Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Airports, Airspace and enforcing Neutrality

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

  • #16
    According to RTE, wallace is representing himself, let's hope he pisses off the judge so much that the judge throws the book at him, and I mean literally throw the book at him along with the rest of the law library.

    The case against Independent deputies Mick Wallace and Clare Daly, alleging they entered a restricted area at Shannon Airport and climbed the perimeter fence, has opened at Ennis District court.
    Last edited by CTU; 24 February 2015, 22:33.
    It was the year of fire...the year of destruction...the year we took back what was ours.
    It was the year of rebirth...the year of great sadness...the year of pain...and the year of joy.
    It was a new age...It was the end of history.
    It was the year everything changed.

    Comment


    • #17


      Why is it a matter for DOD?
      The IAA should be paying for it

      Comment


      • #18
        In other countries, is this not a defence issue and are there not dedicated corps which operate long range ground based air surveillance radars?

        Surely we our thinking should be along the lines of, well if we cant afford to get up there and visually identify them and escort them, then surely the next step down in cost is to buy maintain and operate Mil spec long range radars which we can ? with decent modern military radars you can also connect them to medium to long range missile defence systems should we ever purchase these and im sure we could integrate their picture with existing civi systems to improve the north / north west / western approach coverage?

        Im sorry but i still think this should be military purchase and military role. Just because were currently responsible only for sovereign airspace doesnt mean that we shouldnt give a fcuk until an unidentified aircraft crosses the limit of exploitation and enters our scope of interest. bit late to scramble anything at all when the aircraft is inside the 12 mile limit doing a few hundred knots ...
        "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


        • #19
          Monitoring an Irish area of interest against a military threat is most definitely a Dept of Defence issue.

          Comment


          • #20
            Just for a reference on price, the Thales Ground Master 3d air surveillance radar seems to be a popular military radar system. It is either a mobile or fixed system with a range of 240nm and 100,000 feet altitude. It´s unit cost (including installation) is circa €15m for a fixed system.
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_Master_400

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Jetjock View Post
              Monitoring an Irish area of interest against a military threat is most definitely a Dept of Defence issue.
              Sure, but that doesn't mean using the the defence budget to improve primary radar coverage by buying mil spec long range radars, or setting up a dedicated Army/Air Corps HQ dedicated to monitoring air space movements, is the most prudent use of scarce cash.

              As far as I understand it - and I'm possibly very wrong - there's a military radar section at Dublin airport ATC & I'd be thinking a small expansion of that, allied to the purchase of 2/3 COTS primary radar heads, with the cost borne by the IAA or shared between Defence/IAA, would be a perfectly adequate option.

              You could do all that & still have the same picture relayed to Bal, Haulbowline or wherever.

              The reason I prefer that option at the moment, is because I think given the shoestring budget of the DF - trying to operate & maintain 2 long range PRH's 24/7, would inevitably lead to problems elsewhere in the organisation.

              What astonishes me, is that it's taken to 2015 for the state to actually begin to acknowledge that monitoring airspace is actually an issue...
              Last edited by pym; 25 March 2015, 21:36.

              Comment


              • #22
                Rather than a military "section" at the Dublin ATC centre, there is a military radar operator occupying a station when Baldonnel is operating. He/She uses the frequency 122.0 which is a shared frequency with an operator at Baldonnel. Use the callsign Dublin Military and you speak to the operator at Dublin. Use Baldonnel Military and the guy at Baldonnel answers. The Dublin ATC centre position is purely liaisonary with the aim of better integration between civilian and military traffic. It has zero scope to be ramped up into a dedicated early warning surveillance section.

                Regarding COTS primary radar, civilian systems are generally line of sight only with limited range, circa 100nm. Military systems have an over the horizon capability allowing ranges in excess of 200nm and include IFF capability. Modern systems use powerful AESA technology which have low operating costs and high reliability and high resistance to jamming, an important feature when looking for stray military aircraft. In fact with AESA radar there is a high probability the other guys won't even know you're looking at them. Cost wise at €15m per unit, it is relatively cheap and not worth the cost saving for loss in capability of an all commercial radar system.

                The ideal scenario and one that does not involve massive cost is the placement of two military radar heads,one in Donegal and one in Kerry with the civilian primary radar heads at Dublin, Cork and Shannon filling in the gaps, all feeding into a new control room at Baldonnel or elsewhere. It's not beyond the bounds of possibility financially.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Jetjock View Post
                  Rather than a military "section" at the Dublin ATC centre, there is a military radar operator occupying a station when Baldonnel is operating. He/She uses the frequency 122.0 which is a shared frequency with an operator at Baldonnel. Use the callsign Dublin Military and you speak to the operator at Dublin. Use Baldonnel Military and the guy at Baldonnel answers. The Dublin ATC centre position is purely liaisonary with the aim of better integration between civilian and military traffic. It has zero scope to be ramped up into a dedicated early warning surveillance section.
                  Cheers for the info!

                  Originally posted by Jetjock View Post
                  Regarding COTS primary radar, civilian systems are generally line of sight only with limited range, circa 100nm. Military systems have an over the horizon capability allowing ranges in excess of 200nm.
                  Respectfully, that's not really accurate. All radars that use frequencies above 30MHz - and most modern radars are 300MHz+ range - are ultimately limited by line of sight.

                  If they run sufficient power & are placed high enough, be they civilian or military, they'll have ranges in excess of 200nm.

                  The military of the British, Aussies, Russians, Americans, Chinese & French do operate Over the Horizon Radar systems - but they're a very different beast and operate on the HF bands.

                  There are also early warning radars which tout ranges of 6000 miles etc - but again, these are VHF+ systems, which can see an object 6000 miles away - once it's in orbit, with a line of sight.

                  Modern solid state civilian radars are also low cost & highly reliable - and perfectly adequate for the current climate, though ECCM & IFF are of course highly desirable features if we're going to get serious about policing our airspace.

                  It's not beyond the bounds of possibility financially, but if the finances can't or wont stretch - to quote ropebag on a related topic, civilian PRH's "might be a good compromise between unicorns and fcuk all."

                  Linked this before, about how the yanks do it - mixed civilian/military setup: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Rou...eillance_Radar
                  Last edited by pym; 25 March 2015, 23:19.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    The IAA is responsible for the safe air traffic management of Irish-controlled airspace (not the AC). The IAA need additional PSRs, to cover the huge gaps in coverage, therefore any additional resources should be under their remit, they are experts!

                    To give an additional assets to the AC, would mean that the IAA wouldn't have access to the information they need in real time, especially when the only thing they can do is pick up the phone to the IAA.

                    It would make a lot of sense for 2 long range PSRs to be purchased by the IAA (based in Donegal and Kerry). That the information from all Irish radar to be feed into a RAP accessible probably from Ballygirreen, Dublin, Shannon and Baldonnel.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Interesting article on the Thales Ground Master 400 that Jetjock mentioned above:

                      Finland has ordered twelve radars, along with Estonia which is acquiring two via a bilateral €200 million contract concluded with TRS in May 2009... The value of the Finnish segment of the contract is €150 million, of which €10 million covers the construction and preparation of the sites which will host the GM-403s. By this calculation, the value of the supply of the GM-403s to Estonia is €40 million.


                      They would be a really nice asset.

                      Here's a couple of vids on a different kind of beast - the over the horizon radar:





                      In time, they may also become a more widely deployed means of monitoring our seas:

                      At RFS we specialize in the design and manufacture of premium, future-ready cable solutions for customers across the globe. With over 120 years of heritage in the industry, we build reliable and long service life connectivity systems. Because we care about our collective future.
                      Last edited by pym; 28 March 2015, 17:45.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        procurement blueprint perhaps?

                        two countries harmonise their requirement, and do a joint buy which covers everything - one maintainance contract instead of two, one training contract instead of two...

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by ropebag View Post
                          procurement blueprint perhaps?

                          two countries harmonise their requirement, and do a joint buy which covers everything - one maintainance contract instead of two, one training contract instead of two...
                          Yep. Two countries, one in NATO... one not. One neutral, one not. And they did it because of the shared benefits.

                          Definitely something that should be explored...

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by pym View Post
                            Yep. Two countries, one in NATO... one not. One neutral, one not. And they did it because of the shared benefits.

                            Definitely something that should be explored...
                            Not to be pedantic but... (famous last words) we're not a neutral country.
                            "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


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by morpheus View Post
                              Not to be pedantic but... (famous last words) we're not a neutral country.
                              I don't dispute that - but we like to say we are, and there's a ready made example of a neutral nation working with a NATO member.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X