Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Defending the Irish airspace

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

  • Originally posted by na grohmiti View Post
    Does wiki suggest that this internal fuel load is carried in the hold?
    Sweden uses the KC130H in the tanker role, and is well able to refuel its Gripen fleet. They also have 5 C130H, keeping a nice pool of pilots between the 6 Hercs. This in my opinion is the best solution.
    The KC-130 can have an additional tank in the fuselage containing 3,600 US gal of fuel, just over an additional 13,000lt.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by ropebag View Post
      I think we can safely consign the C-295 tanker to the 'mouse-rape-elephant bucket of effectiveness...

      I'm actually really surprised at how little fuel it carries (might be worth someone checking that figure though, it's very small. It (apparently) only carries marginally more fuel than a Rafael, Typhoon, and rather less than an F-15 with FAST packs....
      In the AAR role the C-295 is designed to off-load 7,500lt of fuel.
      Remember the C-295 is a very efficient light tactical aircraft with a MTOW of only 21,000kg, a Rafale has a MTOW of 24,500kg while an F-15 is up at 30,800kg. A KC-295 is more targeted at refueling CSAR helicopters rather than fast jets.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by na grohmiti View Post
        Does wiki suggest that this internal fuel load is carried in the hold?
        Sweden uses the KC130H in the tanker role, and is well able to refuel its Gripen fleet. They also have 5 C130H, keeping a nice pool of pilots between the 6 Hercs. This in my opinion is the best solution.
        The internal figures I've seen for the 295 are normal fuel only, no extra tank in the cargo hold. I don't doubt you could put more fuel in the cargo hold, but then you're buying a tanker, rather than an MPA or Cargo aircraft that can helpfully refuel fighters in an emergency/sideline.

        The C-130 seems to paddling in a whole different pond - with an internal tank in the cargo bay it can dish out 75,000lb of fuel at 500 miles from base...

        From my dodgy maths that looks like filling up TEN completely empty Gripens with three external tanks each while tootling around some 400 miles west of Shannon.

        Comment


        • I have over-layed Irish controlled airspace with the combat radius of a JAS-39E onto a number of Tu-142 tracks. From this it is easy to see that for a QRA aircraft operating out of Rineanna Airbase would not require the support of a tanker.


          Click image for larger version

Name:	IADR1.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	168.7 KB
ID:	698379
          EUFighter
          Colonel
          Last edited by EUFighter; 13 December 2020, 14:10.

          Comment


          • Can't see the attachment...

            What did you use as your concept of operations?

            I'm assuming that what would be required is to meet it north east of Donegal somewhere, and trail it all the way down until you'd hand over to the French, and then presumably do the reverse for the return trip.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by ropebag View Post
              Can't see the attachment...

              What did you use as your concept of operations?

              I'm assuming that what would be required is to meet it north east of Donegal somewhere, and trail it all the way down until you'd hand over to the French, and then presumably do the reverse for the return trip.
              I have done a number of tracks to intercept the Irish Control box as far away as possible, so hand over from/to RAF in the North and to the AdA in the South.
              Assumption is that the Russians stay out of our Territorial Airspace as opposed to out controlled area
              Click image for larger version

Name:	Track 1.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	118.1 KB
ID:	698380
              Click image for larger version

Name:	Track 2.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	119.9 KB
ID:	698381
              Click image for larger version

Name:	Track 3.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	117.6 KB
ID:	698382

              Comment


              • Just on a side note, it is worth looking at where the Russian aircraft are coming from Fedotovo Air Base for the Tu-142s and Engels for the Tu-95 and 160s. Both have plenty of ramp space and nice 3,500m long runways but not a single hangar to be seen for the big birds!
                Must be the mild aircraft friendly weather conditions they have in central Russia.

                Comment


                • Hangars are for capitalist lackey running dogs/western softies....

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
                    Hangars are for capitalist lackey running dogs/western softies....
                    And P12's...
                    '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


                    • Originally posted by EUFighter View Post
                      ....Rineanna Airbase....
                      That name went out with the Gloster Gladiator...

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Jetjock View Post
                        That name went out with the Gloster Gladiator...
                        Actually the name changed before the Gladiators left service.

                        It is common for shared facilities for the military base to have a different name from the host airport. An example is in Belgium, there is Brussels Airport and on the northern side is Melsbroek Air Base. Even if if was meant in jest, a AC base at Shannon need not be called Shannon but Rineanna or any other name.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by EUFighter View Post
                          Actually the name changed before the Gladiators left service.

                          It is common for shared facilities for the military base to have a different name from the host airport. An example is in Belgium, there is Brussels Airport and on the northern side is Melsbroek Air Base. Even if if was meant in jest, a AC base at Shannon need not be called Shannon but Rineanna or any other name.
                          The majority of Shannon Airport lies within the townland of Kilconry. Shannon is a recent creation, didn't exist before 1982. Some still call it "Shannon New town". The Parish itself was only created in 1962, to serve the many wairport workers living in the area.. The main Airport Runway 06/24 lies within the townland of Rineanna.
                          Rineanna Airfield was renamed Shannon Airport in 1942. It became the world's first Duty Free airport in 1947.
                          For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                          Comment


                          • The ironic thing is that most aircraft of this type, be they turboprop or jet live out of doors for all of their service lives and only come in for checks or unscheduled maintenance and even most of that is done outside. Russian aircraft rarely see the inside of a hangar. When Russian aircraft were routinely based at Shannon, they were rarely if ever hangared and even engine changes were done out of doors. You'd be laughed off the airport if you told a Russian that you wanted to pull an aircraft inside a hangar for a tyre change.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by warthog View Post
                              the previous GOC has stated that a true QRA would require 16 airframes- a near doubling in the size of the IAC- it's not happening in my lifetime!
                              (unless the EU made us, in which case there would be uproar with the public)
                              He proposed 16 airframes and 3 times as many pilots.
                              The number of pilots is fairly easy to determine as you need 2 ready and 2 back-up 24/7/365. Given working hour restrictions means a minimum of 20 is needed just to man QRA. Throw in conversion and other training and you move up to 32-36 pilots. The more you have the more flexibility and more system robustness. The number of aircraft is a function of how hard you want to run them.

                              As for the size and organisation of the AC, this would have to change out of all recognition. It would not be like just introducing a new aircraft, there would be the whole new training schemes both for pilots and techies.

                              The pressure will come from outside, and as for the "public uproar", we all know it will be the usual mob and we should for once be prepared to confront them with how the real world works.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by EUFighter View Post
                                He proposed 16 airframes and 3 times as many pilots.
                                The number of pilots is fairly easy to determine as you need 2 ready and 2 back-up 24/7/365. Given working hour restrictions means a minimum of 20 is needed just to man QRA. Throw in conversion and other training and you move up to 32-36 pilots. The more you have the more flexibility and more system robustness. The number of aircraft is a function of how hard you want to run them.

                                As for the size and organisation of the AC, this would have to change out of all recognition. It would not be like just introducing a new aircraft, there would be the whole new training schemes both for pilots and techies.

                                The pressure will come from outside, and as for the "public uproar", we all know it will be the usual mob and we should for once be prepared to confront them with how the real world works.
                                Now add enough aircrew to make EAS sustainable, 4 SAR detachments and FWSAR plus normal DF work

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X