Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Jets/Light Fighters

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
    andy
    4 Star General

  • andy
    replied
    Originally posted by Old Redeye
    Look, lets consider some reality, even beyond the fact that there is absoloutely no existing or forecast requirement for jet fighters in Ireland.

    Consider this - the best available estimate within the shroud of Saab proprietary secrecy is that new Gripens run about 75 million Euros a copy, including spares and other maintenance support, software, etc. Meaning a squadron of six, the minimum required to field a viable capability, would run in the area of 450 million Euros, with a price per fligt hour of about 2300 Euros.

    The next best option, lease of excess, unmodernized Canadian CF-18's, would run about 35-45 million Euros a year = some 200 million Euros for a five year lease, + a price per flight hour of about 7000 Euros per hour.

    All this cash for little more than sexier airshow participation and photo ops for plane spotters? Give me a break.

    A new C-130J-30 runs about 55 million Euros and would satisfy one of the major outstanding capability shortfalls of the Irish Defence Forces for at least 30 years! A new 130J AND a new C-27J together would only run about 80 million Euros.

    What makes more sense? Buying fighters for the IAC would be disgraceful.
    I have to agree Old Redeye. Even the brits are giving out about the price of aircraft. They are expensive to buy and fly and they dont do a whole pile. Prince Charle got a lift in one to go to collect his army boots and then go to Sandhurst for his military training and the media were all over him.

    Just an example, but the public here would be saying, "...do we REALLY need these?". Plus the taoiseach would be up in arms seeing that he has to fly in that clapped out Gulf Stream

    Leave a comment:

  • FMolloy
    King Monkey

  • FMolloy
    replied
    The difference between France & Ireland is that France can & does operate on it's own, Ireland doesn't. If/when we go into EU battlegroups it'll be someone else providing such support.

    The fact is that, for better or worse, defence is not a major issue in Ireland. The public doesn't really care & therefore most politicians don't either. As a result, the defence budget is more limited than we'd like. The AC has to concentrate it's resources on what is most useful (MATS aside) & has decided, rightly in my opinion, that new helicopters fit that bill.

    New helicopters will allow Irish troops to train for air-mobile operations in a more realistic manner than is currently possible. They will also give the DF a better transport capability within Ireland & may. in time, feature in overseas deployments. Compare that to fighters that may never be needed.

    You could very well say that we don't know what's around the corner, that it's better to have something & not need it than to need something & not have it. You could say it's a country's duty to protect itself & that Ireland can now afford to do so. You'd be right to say those things & you'd be preaching to the converted. Unfortunately we're not in charge of defence policy & neither is GOC AC.

    Leave a comment:

  • Guest
    Guest

  • ldman60119
    Guest replied
    A country has an obligation to protect its own borders. Why did the IAC have figther aircraft from it founding? http://www.military.ie/aircorps/history1.htm Where they afraid of Britian?

    After World War II they had Seafire in service for years. Politcs change and so do the roles of armed forces. But the IAC has the basic role of defending their country against any hostile threat. If a nut with a jet was flying over Dublin, who would stop him.

    I am not saying the IAC should buy F-22s, but a training aircraft with a radar, a cannon or cannon pod, and possibly some AAMs.

    Take the situation in the Ivory Coast. French peacekeepers where strafed by Su-25s. Say that Irish troops are overseas, should they not have an aircraft that can be used for some sort of AD/CAS/Recon.

    The basic line, one of the purposes of a country's military is to defend it homeland. Ireland could easily afford some sort of aircraft that could fill that role. Its not the little poor country of yesteryear.

    Leave a comment:

  • Guest
    Guest

  • Old Redeye
    Guest replied
    Blue,

    Here we go again. Sure the MAKO promises to be a superb a/c, ....but, what existing or forseable threat to Irish airspace could possibly justify an expendite of 225 milion? None. You could buy three 130J's for that much money + first rate infrastructure and lots of overeas training (note: there is no valid requirement for more than 1x 130J + a 235-300).

    What purpose is there in developing the nebulous skills gained from owning 8 MAKO's? Little or none.

    The CAS training you refer to can be more economically and efficiently done by troops attending CAS FAC courses with battlegroup partners Sweden and Finland, or with Canada, the UK, etc., and routinely exercising these skills in regular joint exercises with those same EU battegoup partners and others as part of a standard unit work-up to being declared deployment capable. As for maritime ops, what is the requirement? Strafing errant fishing trawlers?

    On a technical note, to be effective at QRA air defense, your MAKO would require a radar. I also doubt if a MAKO wouldhave the speed, range and endurance to effectively intercept a rapidly closing target far enough out - let's say 100nm out over the Atlantic at night - to permit the exercise of complicated target ID and rules of engagement procedures.

    Cheers

    Leave a comment:

  • The Blue Max
    Intelligence Officer

  • The Blue Max
    replied
    Advanced Light Attacks Jets (ALAJ)

    There is no out lying need in the IAC for the large fast jet that have been recommended previously on this thread such as Typhoons,JAS39 Gripens,F-18,F-35s etc... instead there is a requirement for an aircraft that can previde very similiar capabilities for fractions of the price that offer both Operational/Training Capabilities beyond that of the Pilatus PC-9M this aircraft would be in class of the EADS MAKO which is in the final stages of development
    it would offer the IACs No.ONE Operations Wing witha modern capable aircraft that we could hope to operate in a any decent sizes squadrons and for decent price

    example: EIGHT x EADS MAKO (ALAJ) PRICE 25million + backup systems,new Hangar etc.

    Overall Project Cost = 225million

    These Light Jets would have many uses such as.

    1. To defend the state against armed agreesion and
    to maintain integerity of irish soverign airspace
    (Air Defence needs would be in the form of stand too
    aircraft i.e QRA- Quick Reaction Aircraft)

    2. Development of our pilots skills and developing base of
    qualified pilots that can fly the aircraft etc..

    3. Develop skills for other ground forces (develope Combat Air Support And Operating Alongside Fast Jets in battlefield situation utilizing laser designator etc..)
    and alongside Naval Assets and other airborne assets

    These in my opinion would be some of the main reasons the IAC could expect to operate a new fleet of such Advanced Light Attack Jats...
    [/CENTER]

    Leave a comment:

  • Guest
    Guest

  • Old Redeye
    Guest replied
    Look, lets consider some reality, even beyond the fact that there is absoloutely no existing or forecast requirement for jet fighters in Ireland.

    Consider this - the best available estimate within the shroud of Saab proprietary secrecy is that new Gripens run about 75 million Euros a copy, including spares and other maintenance support, software, etc. Meaning a squadron of six, the minimum required to field a viable capability, would run in the area of 450 million Euros, with a price per fligt hour of about 2300 Euros.

    The next best option, lease of excess, unmodernized Canadian CF-18's, would run about 35-45 million Euros a year = some 200 million Euros for a five year lease, + a price per flight hour of about 7000 Euros per hour.

    All this cash for little more than sexier airshow participation and photo ops for plane spotters? Give me a break.

    A new C-130J-30 runs about 55 million Euros and would satisfy one of the major outstanding capability shortfalls of the Irish Defence Forces for at least 30 years! A new 130J AND a new C-27J together would only run about 80 million Euros.

    What makes more sense? Buying fighters for the IAC would be disgraceful.

    Leave a comment:

  • Aidan
    Closed Account

  • Aidan
    replied
    Gttc, you misunderstood me. The F104 doesn't have an INS, at least not in Italian trim. Hence no spin up time. As for going head to head with Serbian MiG-29, well assuming a 29 could actually cross the Adriatic (doubtful cos of their pathetic fuel loads), I doubt if the quality of their navigation systems would be the deciding factor in any engagement ... . I'd put my faith more in the superior missiles, training and, of course, radar and C4i facilities NATO had at their disposal.

    Theres also the fact that the F104s weren't exactly useful for anything else, but thats a separate story.

    And agreed, any talk of jets in an Irish context is entirely academic, and has been for a long time.

    Leave a comment:

  • GoneToTheCanner
    C/S

  • GoneToTheCanner
    replied
    Aidan
    With regard to the F104s, I'm sure their gyros(60s technology) are less capable than the ring laser gyros of today's fighters. Also, their fuel burn is a joke and their potential enemies were MiG-29s, with much better radars/missiles.I'd venture to suggest that they were kept out of the way....given the prevalence of suicide bombers on foot/in road vehicles in today's terrorism, this endless talk of jet fighters is very,very academic..
    regards
    GttC

    Leave a comment:

  • Itchy
    Philomath

  • Itchy
    replied
    Its well and good suggesting different a/c for the AC but this is a 100% academic topic and will be for the next decade/decade and a half AT LEAST.

    It will need a drastic change in Leadership and public perception of the military for any of these issues to be sorted.

    For me anyway I would like to see the reinstatement of offshore SAR duties (with adequate resources) before Jets.

    Possibly off thread but my 2c.

    Leave a comment:

  • Guest
    Guest

  • ldman60119
    Guest replied
    New aircraft for the IAC

    [Mod: Thread merge. Lets keep the jet talk together eh]

    Has anyone took a look at the PC-21, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilatus_PC-21.

    The speed is greater than the PC-9 and its seems to have state of the art flight controls. I am not sure how far the testing has gone for weapons load. In the next few years it might make a good purchase.

    If the IAC ever gets back in the fast jet game, there is the K-8, http://www.aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/attack/k8/
    http://www.geocities.com/salman4paf/TRAINER_JET.html

    It seems to be a selling pretty well. It would give the IAC some type of interception role and provide fast-jet training. That would prove useful if the IAC obtains more jet transport aircraft.

    Leave a comment:

  • John P Hannon
    C/S

  • John P Hannon
    replied
    There is a not so great state of art Mirage, I think it is the Mirage 2000. We had Mirage 3s as our main fighter and did more than double the airtime and most of that was an attack type aircraft where the air is thicker and the aircraft was designed to fly very high. Fortunately we did have to use them in anger but I am sure that they would have done well.

    Leave a comment:

  • Aidan
    Closed Account

  • Aidan
    replied
    C-Q, Morpheus, the F-104 is judged to be the only fighter in service to be capable of making an intercept not because of its rate of climb or range (its very short ranged if on burner), but because it has a very simple avionics set up that doesn't require a long period of time for gyros to spin up or electronics to boot up and come online.

    It means the aircraft has a very short spin up time, and can be airborne very shortly after an alert being called. During Operation Allied Force in 1999, the alert birds were Italian F-104s, for that very reason. CAP and BARCAP was carried out by USAF F-15Cs, RAF and Italian F.Mk3s and various F-16s (Dutch, Norwegian etc), but the only fighter judged capable of a ground launched intercept of a high subsonic attack was the F-104. The other aircraft available were just as fast once launched, but they took too long to get in the air.

    The F-15s (36TFW) based at Bitburg in the 1980s and early 1990s were the NATO QRF in the case of any incursion across the IGB, they had two two ships on alert, one pair on 5 minute alert and the other on 15. That 5 minute alert was just to get the pilots to the planes, though. In reality the period was much longer. And this was the USAF at the height of the cold war.

    In that regard, and particularly on the specific Irish situation, Morpheus's 2c post was spot on.

    Leave a comment:

  • FMolloy
    King Monkey

  • FMolloy
    replied
    Morph,

    I'm assuming you edited one of your previous posts to say that you confused the F-104 with the F-80, revealing a lack of knowledge on the subject. That in itself is fine, you're not expected to be an aviation encyclopaedia. What's not ok is the fact that you passed critical comment on someone else's post without doing any research.

    Stop posting the first thing that comes into your head & do your homework first, the internet is your friend.

    And I'll keep 'bitching' as long as you keep posting crap.

    Leave a comment:

  • Come-quickly
    Commandant

  • Come-quickly
    replied
    Morpheus, stop for a minute and look at the blindingly obvious, AFMs inference is that the F104s high altitude performance made it the only fighter that could be in position from a two minute warning.

    Leave a comment:

  • morpheus
    Space Lord of Terra

  • morpheus
    replied
    No need to b*tch at me all the time

    I never implied that Come-Quickly was wrong about rates of climb etc, I was pointing out that rates of climb etc mean nothing, because by the time from when we get a message indicating that an airliner has strayed from its flightpath, to assets in the air, in my opinion it would be too late.

    Dublin airport isnt even 2 minutes flying time from the city centre.

    By the way, Im not an aviation buff, but ill have you know that i do know something about aircraft, I dont know rates of climb off by heart of individual aircraft, but if your interested, heres some info.

    F-104 Starfighter:
    Source: http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/airdef/f-104.htm
    Specifications
    Climb Rate: 50,000 feet per minute


    F-16 Falcon
    Source: http://www.aeroflight.co.uk/types/us.../f-16/F-16.htm
    Specifications
    Maximum rate of climb at sea level 50,000+ ft/min (15240+ m/min);

    F-18 Hornet
    Source: http://www.aeroflight.co.uk/types/us...-18_Hornet.htm
    Specifications
    Maximum rate of climb at sea level 45,000 ft/min (13715 m/min);

    Airbus A320
    Source: http://www.jersey-va.co.uk/Aircraft-specs/a320_spec.htm
    Specifications
    ROC "Rate Of Climb"

    Below 10,000ft
    max. 3,800 fpm @ 250kts (fpm is Feet per minute)

    Above 10,000ft to Cruise Flight Level FL
    2000 - 2500fpm from 10,000 - 20,000ft @ 260 - 350kts
    2000 - 1500fpm from 20,000 - 26,000ft
    1500 - 300fpm from 26,000 - 35,000 ft depending on weight.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X