Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Defending the Irish airspace

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

  • If you read the commission on defence even if loa 3 is accepted they don’t foresee a squadron of fighters before 2040

    Comment


    • Originally posted by apc View Post
      As I said radar would identify most "threats", it seems the RAF/NATO will have identified any military "threats" so therefore tracking by radar would suffice. As we are a neutral state we pose no threat to anyone, so therefore any issues with civil aircraft would be benign in nature, and even if it was a threat what do you think we would do.
      I am questioning why people think we need one or two squadrons of MACH 2 fighters and operate 24/7 QRA for situations that offer little or no threat and are a fairly infrequent occurrence.
      No one has addressed how we are going to man and operate such a force Of course we can buy aircraft and send pilots away to train, but will we have enough pilots, technical crew, ground crew, security etc to operate such a force on such a footing and putting command systems in place.
      I understand that we should be able to defend our country but from who and how far should we go.
      I think some people just want fighters for the sake of having fighters. It's just overkill
      You focus is too narrow, the argument for the capability to police one owns airspace is not purely limited to tracking Russian aircraft playing silly bugger. It is about have the control over that airspace, being able to monitor and utilise and effector when necessary. The majority of QRA missions are dealing with civilian aircraft, either those who have lost radio contact or a technical defect. The State needs to be able to have the control and the ability to exercise it.

      There are any number of scenarios which do not involve a Russian bomber, a repeat of 9/11, a incident such as the Helios jet or plan and simple the pilots have fallen asleep! In each case the State does not only need to be able to track the aircraft (which radar does give) but to be able to better understand what is happening with the aircraft. This is were a fast jet fighter comes in, the pilots can report what they can see and so the authorities can take the correct actions.

      Comment


      • I can't get to sleep
        I think about the implications
        Of diving in too deep
        And possibly the complications
        Especially at night
        I worry over situations that
        I know will be alright
        It's just overkill
        For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by EUFighter View Post

          You focus is too narrow, the argument for the capability to police one owns airspace is not purely limited to tracking Russian aircraft playing silly bugger. It is about have the control over that airspace, being able to monitor and utilise and effector when necessary. The majority of QRA missions are dealing with civilian aircraft, either those who have lost radio contact or a technical defect. The State needs to be able to have the control and the ability to exercise it.

          There are any number of scenarios which do not involve a Russian bomber, a repeat of 9/11, a incident such as the Helios jet or plan and simple the pilots have fallen asleep! In each case the State does not only need to be able to track the aircraft (which radar does give) but to be able to better understand what is happening with the aircraft. This is were a fast jet fighter comes in, the pilots can report what they can see and so the authorities can take the correct actions.
          Step 1 (once we have taken a decision to do something) no matter what we do has to be radar otherwise in many cases you may not know when to launch (whatever you may be launching)

          another threat is also if there is a VVIP event and an aircraft intrudes into prohibited airspace

          Depending on the location part of the Defence would be QRA

          Comment


          • Originally posted by paul g View Post
            If you read the commission on defence even if loa 3 is accepted they don’t foresee a squadron of fighters before 2040
            kicking to touch again. Gripens will be gone by then and anything else will be prohibitively expensive.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post

              kicking to touch again. Gripens will be gone by then and anything else will be prohibitively expensive.
              Ok, I've found a mythical money tree, and we are going to buy a squadron of Gripens, he lead time on delivery is five years. Do we have enough time to upgrade infrastructure, train ground and air crew, put in place primary radar and do whatever else needs to be done before delivery? Also, where are we sending pilots for training?
              What are you cackling at, fatty? Too much pie, that's your problem.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by ODIN View Post

                Ok, I've found a mythical money tree, and we are going to buy a squadron of Gripens, he lead time on delivery is five years. Do we have enough time to upgrade infrastructure, train ground and air crew, put in place primary radar and do whatever else needs to be done before delivery? Also, where are we sending pilots for training?
                Looking at what Brazil is doing, the process is relatively straightforward when it comes to pilot training. They learn the basics of mil flying on the PC9M, then move to simulators on the Gripen before progressing to the real aircraft, under the supervision of the Saab Test pilot.
                For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                Comment


                • We may also need to look at BAL is it sufficient to house a fleet of Fast Jets? Should we be looking to fly them from a separate airfield, also in light of current situation, BAL is the single point of failure in any situation.
                  "Why am I using a new putter? Because the last one didn't float too well." -Craig Stadler

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by gaff85 View Post
                    We may also need to look at BAL is it sufficient to house a fleet of Fast Jets? Should we be looking to fly them from a separate airfield, also in light of current situation, BAL is the single point of failure in any situation.
                    Wouldn't the obvious place be Shannon or (dare I say it) Knock airport? It's got a long runway, hasn't it?
                    '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


                    • At a time of escalating tension you are going disperse your aircraft

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by gaff85 View Post
                        We may also need to look at BAL is it sufficient to house a fleet of Fast Jets? Should we be looking to fly them from a separate airfield, also in light of current situation, BAL is the single point of failure in any situation.
                        Not too mention the reaction of the locals and their TDs the first time any fighters scrambled…

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                          At a time of escalating tension you are going disperse your aircraft
                          Dead right you are, look what happened Ukraine initially, most destroyed on the ground as they were in specific air bases, we have one, only would need one direct hit and all air assets are out of use.

                          Agree need to have more SNN, NOC even the likes of SXL as they would al have 24hr ATC/Fire Cover
                          "Why am I using a new putter? Because the last one didn't float too well." -Craig Stadler

                          Comment


                          • Baldonnel doesnt meet NATO standards as a fighter base. It's also densely surrounded by industry and housing so flying a fighter out of there will be unpopular because of noise and the risk of a crash into a populated structure.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
                              Baldonnel doesnt meet NATO standards as a fighter base. It's also densely surrounded by industry and housing so flying a fighter out of there will be unpopular because of noise and the risk of a crash into a populated structure.
                              Base them in Shannon (Push himself over the edge once and for all) and operate them from sections of roadway like Finland and Sweden do. Ever wonder why there is a perfectly straight wide stretch of road outside Kilworth Camp??
                              https://goo.gl/maps/piDFFrg66jvDXYnP7
                              For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by na grohmiti View Post

                                Base them in Shannon (Push himself over the edge once and for all) and operate them from sections of roadway like Finland and Sweden do. Ever wonder why there is a perfectly straight wide stretch of road outside Kilworth Camp??
                                https://goo.gl/maps/piDFFrg66jvDXYnP7
                                Time to take back the road outside of the camp and turning it into an airfield!!
                                What are you cackling at, fatty? Too much pie, that's your problem.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X