Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Defending the Irish airspace

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

  • Originally posted by CTU View Post
    Or have IAC personnel based at IAA in Shannon (similar to RAF Swanwick) and link them into an Air Operations Centre at Baldonnel.
    Originally posted by na grohmiti View Post
    Didn't there used to be an Air Corps ATC person based in Dublin ATC to assist in controlling R15? Why not have the same setup for Irish controlled airspace? Good experience for the AC ATC person and an extra pair of hands in Shannon. (Its a fine building, almost in civilisation.)
    Would be benefit absolutely but AC ATC is a very small organisation (remembering not that long ago Baldonnel couldn’t operate 24/7 due to lack of ATC
    personnel) and modern RAP could see someone in Baldonnel having access to the whole picture.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by DeV View Post
      Would be benefit absolutely but AC ATC is a very small organisation (remembering not that long ago Baldonnel couldn’t operate 24/7 due to lack of ATC
      personnel) and modern RAP could see someone in Baldonnel having access to the whole picture.
      Well if you are looking to operate a 24/7/365(6) QRA, Then I would hope that the manpower issues would be sorted out first. If the Air Corps do get a chance at this once in a life time opportunity then let's do it Properly from the top down, and not the usual half a**ed approach of the past.
      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


      • Originally posted by CTU View Post
        Well if you are looking to operate a 24/7/365(6) QRA, Then I would hope that the manpower issues would be sorted out first. If the Air Corps do get a chance at this once in a life time opportunity then let's do it Properly from the top down, and not the usual half a**ed approach of the past.
        The problem is bottom up

        Comment


        • Originally posted by pilatus View Post
          According to this PDF on Saab's website, the Gripen has been designed to have a service life of 8000 hours, so it could be used for 266 hours per year for 30 years or 200 hours over a 40 year service life.

          https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...=1594147224241
          Cheers for the link.

          The point I was making was that to cover 24/7 there would need to be a minimum of 4 crews. This is to be within the WTD on the amount of hours per week.

          But these pilots will need to be replaced for holidays and training. There it is likely that the minimum of pilots would be 6 crews. This then gives us a pilot cadre of 24.

          Each pilot would need 200 hours per year. This then means the fleet would have to produce 4800 hours per year.

          Given that we are talking of leasing 2nd hand JAS-39 C&D variants they will have used up at 15 years of service. Staying with the assumption of 200 hours per year this should leave them with 5000 hours remaining. That this is very close to the annual utilisation rate, lets us say for each year we would need 1 aircraft. So a 10 year lease would need 10 aircraft as a minimum.

          If this is desirable is another thing as there might be available issues in the later years. It might be more desirable to have a fleet size closer to that of South Africa rather than that of Hungary.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by EUFighter View Post
            Cheers for the link.

            The point I was making was that to cover 24/7 there would need to be a minimum of 4 crews. This is to be within the WTD on the amount of hours per week.

            But these pilots will need to be replaced for holidays and training. There it is likely that the minimum of pilots would be 6 crews. This then gives us a pilot cadre of 24.

            Each pilot would need 200 hours per year. This then means the fleet would have to produce 4800 hours per year.

            Given that we are talking of leasing 2nd hand JAS-39 C&D variants they will have used up at 15 years of service. Staying with the assumption of 200 hours per year this should leave them with 5000 hours remaining. That this is very close to the annual utilisation rate, lets us say for each year we would need 1 aircraft. So a 10 year lease would need 10 aircraft as a minimum.

            If this is desirable is another thing as there might be available issues in the later years. It might be more desirable to have a fleet size closer to that of South Africa rather than that of Hungary.
            Probably best to follow international practice for this.
            If a pilot is on standby he/she is not necessarily flying. Same goes for ground crew. A bit like a stand to, or even most volunteer fire fighters here. You have the pager, but you aren't wearing your firemans hat for the duration. when you are off, you are OFF! Full ground crew would be required for the same time pilot is on standby. How do the Coastguard helis get around it? Their aircraft would fly far more frequently (operationally) than an interceptor would, plus training flights.

            WRT South Africa, 17C + 9D I understand they had been having issues keeping all theirs flying at present on cost grounds, so they are rotating aircraft between long term storage and flyable. (I'd be inclined to blame the Armscor arrangement for that rather than a Saab issue.) Nothing is going into long term storage any more though. The 2:1 C/D ratio seems a good idea too.
            German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
            German 2: Private? I am a general!
            German 1: That is the bad news.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by na grohmiti View Post
              Probably best to follow international practice for this.
              If a pilot is on standby he/she is not necessarily flying. Same goes for ground crew. A bit like a stand to, or even most volunteer fire fighters here. You have the pager, but you aren't wearing your firemans hat for the duration. when you are off, you are OFF! Full ground crew would be required for the same time pilot is on standby. How do the Coastguard helis get around it? Their aircraft would fly far more frequently (operationally) than an interceptor would, plus training flights.

              WRT South Africa, 17C + 9D I understand they had been having issues keeping all theirs flying at present on cost grounds, so they are rotating aircraft between long term storage and flyable. (I'd be inclined to blame the Armscor arrangement for that rather than a Saab issue.) Nothing is going into long term storage any more though. The 2:1 C/D ratio seems a good idea too.
              It is rather different from a volunteer fire fighter. If we had a pilot on standby to launch they would have already a lot of their kit on especially for a 5min scramble. On alert is still counted as working hours even if they are not flying.

              There are a number of ways that crews could be scheduled but they will have to comply with the WTD. As mentioned by others if we're going to ever do this then we should do it right and have the right level of resources. All too often it is just enough until something happens like someone is ill.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by na grohmiti View Post
                WRT South Africa, 17C + 9D I understand they had been having issues keeping all theirs flying at present on cost grounds, so they are rotating aircraft between long term storage and flyable. (I'd be inclined to blame the Armscor arrangement for that rather than a Saab issue.) Nothing is going into long term storage any more though. The 2:1 C/D ratio seems a good idea too.
                The problem is in the main due to the collapse of the Rand and the downturn in the economy plus having to still pay for the World Cup.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by EUFighter View Post
                  It is rather different from a volunteer fire fighter. If we had a pilot on standby to launch they would have already a lot of their kit on especially for a 5min scramble. On alert is still counted as working hours even if they are not flying.

                  There are a number of ways that crews could be scheduled but they will have to comply with the WTD. As mentioned by others if we're going to ever do this then we should do it right and have the right level of resources. All too often it is just enough until something happens like someone is ill.
                  Never mind the WTD

                  It is the AC Flight Duty Period that needs to be complied with and that is for very good safety reasons

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                    Never mind the WTD

                    It is the AC Flight Duty Period that needs to be complied with and that is for very good safety reasons
                    It is both. What the two mean is we will need more than 8 pilots to cover 25/7/365

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by EUFighter View Post
                      It is both. What the two mean is we will need more than 8 pilots to cover 25/7/365
                      Rule of thumb is that in order to cover 1 role 24/7 you need 5 staff.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Graylion View Post
                        Rule of thumb is that in order to cover 1 role 24/7 you need 5 staff.
                        Throw in some leave for training and you have 6. This is why I think a minimum of 24 pilots would be needed to have a 2+2 ship QRA set-up.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by EUFighter View Post
                          Throw in some leave for training and you have 6. This is why I think a minimum of 24 pilots would be needed to have a 2+2 ship QRA set-up.
                          Can't have pilots without techies. Same ratio?
                          German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
                          German 2: Private? I am a general!
                          German 1: That is the bad news.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by EUFighter View Post
                            Throw in some leave for training and you have 6. This is why I think a minimum of 24 pilots would be needed to have a 2+2 ship QRA set-up.
                            You would then need 18 aircraft in the fleet so as to have those 24 pilots qualified as Basic Mission Ready based on the 1:1.25 ratio if you were trying an RAF level QRA capability.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by na grohmiti View Post
                              Can't have pilots without techies. Same ratio?
                              For the aircraft ground crew the quick answer is yes as they will be covering the same times.
                              For depot level maintenance the level of techies is determined by the number of aircraft.

                              Comment


                              • https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/russ...n-kaliningrad/

                                .... the Kaliningrad-based radar should “be capable of monitoring the entire territory of Europe, including the United Kingdom.”

                                And Ireland for that matter.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X