Like
    PC9 isn’t the OA-X but food for thought (I can’t speak to the accuracy):
    https://warontherocks.com/2017/11/oa...-light-attack/

  26. Thanks ODIN, Graylion thanked for this post
    Likes Tempest, Graylion liked this post
  27. #168
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Baltinglass
    Posts
    406
    Post Thanks / Like
    so, first thing first - work on deploying the PC-9s

  28. #169
    BQMS
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    609
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Graylion View Post
    so, first thing first - work on deploying the PC-9s
    what are the requirements for equipment and manpower to have at least 2 aircraft mission ready on our current deployment in Lebanon or even an operation like Chad and what missions would you envisage them carrying out?

  29. Likes DeV liked this post
  30. #170
    C/S
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    328
    Post Thanks / Like
    The first thing is to get the Politicians and the DOD to invest and support the DF in a meaningful way..

    Anything is possible after that.

  31. Likes Sparky42, sofa, Buck liked this post
  32. #171
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,573
    Post Thanks / Like
    @apc; let me give you a genuine example of how to use manpower to operate aircraft; one Middle east air arm has a mix of about 60 Pilatus; PC-7s and -21s. It uses 130 military men to operate the PC-7s alone and about the same again to operate the 21s. A neighbouring State uses 20 Pilatus contractors to operate 20 Pilatus aircraft. Guess which one gives more sorties per day per aircraft? Overmanning and bad handling of manpower does not work and is inefficient.

  33. Likes apod liked this post
  34. #172
    BQMS
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    609
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
    @apc; let me give you a genuine example of how to use manpower to operate aircraft; one Middle east air arm has a mix of about 60 Pilatus; PC-7s and -21s. It uses 130 military men to operate the PC-7s alone and about the same again to operate the 21s. A neighbouring State uses 20 Pilatus contractors to operate 20 Pilatus aircraft. Guess which one gives more sorties per day per aircraft? Overmanning and bad handling of manpower does not work and is inefficient.
    I have no doubt that private industry is more efficient, but my question was a genuine enquiry, in an Irish context if we were to deploy PC-9s or AW139s overseas what would it take to maintain 2 mission ready aircraft for the duration of a tour?

  35. #173
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,851
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by apc View Post
    I have no doubt that private industry is more efficient, but my question was a genuine enquiry, in an Irish context if we were to deploy PC-9s or AW139s overseas what would it take to maintain 2 mission ready aircraft for the duration of a tour?
    thats not how the air componant of multinational missions work - only very large componants offer 24/7 availability, everyone else offers (for example) X capability between 0600 and 1400 each day, with Y capability outside of those hours at Z hours notice. the next componant then offers X capability between 1400 and 2200 etc... the role of the Air componant staff is to mesh the offers together to produce 24/7, or as near as they can get to it.

    in terms of what role what equipment would be required to carry it out - the most basic role would be reece, and at its most basic reece is a window, some binoculars and a radio. if you could carry a reece pod that would a step up, if you could carry a reece pod with a live downlink that would be great - if you could carry a reece pod with a live downlink and some APKS 70mm rockets that would be fantastic.

    an Air Componant commander will welcome anything that takes the strain off is other platforms - if you can provide a couple of early morning reece flights to take the weight off his maintainance heavy fast jets, even if that was all the PC-9M's were to do, then he'd welcome them. of course he would have to weigh up whatever support they needed in terms of people and logistics and decide whether it was worth the effort, but that would depend on what package you were offering to contribute.

    what the PC-9M's would need in terms of airframe mods and equipment to undertake the Reece, or Reece/Overwatch, or Reece/Overwatch/CAS roles is a more tecnical debate that i, as purely a consumer of airpower, niether know nor care about...

  36. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Likes DeV liked this post
  37. #174
    BQMS
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    609
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ropebag View Post
    thats not how the air componant of multinational missions work - only very large componants offer 24/7 availability, everyone else offers (for example) X capability between 0600 and 1400 each day, with Y capability outside of those hours at Z hours notice. the next componant then offers X capability between 1400 and 2200 etc... the role of the Air componant staff is to mesh the offers together to produce 24/7, or as near as they can get to it.

    in terms of what role what equipment would be required to carry it out - the most basic role would be reece, and at its most basic reece is a window, some binoculars and a radio. if you could carry a reece pod that would a step up, if you could carry a reece pod with a live downlink that would be great - if you could carry a reece pod with a live downlink and some APKS 70mm rockets that would be fantastic.

    an Air Componant commander will welcome anything that takes the strain off is other platforms - if you can provide a couple of early morning reece flights to take the weight off his maintainance heavy fast jets, even if that was all the PC-9M's were to do, then he'd welcome them. of course he would have to weigh up whatever support they needed in terms of people and logistics and decide whether it was worth the effort, but that would depend on what package you were offering to contribute.

    what the PC-9M's would need in terms of airframe mods and equipment to undertake the Reece, or Reece/Overwatch, or Reece/Overwatch/CAS roles is a more tecnical debate that i, as purely a consumer of airpower, niether know nor care about...
    What I am really trying to find out is if we were to deploy 2 aircraft overseas what in manpower ie. x number of flight crew and x number of ground crew etc and if we were to provide 2 aircraft do we need spare aircraft as a back up. Logistically speaking what would it entail

  38. #175
    Private 3*
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    245
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by apc View Post
    I have no doubt that private industry is more efficient, but my question was a genuine enquiry, in an Irish context if we were to deploy PC-9s or AW139s overseas what would it take to maintain 2 mission ready aircraft for the duration of a tour?
    Well as a rough idea what does it take to keep the EAS going daily in Athlone, there is your rough idea.

  39. Likes Spark23, DeV liked this post

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •