Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

White Paper - When is it due to be published?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by DeV View Post
    No need
    Engaging with a single country will not broaden the experience as much as it does in a multi-national environment

    Just participate more in PfP, EDA and EU battlegroups
    bit of both perhaps - doing lots of exercises and ops with lots of different partners and groups of partners provides a 'sweetie shop' of immediate experiences from which the DF can pick and choose what it likes, and see whats definitely not a good model to follow. however, it doesn't provide a depth of experience - it gives a snapshot - depth of experience is provided by doing something over a long term, and doing it in several different positions within a particular structure.

    which is partnership.

    the DF mission to Mali will tell the DF about cultural and operational compatability with UK forces, it will tell the DF about the comparative effectiveness of different uniforms (HINT!) etc.. but if the AC wanted to learn about deployed helicopter operations, or AH or medium lift, them it would have to embed AC people at half a dozen levels within, for example, the UK JHF for several years or even several consecutive tours.

    some things would require much deeper levels of partnership - does it, for example, make sense for the AC to run its own rotary, single and ME training streams for what is a tiny number of students? wouldn't it make much greater sense to send AC flying students to the UK (or France, or Canada, or Angola..) and just put them through their established pipeline while also sending experienced Irish aircrew to be instructors within that pipeline?

    Comment


    • [QUOTE=WhingeNot;421210]Similar thoughts towards (whatever) DF units been retained widely dispersed around the country. QUOTE]

      I always wondered in the decision to disband the 4th infantry battalion in cork. In its area of responsibility there's cork airport and port the later being the second largest in the island. Some people will say well Collins barracks is home to 1st brigade headquarters/cavalry/artillery etc. but those are support units. Would two brigades of 4 infantry battalions each be better.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by ropebag View Post
        bit of both perhaps - doing lots of exercises and ops with lots of different partners and groups of partners provides a 'sweetie shop' of immediate experiences from which the DF can pick and choose what it likes, and see whats definitely not a good model to follow. however, it doesn't provide a depth of experience - it gives a snapshot - depth of experience is provided by doing something over a long term, and doing it in several different positions within a particular structure.

        which is partnership.

        the DF mission to Mali will tell the DF about cultural and operational compatability with UK forces, it will tell the DF about the comparative effectiveness of different uniforms (HINT!) etc.. but if the AC wanted to learn about deployed helicopter operations, or AH or medium lift, them it would have to embed AC people at half a dozen levels within, for example, the UK JHF for several years or even several consecutive tours.

        some things would require much deeper levels of partnership - does it, for example, make sense for the AC to run its own rotary, single and ME training streams for what is a tiny number of students? wouldn't it make much greater sense to send AC flying students to the UK (or France, or Canada, or Angola..) and just put them through their established pipeline while also sending experienced Irish aircrew to be instructors within that pipeline?

        Which is why the DF sends people to the likes of PSBC.
        It isn't as if the DF and BA have never operated together before but you are correct (it is a new type of setup and scenario that they are operating together in). The DF have been training Somalis for a good while now so the type of op isn't new.


        "Outsourcing" of AC flight training would be a double edged sword:
        - fixed wing training - you lose the main reason for the PC9s, Finance say sell them, you lose the limited air defence / light strike capability
        - rotary training - same applies for the light utility helo

        Use it or loss it

        Comment


        • I'd imagine your dead right does a nation of this size need two artillery regiments or would one single regiment located centrally not be better

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Spark23 View Post
            I'd imagine your dead right does a nation of this size need two artillery regiments or would one single regiment located centrally not be better
            Nine years ago there were eight field regiments and one AD regiment - even if each of those could only field 1 Gun Bty and 1 Mortar Bty per field regiment and 3 AD Btys (they were closer to 4 back in the day) you'd still get more guns/mortars/missiles that could be deployable at one particular time than you would at the moment. The changes in the past decade haven't been accompanied by any white paper or other changes in defence policy, and the arty corps has never deployed a Gun Bty overseas, so why not bin the corps completely and spin the 120 mortars off to the IWW? As a gunner it pains me to admit it, but it's hard to justify the corps when the main contribution these days seems to be the UAV work that should probably be done by the air corps and the ISTAR work that should probably be done by the cav, recce platoons or other dedicated ISTAR assets.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Spark23 View Post
              I'd imagine your dead right does a nation of this size need two artillery regiments or would one single regiment located centrally not be better
              Because it is part of a conventional all arms capability for 2 brigades

              Comment


              • Have any thoughts been made to the amalgamation between the cavalry and artillery into Combat support Battalions and having a single PDF Engineering Battalion based in the Curragh and A Joint Air Defence Regiment (Air corps/Army) based at Gormanston camp.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                  Because it is part of a conventional all arms capability for 2 brigades
                  Maybe the so called "all arms brigade" needs to be looked at would an engineering battalion in each brigade not be more appropriate in this modern world, ie disaster relief, reconstruction, nation building along with the missions of the engineers corps and also provide enough troops to maintain infrastructure

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Stevo768 View Post
                    Have any thoughts been made to the amalgamation between the cavalry and artillery into Combat support Battalions and having a single PDF Engineering Battalion based in the Curragh and A Joint Air Defence Regiment (Air corps/Army) based at Gormanston camp.
                    Take that man there, with the suggestion.... out the back and shoot him in the head... twice! .... The beatings will continue until morale improves.
                    "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."

                    Comment


                    • Comment


                      • Originally posted by Stevo768 View Post
                        Have any thoughts been made to the amalgamation between the cavalry and artillery into Combat support Battalions and having a single PDF Engineering Battalion based in the Curragh and A Joint Air Defence Regiment (Air corps/Army) based at Gormanston camp.
                        Does any comparable army have their light armoured recce element and light artillery in 1 unit?
                        So remove the organic engineering capability from the Bdes?
                        No need to have AC elements in AD, the army provides that capability. Although they should be dedicated AD Btys. And there could be a good argument for having an AC / attached AD Bty

                        Originally posted by Spark23 View Post
                        Maybe the so called "all arms brigade" needs to be looked at would an engineering battalion in each brigade not be more appropriate in this modern world, ie disaster relief, reconstruction, nation building along with the missions of the engineers corps and also provide enough troops to maintain infrastructure
                        Possibly but the light nature of DF means comparatively few heavy engineer assets are required (eg we need heavy bridging but not enough to support an armd regiment)

                        3 Cdo Bde used to have 1 regular and 1 TA squadron, then it went to a regiment. Now they want to go back.

                        Comment


                        • Here's only A draught but would something like this work
                          Combat Support Battalion (PDF)

                          HQ Company (Admin-Signals-Supply etc.)
                          Cavalry Squadron (HQ- 2 Close recce troop's 1 Medium recce troop 1 Support troop (Aml 90 Replacement)
                          Artillery element HQ Battery including STA and one 105mm light gun Battery.
                          Combat Engineering Platoon

                          Combat Support Battalion (Reserve)
                          HQ Company
                          One Light Reconnaissance troop equipped with WMIK Land-rover’s or G wagen.
                          STA Battery and two 120mm mortar Batteries equipped with 6 120mm Ruag Mortars each.
                          Reserve Engineering Group (Light engineering Duty’s Equipped with Medium excavators/loaders /8wheel tippers and Infantry Support Bridge’s).
                          The Reserve Combat Support Battalion would contain larger Artillery and engineering elements

                          The Engineering Battalion in the curragh would be tasked with all the heavy engineering tasks

                          Comment


                          • The point of a Bde having an organic arty Regt is that a battery can detached to each of the Bde combat elements as required (hence 3/4 batteries). The same with engineers etc.

                            Mil Engineering is fairly labour intensive. There used to a Heavy Plant Section in the DFTC (not sure if there still is)

                            Also there is no RDF units anymore

                            Comment


                            • In my opinion the two brigades that are currently are designed for Admin and Internal security (How often do the army support the Garda with an 105/120mm guns/mortars). With current equipment stocks they would only be able to field one Reinforced light infantry Battlegroup each and possibly one from DFTC. Has the opportunity been lost for the DF to deploy a 105mm gun battery along with its commitment with Nordic Battlegroup?.
                              Last edited by Stevo768; 20 December 2014, 15:39.

                              Comment


                              • [QUOTE=Stevo768;421220]
                                Originally posted by WhingeNot View Post
                                Similar thoughts towards (whatever) DF units been retained widely dispersed around the country. QUOTE]

                                I always wondered in the decision to disband the 4th infantry battalion in cork. In its area of responsibility there's cork airport and port the later being the second largest in the island. Some people will say well Collins barracks is home to 1st brigade headquarters/cavalry/artillery etc. but those are support units. Would two brigades of 4 infantry battalions each be better.
                                There wasn't any sense to it, but in light of closing Clonmel and relocating its people to Limerick, closing Limerick within a year of Clonmel would have made a mockery of the reasons to close Clonmel.
                                Had nothing to do with sense or logic, just politics.
                                Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X