Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Military Barracks Maintenance/Modernisation

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

  • #46
    Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
    in effect, the future (and publicised plan) for Dublin Airport is for hard stands, offices and hangarage on the Western footprint of the airport between the two main runways. there are persistent rumours that some of the old hangarage will be knocked and tenants moved Westward. A lot of the rerouting of old roads and laying of new roads has been done. As for usage, a lot of usage is effectively temporary, ie, park for a day or two and go off again. The kind of very long term parking that you see in Shannon is not really a thing in Dublin Airport.
    where there is a stand currently, south of the fire station?

    if AC was there they would want them more of less full time


    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by DeV View Post

      Argument can be made that contracting out anything that isn’t military (as in Defence of the State (and overseas)) allows the DF to concentrate on that.

      not that I’m advocating it
      Doing active peace time roles such as FP for the Navy and elements of ATCP for troops adds to competence and gives on the ground Comms and deployment experience. Any kind of operational experience is scarce in peacetime so any opportunity to manoeuvre is welcome. Dropping ATCP/SAR type tasks because of inconvenience would not be a good policy

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post

        Doing active peace time roles such as FP for the Navy and elements of ATCP for troops adds to competence and gives on the ground Comms and deployment experience. Any kind of operational experience is scarce in peacetime so any opportunity to manoeuvre is welcome. Dropping ATCP/SAR type tasks because of inconvenience would not be a good policy
        Absolutely I agree and it is better VFM

        But other countries have other agencies and better equipped militaries

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post

          Doing active peace time roles such as FP for the Navy and elements of ATCP for troops adds to competence and gives on the ground Comms and deployment experience. Any kind of operational experience is scarce in peacetime so any opportunity to manoeuvre is welcome. Dropping ATCP/SAR type tasks because of inconvenience would not be a good policy
          Problem is we have become caught up in ATCP/ATCA duties as a priority, and have equipped accordingly. What we should have done is equipped to fulfil primary roles first (defend the state from external or internal aggression) and with surplus capability carry out the ATCP/ATCA duties.
          For now, everything hangs on the CoDF report, which is published, but after discussion with parties in government will probably commence being implemented in May or June.

          Comment


          • #50
            DeV, that ramp area directly in front of the current fire station is mostly used as remote parking or turnaround parking for the big freighters or any large aircraft that has a long visit planned. Don't forget, the 2 Casas were accomodated in Dublin recently enough when the Don had ATC issues. Space is not really as big an issue as it appears. You might have to move an aircraft around a bit but generally there is plenty of room.

            Comment


            • #51
              100 years ago we inherited the military infrastructure we have today, buildings and facilities have changed but the locations have remained the same. Baldonnel and Gormanstown were originally RFC station, located for the needs of WW1. In those days Baldonnel was perfect for interception of any German raiders although none came. Even in WW2 the locations was relevant, and if we look across the water London too had bases close by. Today apart from Northolt which is a special case all the bases have closed. The same goes for all the army locations, they were located to control the civil population in event of an uprising. There locations were not chosen for the defence of the country in the 21st century.

              Location and the associated investment for military infrastructure needs to be thought in the very long term, 100year+. While Dublin airport may offer some possibility for the short term in the real long term it too will become unsuitable. It too is hemmed in on the north, east and south sides and as traffic grows the capacity will be limited. And if by some miracle we ever did get some fast jets they would find it difficult to operate out of an airport so close to large urban populations.

              So maybe once we know what the direction our defence forces will follow after the Commission's report we should look at what infrastructure is needed with a green field approach. If some of the existing locations are suitable then keep them but if not then divest and invest in new locations that will support the DF for the next 100 years.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by EUFighter View Post
                100 years ago we inherited the military infrastructure we have today, buildings and facilities have changed but the locations have remained the same. Baldonnel and Gormanstown were originally RFC station, located for the needs of WW1. In those days Baldonnel was perfect for interception of any German raiders although none came. Even in WW2 the locations was relevant, and if we look across the water London too had bases close by. Today apart from Northolt which is a special case all the bases have closed. The same goes for all the army locations, they were located to control the civil population in event of an uprising. There locations were not chosen for the defence of the country in the 21st century.

                Location and the associated investment for military infrastructure needs to be thought in the very long term, 100year+. While Dublin airport may offer some possibility for the short term in the real long term it too will become unsuitable. It too is hemmed in on the north, east and south sides and as traffic grows the capacity will be limited. And if by some miracle we ever did get some fast jets they would find it difficult to operate out of an airport so close to large urban populations.

                So maybe once we know what the direction our defence forces will follow after the Commission's report we should look at what infrastructure is needed with a green field approach. If some of the existing locations are suitable then keep them but if not then divest and invest in new locations that will support the DF for the next 100 years.
                Reasoning for barracks locations was also the speed of MT, helicopters didn’t exist and neither did dual carriageways. With regard to RAF/RFC bases it was probably also to do with aircraft range (there was also at least 1 in Munster).

                We have actually closed the only 2 military barracks the State built.

                Don’t think that fast jets based out of Dublin would be too much of an issue but IMHO space is.

                On the other hand, basing at a regional airport (to support viability?) could even require runway extensions and the like, as well as a lot of built infrastructure.

                Green field site or just use of existing locations, a lot of modern fit for purpose, energy efficient built infrastructure is required by the DF

                Comment


                • #53
                  Talk of green field sites is encouraging, however a cursory look at recent history when it comes to the state purchasing greenfield sites for state buildings is not encouraging. The new Garda HQ in Kilmainham, The new prison site that was never built on. The Garda tactical training centre outside Templemore?
                  I'd suggest instead make better use of what we have. The DF owns huge areas of land around the country, most of which is used for short periods throughout the year for training. Accommodation on most of these rarely goes beyond single storey huts. BUILD UP! Even in Coolmoney, there is a very poor use of space, and too many buildings there are effectively idle, could be knocked, a 3 storey building put there instead, and to be honest, nobody in civvy street would be any wiser. Same could be said for Finner, Kilworth, Bere Island, etc.
                  We are renting the majority of army land to sheep farmers!
                  For now, everything hangs on the CoDF report, which is published, but after discussion with parties in government will probably commence being implemented in May or June.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
                    DeV, that ramp area directly in front of the current fire station is mostly used as remote parking or turnaround parking for the big freighters or any large aircraft that has a long visit planned. Don't forget, the 2 Casas were accomodated in Dublin recently enough when the Don had ATC issues. Space is not really as big an issue as it appears. You might have to move an aircraft around a bit but generally there is plenty of room.
                    Once again GTTC, you are making statements that are untrue.
                    ​​​
                    As bad as the ATC staffing situation has been what you are referring to had absolutely nothing to do with ATC and everything to do with inadequate CRS cover at Bal due to a COVID outbreak.

                    During this period a combination of Learjet, PC12 and CASA were operating out of Dublin as a contingency. All were parked at the GA apron area on the North side of the airport. It lasted about 10 days.

                    Also, I'd be interested to hear you're thoughts on getting a fully loaded learjet/casa out of Waterford or Donegal on a contaminated runway might be. You seem to infer it would be a non issue.
                    ​​​​​
                    ​​​​

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      The Casas parking in Dublin was before Covid. It certainly wasn't the first time as it happened several times in my era and was easily carried out. It was publicised at the time I referred to, as an ATC shortage(inability to provide 24/7 cover). There may also have been co-related issues of fire crew retirements/retention. The Learjet and Casas are two quite different aircraft for comparison purposes. I'm quite aware of what a contaminated runway is and I've never mentioned that issue in any conversation on here. I'll grant you that Carrickfin would be a sporty place to have issues with contamination,especially in a Learjet, but I'm more familiar with Waterford,as it happens. Given that Waterford is only 30m shorter than Baldonnel's 04/22, then it's a moot point. A Casa couldnt tolerate a wet,short-ish runway at Waterford no more than it could at Baldonnel. I must dig my Performance A notes down from the attic and have a go. Have the Air Corps ever actually flown the Learjet fully loaded? Fuel tanks brimmed, full pax and baggage? That'd be interesting in it's own right. Apart from that, what kind of an air arm is unable to disperse itself,to the State's airports, when the need arises?

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Without getting bogged down in the exciting world of aircraft performance its worth noting the following.

                        22/04 at Bal is 4800 and 21/03 at EIWF is 4700ft. To say that its a mere 30 metres is a tad disengenious as you have chosen to ignore the fact that 21 in EIWF is a LDA of 3200ft based on a 3 degree approach. The threshold is also displaced for what I assume is terrain/obstacles in the protected area. So for planning purposes you are now working off using 3200ft, not 4700ft. Given the prevailing wind and the rwy orientation i can't see the NDB to 03 being used to frequently. Introduce a narrower runway (45m vs 30m) and a contaminated environment and it requires a little bit more consideration than "its 30 metres shorter than 22 in Bal".

                        Then again, if push comes to shove you can always throw cuation to the wind. Its a while back now but the G3 performance figures for getting in and out of Weston would have made for very interesting reading. Fortunately there was never an incident/accident.

                        You are retired a long time so i can't vouch for ATC availability in the 90/00s but the lack of H24 ATC has been felt most recently from circa 2015/16 to present day. The most recent positioning of aircraft to Dublin for any sort of prolonged period (other than a night or two) was in 2020 and this was due to CRS issues in Bal due to COVID as opposed to ATC.

                        A quick google suggests that the MTOW for the Learjet would be exceeded with both full pax load and full fuel load (like a lot of aircraft) so you can have one but not the other. Not sure if the dept website publishes pax numbers for MATS flights but can't imagine the big hitting depts not travelling with a full compliment of staff where possible.

                        I digress.

                        For all the talk I can't see Baldonnel being sold anytime soon. To do so would require a 10-15 year relocation plan and when you have the now CoS turning down an extra pilatus because "there was nowhere to park it", tells you all you need to know about the ambition of long term planning in the DF
                        ​​​​​

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Good points one and all. Not being deliberately selective or obtuse. I'd forgotten about Waha'Fud's threshold.........nothing flies fully loaded. Its always a compromise; I'd imagine a Lear full of punters and fuel and duty free would need Shannon or Dublin for a safe take off within the criteria......you'll have to explain NDB approaches to the young people. I've had the pleasure.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Chuck View Post
                            when you have the now CoS turning down an extra pilatus because "there was nowhere to park it", tells you all you need to know about the ambition of long term planning in the DF
                            ​​​​​
                            And the level of ambition of Senior Officers/General Staff to really want the role of "Accounting Officer" for Vote 36 like the Garda Commissioner. I digress too!

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Without getting bogged down in the exciting world of aircraft performance its worth noting the following.
                              How is that not getting bogged down ?

                              Anyway please remain on topic
                              "Are they trying to shoot down the other drone? "

                              "No, they're trying to fly the tank"

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                With regard to a 10-15 yr relocation,I would respectfully suggest that events might drive a relocation sooner. While the State has an uncanny knack of dragging it's heels while appearing not to,as all the restitution of victims cases have shown,the State can move quickly when it wants to (bailout) and shifting some or all of the Air Corps' fleet and it's personnel to parts far and wide could happen in short order. Clancy Barracks is a case in point. Supposedly a pivotal cog in the barracks system, it had several millions poured into it and with exquisite timing, was sold for relatively small money. Apart from that, the DF has had to get good at relocating units or losing them entirely. A lot of historical Army units and locations fell to the axe and it wouldn't be beyond the wit of the DoD/ DoF to demand that the AC take the hit and shift itself,for the supposed good of the State. if push came to shove, GOCAC would simply have to follow orders and might not get the luxury of a 15-yr timeline in which to do so. Imagine if the State had said, ten years ago, we want the site for the infamous Children's Hospital. Good road access, pivotal location for city and country, perfect helicopter access and within sight of a LUAS link. The AC would have been given it's marching orders in a heartbeat. Rule nothing out.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X