Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Unsas

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

  • Unsas

    Is it time to revise our UNSAS commitment based on the various reorgs of the DF that have taken place (eg corp units especially would have had their numbers cut by 25-33%

    Currently it is up to 850 from this palette:

    Inf Bde HQ - 150 - M
    Logs Bn HQ - 50 - H
    Light Inf Bn - 750 - H (including Coy VH)
    Fd Arty Bty - 80 - H
    Recce Unit - 80 - VH
    Medium Truck Pallet Cargo Unit - 60 - H
    Medium Transport Unit - 60 - H
    SOF Unit - 40 - VH
    CBRN Decon unit - 30 - H
    CIMIC Group - 30 - H
    CIMIC Tac Elements - 25 - H
    EOD/IEDD Team - 5 - H
    CBRN EOD/IEDD Team - 5 - H
    Mil Observer Team - 12 - VH
    Ops Liaison Recce Team - 10 - VH
    Mil Provost Marshal Office - 10 - H
    MP Detachment - 10 - H
    Media Ops Unit - 6 - H


    VH is <20 days
    H is 21-60 days
    M is 61-90 days

  • #2
    Do we have a spare Bde HQ, Logs Bn HQ, Fd Arty Bty (with CB radar and APS etc), Cav Sqn, Tpt Coy?

    Comment


    • #3
      With a properly supported RDF, the Single Force could increase that commitment from 850 to 1000 for a very marginal increase in defence spending and without having to inflate the existing establishments.

      Something I'm sure our EU and UN partners would welcome.
      Last edited by SwiftandSure; 19 November 2014, 20:08.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by SwiftandSure View Post
        With a properly supported RDF, the Single Force could increase that commitment from 850 to 1000 for a very marginal increase in defence spending and without having to inflate the existing establishments.

        Something I'm sure our EU and UN partners would welcome.
        RDF overseas (properly) would require huge policy and legislative changes

        And isn't going to happen, when the numbers actually serving overseas is nearly 50% of commitment to overseas

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by DeV View Post
          RDF overseas (properly) would require huge policy and legislative changes

          And isn't going to happen, when the numbers actually serving overseas is nearly 50% of commitment to overseas
          I know, but wouldn't it be nice to have the capability, you know, like the grown ups do.

          Another "nice to have" would be developing a capability platform from the Reserve component of the Single Force that meets the potential needs of tomorrow's operations, rather than saying what we don't need today.

          Comment


          • #6
            What are these Dev ? Rdf jobs ? What is unsas?

            Comment


            • #7
              UN Standby Arrangement Scheme

              The Irish Government signed up to contribute up to 850 personnel to UN PSOs at any one time.

              Above is the list (palette) of personnel/units we could/would make available and how quickly after a mandate was agreed we could deploy them - obviously not all at once.

              Subject to the other 2 parts of the triple lock of course

              Nothing to do with the RDF
              Last edited by DeV; 19 November 2014, 22:50.

              Comment


              • #8
                We currently have less than 50% of that number (418) overseas plus IRCON of the EUBG

                Comment


                • #9
                  Ireland is a Level 3 in UNSAS so we have signed a MOU with the UN

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by DeV View Post
                    UN Standby Arrangement Scheme

                    The Irish Government signed up to contribute up to 850 personnel to UN PSOs at any one time.

                    Above is the list (palette) of personnel/units we could/would make available and how quickly after a mandate was agreed we could deploy them - obviously not all at once.

                    Subject to the other 2 parts of the triple lock of course

                    Nothing to do with the RDF
                    A forward thinking white paper on defence could alter that - not likely though.
                    "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


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by DeV View Post
                      Do we have a spare Bde HQ, Logs Bn HQ, Fd Arty Bty (with CB radar and APS etc), Cav Sqn, Tpt Coy?
                      Its always been the case that new units be formed for overseas, existing home units or subunits don't go overseas.
                      There is no shortage of troops wanting to go overseas, every trip could be filled multiple times over.

                      The current government is very anti-overseas, continually cutting overseas numbers since they came to power, with more cuts planned and repeatedly saying the DF is not in a position to make any more contributions to other missions due to current commitments, which is pure bullshit.
                      It will come as no surprise if the current government try to make big cuts to its offer to UNSAS.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Rhodes View Post
                        Its always been the case that new units be formed for overseas, existing home units or subunits don't go overseas.
                        There is no shortage of troops wanting to go overseas, every trip could be filled multiple times over.

                        The current government is very anti-overseas, continually cutting overseas numbers since they came to power, with more cuts planned and repeatedly saying the DF is not in a position to make any more contributions to other missions due to current commitments, which is pure bullshit.
                        It will come as no surprise if the current government try to make big cuts to its offer to UNSAS.
                        True but when you are talking infantry battalions we have 7 of them (to take troops from) but when you only max 3 corps units to take personnel from (even to form a composite unit) you are talking about deploying 33-50% of your capability (before you take leave, courses, vacancies, other units overseas and rotations into account).

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by DeV View Post
                          True but when you are talking infantry battalions we have 7 of them (to take troops from) but when you only max 3 corps units to take personnel from (even to form a composite unit) you are talking about deploying 33-50% of your capability (before you take leave, courses, vacancies, other units overseas and rotations into account).
                          Which Corps units are you referring to?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Rhodes View Post
                            Which Corps units are you referring to?
                            Presume he means units per Corps, e.g. 3x Cav Sqn, 3x Tpt Coy, etc ?

                            P.S: Yes, I am aware there are only 2x Arty Regt
                            "Well, stone me! We've had cocaine, bribery and Arsenal scoring two goals at home. But just when you thought there were truly no surprises left in football, Vinnie Jones turns out to be an international player!" (Jimmy Greaves)!"

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Dev if its nothing to do with the Rdf why do they make it into the thread as per??
                              Every thread is starting to go the same way!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X