Move AC to Shannon/Cork?

[DeV]

The Irony in this thread is that most resistance here, to an AC move to Shannon is coming from non AC types.

If the army can move a Bn and its stores/vehicles/weapons and ammo etc quarter the way round the world to some spot in the back of beyond and then have to build its own accom, infrastructure and make its own maps and so on- then there is no reason it cant move the AC or part there of to a location which in comparison is down the road.

I believe it actually could be done but economically it isn't worth it (maybe in the better times). But we can't afford to waste money.

Thats temporarily turbocalves.

Come on, the "is it Avgas or Jet A1" question demonstrates the trivial level of knowledge on the subject, or even basic aviation matters.

It was a question as you said not a comment because I could find the information. I do however understand economics & cost accounting.

Sofa, the Minister could simply order Ralphie to set up a permanent station in Shannon in the morning and RJ would have to do what he's told.Bear in mind that the Donners are master heel-draggers when they are given a task that they don't want to complete. If they didn't want to go, then every excuse known to man would be trotted out against it. The "we're at home in our garrison" mentality is very hard to deal with.

This was part of my argument, it has to be considerred, it is all well and good placing 2 aircraft in Shannon, what if there are no crews or facilities in Shannon?

The Army is well capable and enthusiastic about going overseas(especially when there's a big wedge of expenses going with the discomfort). Even the NS loves to swan about in foreign parts yet the Don still can't seem to cut the apron strings from Mother Baldonnel. As JJ will tell you, airlines open and close bases regularly, all over the place, with a minimum of fuss, so it's not that difficult to do.
regards
GttC

The public service (and the DF) don't like change. The army wivies were vocal about some of the base closures!

Some have their apron strings in Mother Gormo.

There's a bit of a difference between a commercial airline and (possibly) a branch of the most underfunded military in the Western world. The money just doesnt exist to set up another on island base. Bear in mind no more than 2 aircraft would ever be based there.

the entire DF has had a huge amount of money spent on vehicles, clothing, accomodation, workshops, offices, training, aircraft, ships and lots of other things, not to mind two missions to Africa.Clearly, it is not underfunded.Things might be a little tight now but the DF, as a whole, is not suffering like it used to.

Correct there is massive money in the DF budget, that is why the navy will have vessels that are over 35 years old when they are replaced, that is why the AC are flying Cessnas on a daily basis that are coming up to 40 years old. Like no continuous recruitment, like no promotion, like pay cuts etc etc.

The DF has come on leaps and bounds but the next couple of years are going to be very hard on the DF I suspect. It will very hard for the DF to justify defence spending especially if ATCP dries up and we don't have a major troop contributing overseas mission.

Airlines routinely move bases because, when it's done right, it can be achieved with a minimum of fuss and waste. Moving two aircraft and a few people to give them a Daily and fly them, just over a hundred miles across a small island, to a fully-fitted and stocked location is easy.

The AC isn't good at that type of thing as Waterford proved. You can't compare an airline and an air force in all aspects (in some yes).

[GoneToTheCanner]

Hi there,
The Cessnas are minded like babies and are in very, very good order, despite their age and the Don dithered for too long over their replacement. In effect, the 135s are their replacement.
The Air Corps can do detachments just fine when it suits them,as long as the invisible line back to the Mother Ship still exists. They still can't do proper off-base deployments, like proper Army Support demands. About time they grew up and joined the real world.
regards
GttC

[Aidan]

How was the institutional knowledge lost? People didn't leave, they moved.The gen was and still is at the end of a phone or a face-to-face meeting.........

Nope - not even close. In some of the bigger Depts, there may have been internal transfers, but in general, there was massive loss of institutional knowledge. Even leaving aside the fact that many units left Dublin with none of the original staff (and experienced significant churn even before that), many Depts lost people to LIFO to make room for decentralising staff, in some places the turnover rate was in excess of 150% in just over a year.

AC personnel wouldn't generally have the option of going elsewhere without leaving the DF, so some would have to. The question then becomes as to whether or not the desire is to shed staff, and either replace them with new staff on new contracts, or replace them with contractors. Either way, there would be a severe loss of institutional knowledge. Moving the whole organisation would be a way of engineering a huge shakeup - but one that brings costs and risks.

[GoneToTheCanner]

Hi there,
When Qantas came looking for engineers in 1988, they emptied the Don and Dublin Airport.The Air Corps' attitude was to shrug it's official shoulder and then jack up the price of a discharge from £1200 to £5000, a punitive measure.Conversely, when AC pilots threatened to leave, the Don paid them many thousands to stay, clearly illustrating the contempt the Service had for it's own engineers. If the Don moved two aircraft to Shannon, the attitude would be exacty the same.
regards
GttC

[Tadpole]

there would be a severe loss of institutional knowledge

Good! Its over institutionalisation and a complete lack of real world management that has the Don in its current downward spiral. Its needs a huge shake up, at all levels, to become an effective part of the DF.