Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Not a good idea?

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

  • Not a good idea?

    Heard a rumour today that the Don/DoD want to push all heli ops out to civilian contract, like the Garda heli/defender, on a power-by-the-hour set up. This would be managed by companies owned by ex-Officers, of course.....say goodbye to apprenticeships and in-house technical skills.

  • #2
    Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
    Heard a rumour today that the Don/DoD want to push all heli ops out to civilian contract, like the Garda heli/defender, on a power-by-the-hour set up. This would be managed by companies owned by ex-Officers, of course.....say goodbye to apprenticeships and in-house technical skills.
    serious step backwards..
    "We will hold out until our last bullet is spent. Could do with some whiskey"
    Radio transmission, siege of Jadotville DR Congo. September 1961.
    Illegitimi non carborundum

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
      Heard a rumour today that the Don/DoD want to push all heli ops out to civilian contract, like the Garda heli/defender, on a power-by-the-hour set up. This would be managed by companies owned by ex-Officers, of course.....say goodbye to apprenticeships and in-house technical skills.
      its probably crunch time - unless overseas heli ops are on the immediate cards, i don't see the govt deciding on anything else other than inertia. truth is that BIH provided the same support svs to the garrison in the FI that the AC provides in Ireland. soveriegnty patrols, artillery airlift, logistics support, 'battlefield' mobility...

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by ropebag View Post
        its probably crunch time - unless overseas heli ops are on the immediate cards, i don't see the govt deciding on anything else other than inertia. truth is that BIH provided the same support svs to the garrison in the FI that the AC provides in Ireland. soveriegnty patrols, artillery airlift, logistics support, 'battlefield' mobility...
        But the FI forces have no requirement to go overseas..[stating the obvious hat on]
        "We will hold out until our last bullet is spent. Could do with some whiskey"
        Radio transmission, siege of Jadotville DR Congo. September 1961.
        Illegitimi non carborundum

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Turkey View Post
          But the FI forces have no requirement to go overseas..[stating the obvious hat on]
          neither does the AC...

          if a commercial company can provide the same service, but do so without the overheads that an in-house, AC requires, then why would you employ the more expensive model?

          the one reason governments like military, in house forces is that they do what governments want, when they want them to do it, and without quibbling about the contract and presenting the government with a huge bill for the doing what that government wants. if the government has decided, whether off its own bat or because it thinks the AC is institutionally incapable of doing the overseas role, that overseas, crunchy operations are off the table, then the potential requirement for 'off the cuff' operations no longer exists - so everything that is left falls well within the capabilities of any of the larger commercial helicopter operators.

          you, in fact, could argue that there are a good many commercial helicopter operators who are already more 'warry' than the AC - they fly in places the AC would void its bowels just by googling, so infact you might find that by civilianising the helicopter operation, you actually get a more deployable, crunchy capability than you have now...

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by ropebag View Post
            neither does the AC...

            if a commercial company can provide the same service, but do so without the overheads that an in-house, AC requires, then why would you employ the more expensive model?

            the one reason governments like military, in house forces is that they do what governments want, when they want them to do it, and without quibbling about the contract and presenting the government with a huge bill for the doing what that government wants. if the government has decided, whether off its own bat or because it thinks the AC is institutionally incapable of doing the overseas role, that overseas, crunchy operations are off the table, then the potential requirement for 'off the cuff' operations no longer exists - so everything that is left falls well within the capabilities of any of the larger commercial helicopter operators.

            you, in fact, could argue that there are a good many commercial helicopter operators who are already more 'warry' than the AC - they fly in places the AC would void its bowels just by googling, so infact you might find that by civilianising the helicopter operation, you actually get a more deployable, crunchy capability than you have now...

            This comment proves you have absolutely no idea about the operational capabilities and abilities of Air Corps crews front/back and on the ground, skills that are displayed daily. Give me any example of your above statement?

            Comment


            • #7
              If they do that they might as well just disband the Air Corps.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Bravo20 View Post
                If they do that they might as well just disband the Air Corps.
                does the AC exist to provide a capability, or does it exist in order to exist?

                if heli's go commercial, the AC will be at 3 operational airframes - none of which do anything that commercial operators don't do 100 miles east of Dublin. the writing will be on the wall in 60ft letters.

                Comment


                • #9
                  So basically sub out all maintenance?

                  Not a good move - especially when we may shortly see AC aircraft deployed overseas (it is being seriously looked at and there is a proposal out there).

                  If they were saying PBH contracts from all aircraft (ie spares) - then get it ASAP!!
                  Last edited by DeV; 16 December 2015, 17:23.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by DeV View Post
                    ...Not a good move - especially when we may shortly see AC aircraft deployed overseas (it is being seriously looked at and there is a proposal out there)...
                    if the AC manage an OS deployment in reasonably short order and does it well, then they are safe (both in terms of flying the aircraft and maintaining it) - however, if after operating the 139's for a decade, they can't do something that pretty much every other first world air arm manages without breaking a sweat, then they are fcuked, and the government would have no problem in looking for people who can do the job, rather than paying for people who spend all day telling them why they can't.

                    or they could just decide that Ireland simply doesn't need the capability, and flog the airframes, issue the redundancies and save itself a fortune and lose not a lot.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Surely the best way to do this is to open a tender. If the techs at the don can provide the same level of service at same cost as a private company, off with them.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by na grohmití View Post
                        Surely the best way to do this is to open a tender. If the techs at the don can provide the same level of service at same cost as a private company, off with them.
                        Would they have the capability of putting in that tender...
                        'He died who loved to live,' they'll say,
                        'Unselfishly so we might have today!'
                        Like hell! He fought because he had to fight;
                        He died that's all. It was his unlucky night.
                        http://www.salamanderoasis.org/poems...nnis/luck.html

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          [QUOTE=ropebag;435700]neither does the AC...

                          if a commercial company can provide the same service, but do so without the overheads that an in-house, AC requires, then why would you employ the more expensive model?

                          the one reason governments like military, in house forces is that they do what governments want, when they want them to do it, and without quibbling about the contract and presenting the government with a huge bill for the doing what that government wants. if the government has decided, whether off its own bat or because it thinks the AC is institutionally incapable of doing the overseas role, that overseas, crunchy operations are off the table, then the potential requirement for 'off the cuff' operations no longer exists - so everything that is left falls well within the capabilities of any of the larger commercial helicopter operators.

                          you, in fact, could argue that there are a good many commercial helicopter operators who are already more 'warry' than the AC - they fly in places the AC would void its bowels just by googling, so infact you might find that by civilianising the helicopter operation, you actually get a more deployable, crunchy capability than you have now...[/QUOTE

                          The rest of our armed forces do, (your nitpicking) with the exception of the Reserve, this must change, or wind up both organizations. There is in my opinion a better case for disposing of the Air Corps then the reserve, as at least the reserve has weapons, by present day standards the Air Corps is just an expensive, exclusive flying club. (Feck, I hope I'm not dropping anyone at Bal' tonight)
                          "We will hold out until our last bullet is spent. Could do with some whiskey"
                          Radio transmission, siege of Jadotville DR Congo. September 1961.
                          Illegitimi non carborundum

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I've been corrected before that AW139s have deployed for periods in the field at home (not sure for how long but I assume for at least 24 hours).

                            AC fixed wing aircraft have also deployed outside Ireland for short periods (including MATS (not suggesting that MATS counts as overseas)).

                            Hopefully we will see an AC deployment overseas in the next 12 months or so.

                            But any deployment will depend on 3 main issues:
                            - availability of trained personnel (there is a critical shortage of pilots and techs)
                            - finance to be made available
                            - a tasking by Government (nothing can happen without that!)

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Turkey View Post
                              ...The rest of our armed forces do...
                              yes they do - the NS does an 'off the cuff' 6+ months SAR op in the Med while working up a new class of ships and having been preparing to undertake a completely different type of mission in the IO, the Army moves completely out of its previous experience and does a difficult and potentially very crunchy deployment to Chad. both ops involve less than ideal equipment and less prep than people would like, yet they crack on and do it, and do it well.

                              why then should the AC be so different?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X