Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Flying in ireland

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

  • #16
    From Ireland.com

    Planes over Dublin not linked to attacks - Army
    Last updated: 07-07-05, 16:32


    Three Air Corps planes and a Garda helicopter flying over Dublin city centre today resulted in a rash of calls to the Defence Forces from people wondering whether their presence was due to today’s attacks in London.

    The planes and helicopter flew low over the city at around lunchtime.

    However, an Army spokesman told ireland.com the fly over was a rehearsal for next Sunday’s National Day of Commemoration, an annual event held in memory of Irish men and women who have died in past wars and on UN service.

    He said there had been "loads" of calls about the planes.

    The spokesman said the rehearsal had been planned before the seriousness of this morning’s events in London was known. It was very weather-dependant and the planes were flying low due to the level of cloud cover over the city, the spokesman said. He confirmed there were three Air Corps planes and that the Garda helicopter was also involved.

    "It was nothing to do with what has happened in London."

    Sunday’s event will attract a large military presence and will be attended by the President Mary McAleese.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by pym
      well that is the end of that rumour
      That depends on the NS more than the AC. Just as the AC is seeking a greater role in support of overseas missions, so is the NS. I wouldn't discount the rumour entirely.
      "The dolphins were monkeys that didn't like the land, walked back to the water, went back from the sand."

      Comment


      • #18
        For a moment let's imagine he wasn't just paving the way for a new exec. jet.

        If we're serious about joing the EU BGs can anyone really imagine flying a shinny new A320 into a hot spot (Kabul for instance)?

        I know New Zealand bought 2 x 757s for dual role, executive and troop transport, but they're supported by modernised C-130Hs(?).

        IAS

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by FMolloy
          That depends on the NS more than the AC. Just as the AC is seeking a greater role in support of overseas missions, so is the NS. I wouldn't discount the rumour entirely.
          His comments made the point that for the majority of the time,the sea and weather conditions did not allow aircraft operations. Basically what this meant was that both Ship and heli were unsuitable for their intended role.

          How do other navies manage? Do flying ops cease with a bit of swell?


          Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

          Comment


          • #20
            hi all
            The Air Corps-Navy operation had some of the inter-service personnel problems, in similar vein to the Garda-Air Corps set-up. Naturally, all sides would prefer to be their own bosses, but the Don plays it's hand and wins every time. If other navies can do it, so can we. The gardai and the navy should have their own air wing, with no input from the Don.
            regards
            GttC

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by ias
              For a moment let's imagine he wasn't just paving the way for a new exec. jet.

              If we're serious about joing the EU BGs can anyone really imagine flying a shinny new A320 into a hot spot (Kabul for instance)?

              I know New Zealand bought 2 x 757s for dual role, executive and troop transport, but they're supported by modernised C-130Hs(?).

              IAS

              if you look at the recent UN deployments - our troops have been taken over in massive antanovs, i.e. one of the biggest targets in the sky. they arent sent anywhere unless there is relatively secure airbase.

              based upon that, an aircraft like the 320, 757 would be perfect for troop rotations. i would question how often their use and full capacity would be required outside of deployments however - i.e. i think they would be overkill in the vip role.

              i personally would still like aircraft such as the c-295 to be purchased

              Comment


              • #22
                Since when have our forces been deployed to a "hot" zone?

                We still haven't even joined an EU BG so I suppose you're right we don't need tactical transpor!

                IASt

                Comment


                • #23
                  A few points:

                  1. Great news that the GOC is admitting the realistic requirement for a deployable support helicopter capability. Eight is the right number of 139's to provide a 4-5 ship package. Think future Liberias, Afghanistans and Darfurs.
                  2. That said, what possible requirement will ever exist for another two PC-9's? Yes, other than pure pilot training they should be considered potentially deployable on peace support ops - the current situation in Congo is an good example. But eight is is plenty for all foreseeable requirements at home and abroad. Up the 139 order to eight ASAP. More PC-9's would just reinforce a view of the IAC as a less than useful flying club.
                  3. Islanders? OK I guess and better than the 172's, but probably not ideal either, depending on what requirements really are? Have they been published anywhere?Islanders or not, the IAC needs a replacement (low time used late-model) B200 for multi-engine IFR and mission training of pilots after the PC-9 and before they go on to the CASA MPA and the future airlifter...
                  4. A320 airlifter??? All due respect to the GOC, but a short/medium range civil airliner along the lines of an A320 WOULD NOT satisfy Irish airlift requirements. Carrying people and baggage during troop rotations can be more economically accomplished with chartered air as it is now - not to mention the A320's poor range of not much over 2000NM's. What the IAC needs is a.) the ability to move hazardous and sensitive bulk cargo such as ammo and heavy weapons and other equipment, including (RW) vehicles, on short notice over longish distances (3000+ NM's) into austere, less than commercially safe airfields, - and b.) to similarly air deliver humanitarian cargo to remote areas, and c.) to serve as a casualty evacuation platform. The most viable and timely solution is a C-130J-30. The RAF has offered to lease a late-model J (standard fuelage as opposed to a long 30), and Lockheed has offered a lucrative lease to buy arrangement on a new J-30. Astounding to hear the GOC refer to a Hercules as too small and then go on to tout the A320, which carries much less cargo only in the belly over much distance and only to established commercial quality airfields with proper serivcing equipment. I also would be surprised if there were any economic advantages to be had from an airliner vice a real airlifter. To visualize the actual requirment, think Liberia, Darfur, Afghansitan and Tsunami relief.

                  Don't get me wrong, I have a lot of admiration for the GOC and applaud his efforts to transform the Corps into a professional military air arm, but on airlift he's got it wrong.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    There are 2 types of airlift requirements:

                    Strategic - getting the troops into theatre in relatively safe rear areas (eg Saudi Arabia before going to Iraq) role preformed by VC10 & Tristar by RAF

                    Tactical - getting the troops to more forward, dangerous, areas (eg Baghdad) role preformed by C-130 Hercules

                    Some aircraft aim to do both, eg C-17 Globemaster, but make very large targets

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Regarding point 3. The requirement specifics for a cessna replacement is currently being considered. They have not come up with a clear outline as to what roles will be undertaken yet,though it is accepted that the Cessna has come to the end of its useful life.


                      Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        I dont think the GOC mentioned 'islanders' as cessna replecements, didnt read the article yet so might be wrong there....but i think form what i can gather from the original post the cessna replacement will also have to be able to fulfill an 'island relief' capability ie support or comrades residing on or nations islands etc

                        Maybe the thing about strategic lift is more to do with been able to deploy troops at very short notice (days) to troubled areas with as much light kit as they will need using our own assets, as time and areas to deploy to might rule against using outside contractors. These guys will then be supported some time later by a heavier force, utilising other eu nations assets. Now consider that this scenario might only accur once in a blue moon so it would be hard to sell to the gov in terms of expence, easier though if the machine can also double mainly as a gov transport asset aswell. This may be why he is suggesting an a320, its a compromise but what is worse no capability or some.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Been doing a little thinking and research and can see some advantages of going with an airliner based airlifter. If an airliner based solution is more palatable to the government and might therefore permit the IAC to obtain a much needed capability, than rock on.

                          The best option is probably a Boeing 737-800 Combi similar to the US Navy C-40. Cargo door and strengthened floor, wing and landing gear - with the ability to carry eight 463L pallets or 120 pax or 70 pax in the rear half + three pallets in the forward half = 9000KG over a distance of 5500kms. Cost about US$60-65M, though best option is probably lease of a purpose built new aircraft either from Boeing or one of the large leasing firms. With various quick change kits this 737 could support international deployments/contingencies and humanitarian ops, casualty evac and the odd VIP run. Crew training would be contracted out and maintenance subject to lease terms.

                          Compare to C-130J-30 at about the same price, also able to carry 120 pax or eight pallets, but with a payload of 18,000KG, twice the 737, over the same distance + the ability to carry vehicles and outsize cargo and operate into and out of austere fields.

                          There is no combi version of the A320, though performance, cost and other specs are similar to the 737-800. While Airbus would certainly be willing to make a combi A320, the cost may be higher for all the intitial engineering design work that's already been done on the 737 courtesy of the US Navy. There's also the advantage of current exchange rate Euro to $$.

                          A straight-up A320 or 737 airliner, probably used, might be considerably cheaper, but without the cargo capability of a Combi would be too much money for an inadequate capability. If the requirment is only to carry troops and their baggage back and forth overseas a few time a year then stick with chartering.

                          Interstingly, I understand one or two C-40's were at Baldonnel recently on a training hop that just happened to correspond to St. Pats Day. Wonder if the GOC has a chance to take a look?

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Ooops! As you were - what I meant to say was Boeing 737-700C/QC.

                            See http://www.boeing.com/commercial/737...technical.html

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              I think the GOC was way off the mark when he explained the end to Naval Ops. He claims that "Ships of the size we operate traditionally worldwide or europe wide don't operate Helicopters any more".

                              New RN river class? Helipad!
                              Any Nation engaged in EEZ patrolling have heli equipped vessels of the 2000 tonne class,or at least a vehicle equipped with a sizeable helipad.


                              Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                This is the newest US Navy C-40A Clipper, a.k.a. Boeing 737-700C/QC.
                                QC = Quick Change, meaning the seating is on pallets that permit the interior to change from all cargo to all pax or half pax/half cargo in an our or so. See my previous for capabilities, etc.
                                Attached Files

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X