Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Future Air Corp Requirements (other than fighters)

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

  • #46
    Could it be because the current top man has a career history spent flying MATS?


    Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Goldie fish View Post
      Could it be because the current top man has a career history spent flying MATS?
      Then again, it ll depends on the next white paper, if it says the Air corps is limited to on lsland duties, then they probaly wont get a great deal of new equipment.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Duffer View Post
        When considering any air defence fighter or ground based system one must first access the threat level. Only countries that could possibly reach us are within EU/NATO and not realistically a threat in the foreseeable future.
        What about possble hi-jacked aircraft over the North Atlantic. Ireland is on the flight path for most of the Trans-Atlantic flights. I know the RAF pretty much have this covered but what if there was a Flight of 4 jet aircraft able to intercept a Commercial airliner. That's all that would be needed.

        Originally posted by Duffer View Post
        Also they UK/France/Spain/Germany have vastly larger air forces than we could ever have with our population and GDP so buying 10 F16's
        Hasn't stopped Israel!!!

        Originally posted by Duffer View Post
        Only reason to buy a modern fighter aircraft would to be contribute a squadron to a larger EU/NATO air defence for Europe in light of possible Russian expansion.
        HA, Ireland will be Neutral for the next 1000 years

        Originally posted by Duffer View Post
        Also helicopters could be used at home for SAR/ Assistance to the Civil Power in the event of natural disaster. i.e how many choppers could we make available in the event of a major natural disaster or would we look to the RAF or USAF for this.
        Read ----> http://www.military.ie/aircorps/roles/index.htm

        Originally posted by Duffer View Post
        Ireland's current security threat comes from within on a national level and possibly from a increased conflict level between Europe and Russia. and i don't think Russia would differentate between EU and NATO.
        There's alot of Europe and other powerful European NATO members before they would ever reach Ireland boss.

        Originally posted by hptmurphy View Post
        I think before going down the road of identifying the aircraft suitable for our needs we need to assess the percieved level of threat..to date no one has attempted to assault the state from the air so there has been no realistic support of the idea.
        Here, Here

        Originally posted by hptmurphy View Post
        the AC's entire existence is down to the fact the army need to play credence to air support either in the role of heli support or light strike.
        I'd argue it's to haul those fat ass, good for nothing, politicians around the fecking country.

        Originally posted by hptmurphy View Post
        The maritime related units again are there to support what the Navy does primarily ..fishery protection, If the role wasn't there they would possibly sacrifice the aircraft for extra helos.
        Was there not talk of some UAV's going to the Navy for this role?

        Originally posted by hptmurphy View Post
        The dual mentality of providing the services like MATS etc has hamstrung the AC from acquiring the aircraft they need to meet the armies requirements.

        The token air defence we have is about as good as it ever will be.
        Here, Here

        I strongly dislike this attitude that Jet fighters constitute an Air Force, Tanks constitute an army and destroyers constitute a navy. At the end of the day needs must!

        Ireland doesn't need a hugh Air Corps just one that works. Air lift capacity seems to be more of a priority in my eyes. Even 1 Herc would drastically increase this. New Zealand can operate 4 of the Bastards. I know they have a smaller army but an increase in defence spending from .7% per GDP would go a long way to improving the funding of the DF. Many other European countries are sitting at 1.2% per GDP...and yes I know, times are tough so there's less money around.
        Last edited by mugs; 17 April 2009, 23:24.
        Theirs not to make reply,
        Theirs not to reason why,
        Theirs but to do and die:
        Into the valley of Death
        Rode the six hundred.

        The Charge of the Light Brigade

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Duffer View Post
          in light of possible Russian expansion.
          Russia arn't expanding, they're re-arming. Infact they're leaning more towards professionallising their army and re-organising. Many top brass have already been let go which has been contraversal amongst older generation Russians.
          Theirs not to make reply,
          Theirs not to reason why,
          Theirs but to do and die:
          Into the valley of Death
          Rode the six hundred.

          The Charge of the Light Brigade

          Comment


          • #50
            Another few choppers and maybe some type of troop carrying aircraft would be what i'd invest in....Once the whole economic disaster is gone of course.

            Comment


            • #51
              Paul g,
              You are correct, but what goes into the white paper can be influenced by Corps commanders pushing roles that are USEFUL to the DF and therefore supported by the CoS. Sit on your a**e and do nothing, dont complain when you get nothing!

              A small dose of reality to show why the Air Corps MUST reinvent itself. Two questions:

              1. If the Air Corps disappeared in the morning would it be missed by the DF or the State? What roles does it currently provide that would no nolonger be covered?

              2. Of these roles how many could not be provided more efficently and cost effectively by a civil operator?

              The Air Corps have to get their heads out of the clouds and realise that to remain static in its current melaise will be its death. They are the master of both their future and demise.

              Comment


              • #52
                Hi there
                Civilianise as much as possible.
                Give GASU entirely to the gardai.
                Give the helis to the Army directly and entirely, personnel included,just like every other Army Air Arm in the world.
                Run MATS entirely thru the Dept of Foreign Affairs, just like every grown-up country.
                Give the NS and ARW their own helis. They have distinct requirements that really need them to have absolute control of their own aviation, just like in grown-up countries.
                Keep Bal as a training base and evict the helis, except for heavy maintenance.Get the helis out to the Army.That's what they're there for.
                Lease four C130s for long-range ops, using civvie crews. It's a buyer's market right now for heavy lift.
                Offer a redundancy package to get the old lags out of the Don.
                regards
                GttC

                Comment


                • #53
                  Can someone PLEASE fix the spelling on the thread title?

                  Good ideas there GttC. The CASA should be a naval aircraft. The difficulties with Naval dauphins, and the reluctance of the Air Corps to go to sea is well documented. I know the Gardai originally wanted their own pilots. Some GASU members even went to the trouble to get Heli flying lessons. Is there anywhere else that uses "military" pilots for a policing task?
                  The reasons for keeping aircraft under military charge are cancelled out when civilian maintenance facilities work longer hours than our military aircraft maintenance facility.

                  It is time to start over. It seems to me that the Don was a much more practical and efficient place when the uniforms behind the railings were army ones. Now the uniforms are the only thing justifying its independence.
                  If it isnt operational or deployable, then it is no more than a VIP taxi service/flying club. The DF spends the majority of its time training to Deploy overseas on Peace Support Missions. Even the Naval service are getting involved.

                  The Air Corps are still the homebirds. To me this goes against irish defence policy. If you have no role overseas, and none of your roles at home could not be handled just as efficiently by a civilian contractor, why do you continue to exist?
                  Goldie fish
                  Tim Horgan
                  Last edited by Goldie fish; 19 April 2009, 11:03.


                  Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    JNS response?????

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      In fairness though Goldie their personnel do serve oversees now more then ever, though mostly not in their assigned role except for a few JTACs

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
                        Hi there
                        Civilianise as much as possible.
                        Give GASU entirely to the gardai.
                        Give the helis to the Army directly and entirely, personnel included,just like every other Army Air Arm in the world.
                        Run MATS entirely thru the Dept of Foreign Affairs, just like every grown-up country.
                        Give the NS and ARW their own helis. They have distinct requirements that really need them to have absolute control of their own aviation, just like in grown-up countries.
                        Keep Bal as a training base and evict the helis, except for heavy maintenance.Get the helis out to the Army.That's what they're there for.
                        Lease four C130s for long-range ops, using civvie crews. It's a buyer's market right now for heavy lift.
                        Offer a redundancy package to get the old lags out of the Don.
                        regards
                        GttC
                        I think that's a very sensible way forward. The key point is that helicopters are a basic transport resource, like trucks. The Army, Naval Service, Special Forces (is the ARW too small to justify dedicated helis?), and Police should all operate their own helicopters. I would add the HSE, who should be the ones providing an air ambulance service.

                        As GttC says, that would leave the Air Corps doing training and transport. But training could and should be revamped and made more relevant and cost-effective. After an initial period of training and assessment (PPL level?), trainee pilots would be streamed for either helicopter or fixed-wing/multi-engine training. That means the PC-9s should only be kept if they're going to be used for something other than training.

                        If the Air Corps are ever going to get into the tactical transport business - which they should, and the Army should be pushing them to do it - then they need to step back from the 'Rolls-Royce' approach to acquisitions: there are options on the market other than bright shiny new aircraft. For example, the Polish Air Force bought five recently retired USAF C-130Es for about €15 million each, and they're planning on flying them for the next 20 years.
                        easyrider
                        Commandant
                        Last edited by easyrider; 19 April 2009, 15:29.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
                          Hi there
                          Civilianise as much as possible.
                          Give GASU entirely to the gardai.
                          Give the helis to the Army directly and entirely, personnel included,just like every other Army Air Arm in the world.
                          Run MATS entirely thru the Dept of Foreign Affairs, just like every grown-up country.
                          Give the NS and ARW their own helis. They have distinct requirements that really need them to have absolute control of their own aviation, just like in grown-up countries.
                          Keep Bal as a training base and evict the helis, except for heavy maintenance.Get the helis out to the Army.That's what they're there for.
                          Lease four C130s for long-range ops, using civvie crews. It's a buyer's market right now for heavy lift.
                          Offer a redundancy package to get the old lags out of the Don.
                          regards
                          GttC
                          Very accurate, and the lead with has been taken with the decision to lease medium lift helicopters for Chad. I'd reckon that in future every irish overseas deployment will see more and more of that leasing type arrangement to provide air support. But if there is no overseas role, then the question should be asked why keep the aircorps.

                          One thing to pick up on is the naval service and the whole Dauphin sage. Its silly in this day and age that no naval service vessel, or even those projected have an embarked helicopter capability, ( the EPV for example will be frigate sized). We can't operate helicopters from ships, a real force multiplier, but every other navy can, and then we sell ours to chile, who refurbish them to operate in the seas around cape horn. Something wrong there. There was a proposal to train naval service officers to fly helicopters was there not.

                          The PC-9 provide good coverage against a slow terrorist aircraft, this months AFM has a letter by the greek airfroce pointing out that during the Olympics in 2004, PC-9 armed with machine guns provided such a service, intresting given the other aircraft available to the greek airforce.

                          The Casa is a twin engine, the rule elsewhere is that navies fly helicopters, and airforces maratime patrol aircraft.
                          Last edited by paul g; 19 April 2009, 15:27.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by paul g View Post
                            ......The Casa is a twin engine, the rule elsewhere is that navies fly helicopters, and airforces maratime patrol aircraft.
                            Hardly a rule: maritime patrol aircraft are operated by many navies. This is a Dutch P-3 Orion, for example:



                            Likewise the French, Germans, Americans...

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by paul g View Post

                              One thing to pick up on is the naval service and the whole Dauphin sage. Its silly in this day and age that no naval service vessel, or even those projected have an embarked helicopter capability, ( the EPV for example will be frigate sized). We can't operate helicopters from ships, a real force multiplier, but every other navy can, and then we sell ours to chile, who refurbish them to operate in the seas around cape horn. Something wrong there.
                              We did what now? When did we sell ships to Chile?:confused:


                              Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                [QUOTE=Goldie fish;249244]We did what now? When did we sell ships to Chile?:confused:[/OTE]

                                The irish Dauphins are now owned by the Chilean navy are they not, who hope to use them from their new class of OPV, in the seas around cape horn. The EPV will be the same size as a frigate, but will about the only modern vessel of its type without an embarked helicopter. Iceland, Canada, Portugal the USCG and other navies/Coast guards operating in the same ocean as us feel a helicopter is a force multiplier.

                                Easyrider, nice photo but the Dutch navy have phased out their Orions, selling them to German and Portugal, and now only operate helicopters. All those nations you mention have very big navies do they not with airarms comparable to airforces

                                Airforces that operate orions on behalf of their navies include Austrailia, Portugal, New Zealand, Norway, etc, smaller navies don't have the resources to provide their own pilots for these aircraft, while larger navies can, were the NS to operate CASAs they'd have to provide pilots rated on twin engine aircraft.
                                Last edited by paul g; 19 April 2009, 17:04.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X