Originally posted by Tadpole
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Ministerial Air Transport Service
Collapse
X
-
- Likes 2
-
Originally posted by Bravo20 View PostThat is not a correct view. Flying hours is only one of the outputs of the Air Corp so to allocate all the fixed costs of the corps and just allocate against flying hours you would be creating a distortion. It is part of the defence force and therefore has a contingency role in the defense of the state. It would be like allocating the fixed cost of the army to the number of cash & security escorts being provided. It is a simple mathematical exercise but it would produce an incorrect figure. Similarly you shouldn't allocate the entire cost of the coast guard against its flying hours.
It is like staying the CHC S92s are costing €6,200 per hour (based on 2000 hrs of contracted ops (not training) annually per aircraft)).
By the way, i very much doubt hours are anywhere near that.
Each heli is currently averaging 120 callouts annually, lets say that rises and allowing for training (which some dont allow the AC to do) totals 200. Say the average flight is 3 hours. Thats 600 hrs per aircraft per year.
If my maths is correct that is over €20,000 per hour!Last edited by DeV; 12 June 2013, 15:02.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by DeV View PostAs an example, there is probably one ESB Networks meter for the whole of Baldonnel, there is a non-DF unit based there (the GS element of GASU) that also use Baldonnel's electricity."The dolphins were monkeys that didn't like the land, walked back to the water, went back from the sand."
Comment
-
It is a simple mathematical exercise but it would produce an incorrect figure.
Comment
-
So gents, tell me this, if the Air Corps had no aircraft in the morning what would it's purpose be in the Defence Forces? Exactly, none. It's reason for existence is the operation of aircraft, therefore its cost is the cost of operating those aircraft. All the little ancillary things would soon be parcelled out to the wider DF with a hell of a lot less then 750 personnel and a he'll of a lot less infrastructure cost if the IAC ceased to exist.
It's primary output is operation of aircraft and therefore that is the primary cost driver. If you want to take a few % of the total bill for those ancillary tasks fair enough but it won't vastly change the outcome.
I also never said to exclude training hours, thats you assuption to make. As for the CG maths maybe you aren't to far off but tell me this, what was the total flight hours produced by 750 personnel and 20 odd aircraft in the IAC EXCLUDING ALL training flights? That's a double edged sword I'm afraid
Comment
-
Originally posted by Aidan View PostExactly. You could work out a formal cost/benefit analysis of the AC (as presently formulated), but it would need to use a far broader set of metrics than just flying hours.“The nation that will insist on drawing a broad line of demarcation between the fighting man and the thinking man is liable to find its fighting done by fools and its thinking done by cowards.”
― Thucydides
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tadpole View PostSo gents, tell me this, if the Air Corps had no aircraft in the morning what would it's purpose be in the Defence Forces? Exactly, none. It's reason for existence is the operation of aircraft, therefore its cost is the cost of operating those aircraft. All the little ancillary things would soon be parcelled out to the wider DF with a hell of a lot less then 750 personnel and a he'll of a lot less infrastructure cost if the IAC ceased to exist.
It's primary output is operation of aircraft and therefore that is the primary cost driver. If you want to take a few % of the total bill for those ancillary tasks fair enough but it won't vastly change the outcome.
I also never said to exclude training hours, thats you assuption to make. As for the CG maths maybe you aren't to far off but tell me this, what was the total flight hours produced by 750 personnel and 20 odd aircraft in the IAC EXCLUDING ALL training flights? That's a double edged sword I'm afraid
That would be a Government decision, if they were to do it and retain the AC, the role could be to operate a secure airfield and contribute to other DF taskings, which it already does.
The primary role of the DF, including the AC, is to defend the State from armed aggression. Everything else is secondary.
The hours that are published exclude training hours but some assume incorrectly that the hours given in reports are the total hours, they aren't they are operational only.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tadpole View PostSo gents, tell me this, if the Air Corps had no aircraft in the morning what would it's purpose be in the Defence Forces? Exactly, none. It's reason for existence is the operation of aircraft, therefore its cost is the cost of operating those aircraft. All the little ancillary things would soon be parcelled out to the wider DF with a hell of a lot less then 750 personnel and a he'll of a lot less infrastructure cost if the IAC ceased to exist.
It's primary output is operation of aircraft and therefore that is the primary cost driver. If you want to take a few % of the total bill for those ancillary tasks fair enough but it won't vastly change the outcome.
I also never said to exclude training hours, thats you assuption to make. As for the CG maths maybe you aren't to far off but tell me this, what was the total flight hours produced by 750 personnel and 20 odd aircraft in the IAC EXCLUDING ALL training flights? That's a double edged sword I'm afraid
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Actually Danno the ICG have always had aircraft and boats. Maybe you are thinking of IMES which, even they, had aircraft from about 30 years ago. Before that however they had distinct roles, maritime radio operations, maritime SAR coordination and coast and cliff rescue for which their staffing levels and budget were consumate.
Now, take your example and put it with the IAC. Remove the aviation aspects, what distinct roles from the Army do they now have and what manpower and budget would it require to run them? Now you have the answer as to the total cost of IAC aviation operations.
Comment
-
The ICG do not have any aircraft unless I'm missing something. They have an expensive contract to a private company to do that role for them, they do not own as much as a helmet never mind an aircraft. When were those second hand aircraft supposed to arrive?? Seems like they are late! As for boats well they just appear to station ribs next to already existing RNLI stations!
Comment
-
Not sure a Cost/Benefit analysis would be relevant (the existence of any Military Force is essentially insurance) but you could do an ABC (Activity based costing) exercise
One could be forgiven for getting the distinct impression that no matter what the AC do, or no matter what they did to improve their service or cut costs, there would still be people coming on here having a strangely oriented dig at them.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by Shaqra View PostNot sure a Cost/Benefit analysis would be relevant (the existence of any Military Force is essentially insurance) but you could do an ABC (Activity based costing) exercise. ABC was proposed for the Air Corps/Naval service study that was awarded to PWC but was rejected on cost. They are horribly expensive and, as Dev said above, horribly complex to carry out.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Aidan View Post... other less so (like the contribution they could make to national defence...
its military capability against any outside force that can get itself to Irish territory is absolutely nil. if anyone were to be looking at the possibility, the G3 brief labelled 'Air Threat' would be only marginally longer than that given about the Talibans Air Force. the Army would give an enemy force a run for its money, and the NS would keep the Amphibious fleets Int section awake, but the AC would barely figure in anyone calculations. this is of course as things stand - however any dramatic change to the air picture is going to be eye-wateringly expensive, whereas the Army and NS have a vastly higher base level from which very significant changes could be made without massive funding increases.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Happyman View PostThe ICG do not have any aircraft unless I'm missing something. They have an expensive contract to a private company to do that role for them, they do not own as much as a helmet never mind an aircraft. When were those second hand aircraft supposed to arrive?? Seems like they are late! As for boats well they just appear to station ribs next to already existing RNLI stations!
Those a/c are in Shannon at the minute, they will be gettin a lick of paint shortly and then will be sent to the next two bases. Shortly after that another two will arrive and the process will be repeated.
I'm sure your station will get loads of training with the new a/c as will the CG unit beside you (something your obviously a wee bit bitter about) - let the thread creep begin to distract from the issue raised!!
Comment
Comment