Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Defending the Irish airspace

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

  • Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
    That's more like it. Bit of BVR, they don't like it up 'em.
    Nothing says "gerrorf my land" like a blast of BVR.
    For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by EUFighter View Post

      Follow the reference in wiki and you will find nothing to support the statement.

      We have discussed the advantage of having RF missiles as well as IR and the decision would be the operational need, mainly driven by weather conditions. While early usage of the F16 in the air defence role was limited to Sidewinders with the advance of the AIM120 series of missile the typical CAP mission now has a mix. It is always a bit strange to see the much heavier AIM120 on the wingtip rail!
      apart from the fact that no AAM (apart from Sidewinder) is currently integrated into FA50

      no user can have any AAM at the minute

      Comment


      • Would the Boeing-Saab T-7 be an option?
        What are you cackling at, fatty? Too much pie, that's your problem.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by ODIN View Post
          Would the Boeing-Saab T-7 be an option?
          Not until they arm it, and greatly ramp up production for potential export.
          For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by na grohmiti View Post

            Not until they arm it, and greatly ramp up production for potential export.
            From reading, it looks like the arming of the platform is in the works already, and given we haven't even released an RFP yet, there might be runway (excuse the pun!) for Boeing-Saab to get this done.
            What are you cackling at, fatty? Too much pie, that's your problem.

            Comment


            • We don't want to be launch customer.
              Don't expect to see an RFP until we get agreement on LOA2 first. Expect Us to ramp up to LOA3 not before 2030. We have a lot of work to do.
              For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

              Comment


              • I think the very best we can hope for is the Aermacchi M-346. we wont be getting Gripens or F16s, if not for the pure optics of a "fighter" but on economic grounds especially in light of the way the economy is going to go. We wont be doing QRA either as we wont have enough aircraft,I reckon we might get 8 ,at best 10 aircraft but probably 8 and unless there is a drastic change in Pay we wont have the manpower.

                Our QRA will be 9 to 5 Monday to Friday and only if the RAF give us the heads up first. An that is because I dont think we will acquire the military radar required for surveillance of our airspace. I think we will be lucky to replace the Giraffes

                Comment


                • Originally posted by ODIN View Post
                  Would the Boeing-Saab T-7 be an option?
                  Short answer is no.

                  The T-7 is a jet trainer, a good aircraft and one that looks like a jet fighter to the "man in the street" but it is far from being one. The integration of a fire control system plus the qualification of the weapons system to be used will cost a lot of money and take many years to complete. Priority for Boeing is to get the T-7 into service and avoid the issues it is having with products out of Seattle. Plus Boeing does not have the spare engineering capacity to do this unless there is a big launch customer.

                  While there have been statements that Boeing sees an armed version of the T7 as a replacement of F-5s most have already been replaced or are in the process of being replaced. And the replacement in a lot of cases are either the JAS39 or F16. And on the world market there is the T50/FA50 already available with a FCS and W/S which includes and internal gun something it would not be easy to integrate into the T7 airframe.

                  The four biggest F5 operators are Iran (no way they will get T7), South Korea (they have the FA50), Turkey (they have their Hurjet) and Taiwan (just order F16V and have their T3). So a big market for a new variant will be difficult to come by.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by apc View Post
                    I think the very best we can hope for is the Aermacchi M-346. we wont be getting Gripens or F16s, if not for the pure optics of a "fighter" but on economic grounds especially in light of the way the economy is going to go. We wont be doing QRA either as we wont have enough aircraft,I reckon we might get 8 ,at best 10 aircraft but probably 8 and unless there is a drastic change in Pay we wont have the manpower.

                    Our QRA will be 9 to 5 Monday to Friday and only if the RAF give us the heads up first. An that is because I dont think we will acquire the military radar required for surveillance of our airspace. I think we will be lucky to replace the Giraffes
                    If this were the case radar would be a better purchase than a bunch of trainers with limited top speeds and range

                    Comment


                    • Absolutely, radar is the more important, certainly more important than Mach 2 fighters as well. In fairness F16s and Gripens are useless without a comprehensive national surveillance radar system. How long will it take to get such a system working 24/7 in place with a central command structure that would allow for us to react around the clock at the very short notice that air threats demand.

                      Chickens and eggs

                      That is why we will only get trainers. It looks like we are addressing the issue of air defence but on the cheap and without being overly aggressive .
                      Have we the cabability to run a QRA system 24/7?
                      I don't think we will ever have that capability so why buy fighters we can't use effectively

                      Comment


                      • Other part of it is do we need true 24/7 QRA at the traditional 5-15 mins response time?

                        could be argued we don’t

                        we need an air policing capability for high profile events (eg EU summits, VIP visits, etc) in which case QRA could be stood up for the duration

                        any Russian aircraft we should get about 60 mins notice of a Russian AF approaching Irish controlled airspace

                        the unpredictable threat is probably the greatest - terrorism / civil aviation (eg non responsive aircraft) or a little green men type situation

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by EUFighter View Post
                          What restriction will be placed on sales of the KF-21 we will have to see.
                          Lockheed Martin have no IP rights or investment stakes in the KF-21 so KAI are be free to sell it to whomever has the cash. The only main US components are the two GE F414-400K which produces 22,000 lbf of which, similar F414 variants go into the Gripen E and Shornet.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                            Other part of it is do we need true 24/7 QRA at the traditional 5-15 mins response time?

                            could be argued we don’t

                            we need an air policing capability for high profile events (eg EU summits, VIP visits, etc) in which case QRA could be stood up for the duration

                            any Russian aircraft we should get about 60 mins notice of a Russian AF approaching Irish controlled airspace

                            the unpredictable threat is probably the greatest - terrorism / civil aviation (eg non responsive aircraft) or a little green men type situation
                            On the point of Supersonic/Transonic.. most scrambles for loss comms on civil-aircraft would be heading west-east, and for the odd Russian activity, if set up properly, should get notice from "partner nations", so could supersonic requirements be classed as preferred, but not necessarily required???

                            The basic trainer aircraft has done supersonic tests during development, and I am sure I read not to long ago (can't seem to find the source at the moment) that the M-346 engines (Honeywell/ITEC F124), are restricted to 80% Max power. There is an afterburner version of the engines (F125), so could it be possible that Leonardo could eventually upgrade the engines on the "FA" version, which, while believed to be ordered by an "unnamed "country, is technically still under development.
                            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


                            • I dont think we need it nor can do it, but even at 60 minutes notice we still need a 24/7 presence or commitment along the lines of CHC contract, would that work with readying and launching 2 aircraft to police the threat, I dont know. We would probably require at least a 24/7 command structure to authorise and oversee the mission.
                              Surely then if we are just rendezvousing with a belligerent aircraft and escorting it through our airspace then a capable trainer would suffice . Any aircraft fighter or trainer would struggle to escort an aircraft through our airspace without having to refuel. So would our air policing be a rendezvous , fly alongside for a while and then let them on their way, just letting them know we know they are there

                              Comment


                              • Most EU QRA launches are not to intercept a Russian Bear or similar, the majority are for non-responding civil aircraft, these do not have the 60 minutes warning. It could even be argued that 15minutes for such cases is too long.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X