Thanks Thanks:  273
Likes Likes:  1,152
Dislikes Dislikes:  21
Page 2 of 40 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 994
  1. #26
    Sergeant
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Co Cork
    Posts
    88
    Post Thanks / Like
    Headline on the Indo today: "Ireland drawn into New Cold War as Putin flexes muscles"

    Bit over the top isn't it? I mean yeah it was a slightly embarrassing episode for Ireland having to rely on the RAF to secure our airspace but I don't think Putin or Russia would give two sh**'s about Ireland in a New Cold War.

  2. #27
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,973
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevo768 View Post
    Would having RAF Aircraft on Irish Soil mean Ireland was then a member of Nato by Association....
    nope, no more than Japan is a member of NATO because the US has a presence there, or you become a member of your friends mountaineering club because you walk to the pub together.

    the easiest way to progress on the air defence/air policing issue would be to have the minimal infrastructure neccessary at Shannon or Knock for RAF/French/Norwegian/Danish aircraft to refuel or lay up, its not worth basing aircraft there (in the current threat environment) because we get enough notice from the Norwegian, Danish and UK radars to have aircraft sat off Donegal in time to meet our unwelcome guests. if we wanted to go further we could look at temporary detachments and exercises, or moving/establishing an RAF AD base to RAF Valley, or (and this is much more complex) putting Irish aircrew through fast jet training and seconding them to the Typhoon force and having the Typhoon force act as a 'pooled' AD capability for both countries. this would, obviously, be a political and financial minefield, but if both sides wanted it it could be done. wit of man etc...

    the costs involved of setting up a sovereign fighter force - airframes, techs, training, aircrew - would be astonishing. i wouldn't bet on much change of €5 billion over 5 or 6 years, and it would only be operational for perhaps 2 of those. it would be a 'courageous' politician who went for it.

  3. #28
    Sqdn. Ldr Silver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    449
    Post Thanks / Like
    I believe we should have more than just PC-9's for the Air Corps.
    However, some perspective, the Swiss Air Force have fleet of c.70 fighter jets (which includes c.20 F/A 18's) and they only normally operate a 'quick reaction alert' system during offices hours, monday-to-friday!
    IRISH AIR CORPS - Serving the Nation.

  4. Likes DeV liked this post
  5. #29
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,212
    Post Thanks / Like
    The lease idea worked for Italy while they were waiting for the Eurofighter, having retired their starfighters.....

  6. #30
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,973
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmití View Post
    The lease idea worked for Italy while they were waiting for the Eurofighter, having retired their starfighters.....
    certainly true - but they had a pre-existing physical, training and crew infrastructure for those aircraft. they went from Starfighters to Tornado's to F-16's, which isn't a great leap. in the same way that the NS could buy a Frigate/Corvette tommorow and have a decent handle on operating it, but if you gave then an SSN they'd be a bit 'err... so what does this do then..?'

  7. Likes pym, The real Jack, danno, Flamingo liked this post
  8. #31
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    22,274
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Buck View Post
    Well cost for one, sadly. But we are a NATO member by association with the PfP, surely?
    In that case, Russia is also a member NATO

    Quote Originally Posted by tomh903 View Post
    a slightly embarrassing episode for Ireland having to rely on the RAF to secure our airspace but I don't think Putin or Russia would give two sh**'s about Ireland in a New Cold War.
    At no time were they in Irish sovereign airspace, they did however pass through Irish-controlled airspace (ie that which the IAA provides services for).

  9. #32
    Lt Colonel
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    2,090
    Post Thanks / Like
    ropebag - would use of Irish airspace be beneficial to the RAF, in terms of extra training space/opportunities etc?

    Someone has to pay for deployments, or at least there has to be benefits for the people doing the heavy lifting.

    I know I'm the one who brought the Bears into this thread, but I think people are leaping miles ahead of themselves talking about Irish based/or crewed fighter aircraft.

    For the moment, in our neck of the woods at least, the Russians are just acting like petulant teenagers - and given the basic equipment shortfalls in the DF, splashing out on one long range military radar would be extremely difficult to justify, so forget aircraft.

    There's no harm in contingency planning though, familiarisation training, speeding up communications etc. and all that stuff.

    I also take Paul's point that things are going in a fairly inevitable direction, but the potential backlash from moving too fast (Let's put 4 RAF Typhoons in Shannon for a month!) would probably knock co-operation backwards for years.

  10. Likes DeV liked this post
  11. #33
    Major General
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by tomh903 View Post
    Headline on the Indo today: "Ireland drawn into New Cold War as Putin flexes muscles"

    Bit over the top isn't it? I mean yeah it was a slightly embarrassing episode for Ireland having to rely on the RAF to secure our airspace but I don't think Putin or Russia would give two sh**'s about Ireland in a New Cold War.
    RAF only went up when the bears were heading up St Georges(is one allowed use this nowadays)Channel,the bears could have played all day off our West coast for all anyone cared/confronted.

  12. #34
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,973
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by pym View Post
    ropebag - would use of Irish airspace be beneficial to the RAF, in terms of extra training space/opportunities etc?...
    yes.

    access to new low flying areas, and just a generally larger airspace to train in, would be beneficial. secondly, exercising with a different 'enemy' (both GBAD and Helicopters and fixed wing), with different kit, different procedures, and different - non-NATO - thinking would be enormously beneficial.

    its also in the UK's interest to be able to push the air battle another 400 miles out over the Atlantic - firstly because it means more time in contested airspace to shoot the buggers down before they can launch, secondly because its more difficult to avoid being seen on radar/IR over the sea than hammering through Irish valleys, and thirdly because the more time they have to fly on a war footing - fast, low, and manouvering - the more fuel they're burning and the more tired they'll be when we finally get to grips with them.

  13. Likes Flamingo liked this post
  14. #35
    Corporal
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    55
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ropebag View Post
    access to new low flying areas
    Are The Irish People going to be happy With The noise. Back in 09ish There was an RAF/AAC Exercise over Tyrone and Fermanagh I was Home during the time and the noise lasted all night the constant drone of engines. Anyway there was some political opposition to it (Both sides of the fence) As there was no notice to what was going on. There haven't been any exercises since.

  15. #36
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,212
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevo768 View Post
    Are The Irish People going to be happy With The noise. Back in 09ish There was an RAF/AAC Exercise over Tyrone and Fermanagh I was Home during the time and the noise lasted all night the constant drone of engines. Anyway there was some political opposition to it (Both sides of the fence) As there was no notice to what was going on. There haven't been any exercises since.
    That would be the sound of freedom.

  16. #37
    Major General
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by RoyalGreenJacket View Post
    how close did they come to Irish mainland before they got close to mainland UK?

    might be nice to have a few Typhoons on QRA in Shannon now that we're all chums now
    Hardly merited for turboprop bears that must be 35y+ old and suffering from Nimroditis,biggest risk must be them falling out of the sky .

  17. Likes The real Jack liked this post
  18. #38
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,973
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by danno View Post
    Hardly merited for turboprop bears that must be 35y+ old and suffering from Nimroditis,biggest risk must be them falling out of the sky .
    depends - on the face of it they are just a pain, and reacting to them just feeds Vlads' ego, but these flights are 'pathfinders' for the TU-160 BLACKJACKS, being relaxed about the bears and letting them get on with it sets a big precident that the Russians will be happy to exploit with the blackjacks.

    moreover, if we let them crack on we give the impression - falsely - that we don't have either the capability or will to confront them. and you know full well what eventually happens when a self-deluding bully is continually allowed to do what he likes. he stops being a pain and he does something much worse.

  19. Likes Truck Driver liked this post
  20. #39
    Lt Colonel Buck's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Heart in Donegal
    Posts
    2,137
    Post Thanks / Like
    I think given that gucci aircraft are out of the picture, some decent ground to air capability would be nice. I realise that I'm straying dangerously close to Walter Mitty territory here of course.
    I knew a simple soldier boy.....
    Who grinned at life in empty joy,
    Slept soundly through the lonesome dark,
    And whistled early with the lark.

    In winter trenches, cowed and glum,
    With crumps and lice and lack of rum,
    He put a bullet through his brain.
    And no one spoke of him again.

    You smug-faced crowds with kindling eye
    Who cheer when soldier lads march by,
    Sneak home and pray you'll never know
    The hell where youth and laughter go.

  21. #40
    Lt Colonel
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    2,090
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by danno View Post
    Hardly merited for turboprop bears that must be 35y+ old and suffering from Nimroditis,biggest risk must be them falling out of the sky .
    The Russians have never tried to bolt as many new systems on to them as the UK tried with the Nimrods - so no similar problems. USAF B-52's which are even older, will see out their more modern B-1 "replacement".

    No doubt they're a maintenance hog too, but they can fulfill their mission.

    What's interesting to me is that Putin's actions have provided the backdrop to Sweden, Finland and Ireland getting more cosy with NATO, or at least making bilateral defense deals with their neighbours.

    I think if things continue to heat up, there might be a greater push for joint surveillance - in the air and sosus type stuff.

    But the big variable is whether Vlad & his military will be able to survive the economic turmoil over the next few months and years.

    And that potential for instability and the possible effects on command & control of their nuclear forces will provide many headaches.
    Last edited by pym; 1st February 2015 at 01:49.

  22. #41
    Captain Truck Driver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Here And There...
    Posts
    10,399
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by pym View Post
    The Russians have never tried to bolt as many new systems on to them as the UK tried with the Nimrods - so no similar problems. USAF B-52's which are even older, will see out their more modern B-1 "replacement".

    No doubt they're a maintenance hog too, but they can fulfill their mission.

    What's interesting to me is that Putin's actions have provided the backdrop to Sweden, Finland and Ireland getting more cosy with NATO, or at least making bilateral defense deals with their neighbours.

    I think if things continue to heat up, there might be a greater push for joint surveillance - in the air and sosus type stuff.

    But the big variable is whether Vlad & his military will be able to survive the economic turmoil over the next few months and years.

    And that potential for instability and the possible effects on command & control of their nuclear forces will provide many headaches
    Sounds just like a Tom Clancy page turner !
    "Well, stone me! We've had cocaine, bribery and Arsenal scoring two goals at home. But just when you thought there were truly no surprises left in football, Vinnie Jones turns out to be an international player!" (Jimmy Greaves)!"

  23. Likes Buck, ODIN liked this post
  24. #42
    Private 2*
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    14
    Post Thanks / Like

    TU 95 Bears and Irish Air space.

    Can anyone shed any light on the two TU 95 Bears that were in Irish air space this weekend? They were being monitiored by RAF Typhoons, and I was wondering what the Irish Air Corps was doing? Defense Minister Coveney stated that "Russian military aircraft should not enter Irish airspace without notification". However what is to stop them? Is there an agreement between Britain and Ireland regarding air defense? Furthermore, does this incident support the idea to purchase modern fighter aircraft to defend Irish sovereignty?

    Thanks

  25. #43
    Major General
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Buck View Post
    I think given that gucci aircraft are out of the picture, some decent ground to air capability would be nice. I realise that I'm straying dangerously close to Walter Mitty territory here of course.
    Cheapest possible counter would be upgrade to radar/FC and 76 capability to P50s/60s,bound to be 2-3 on patrol at any given time and be able to "tone" intruders within their electonic horizon.

  26. Likes Buck liked this post
  27. #44
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,212
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by danno View Post
    Hardly merited for turboprop bears that must be 35y+ old and suffering from Nimroditis,biggest risk must be them falling out of the sky .
    While it is an old design, most of the aircraft in regular use are actually new airframes, build in the late 90s. They pose no risk to us, other than them falling out of the sky. Being lit up by long range AA Radar would focus their minds somewhat though.
    I do remember hearing of a Harrier Pilot off Donegal getting a bit worried when Eithne's Air Search radar started interrogating him, and her crew being entertained by his efforts to break lock.... (Authenticity of story not guaranteed)

  28. Likes Banner liked this post
  29. #45
    C/S
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    3,137
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by pym View Post
    The Russians have never tried to bolt as many new systems on to them as the UK tried with the Nimrods - so no similar problems. USAF B-52's which are even older, will see out their more modern B-1 "replacement".

    No doubt they're a maintenance hog too, but they can fulfill their mission.

    What's interesting to me is that Putin's actions have provided the backdrop to Sweden, Finland and Ireland getting more cosy with NATO, or at least making bilateral defense deals with their neighbours.

    I think if things continue to heat up, there might be a greater push for joint surveillance - in the air and sosus type stuff.

    But the big variable is whether Vlad & his military will be able to survive the economic turmoil over the next few months and years.

    And that potential for instability and the possible effects on command & control of their nuclear forces will provide many headaches.
    Not only will Putin survive he’ll prosper by escalating the crisis in the Ukraine and starting trouble elsewhere in his near abroad. He’ll also try and play the Greeks, possibly by giving them just enough money so that they can continue to defy the rest of the EU in the hope that Syzria will lead to similar governments in Spain and Italy and cause chaos in the EU. It’s almost as if he worked for the KGB at one stage.

    Which brings us back to the Tu-95, and what to do? The problem is that we are geographically isolated and protected by NATO powers, and spendingon defence to replicate NATO spending would be sa waste of money. Looking at the mission at the weekend the Tu 95 were first intercepted by the Norwegian air force that then passed them over to the British, flying from lossiemouth. In real conflict they’d be shot from the sky long before they got anyway near our west coast. NATO has a technological and geographic edge over the Russians that simply can’t be bridged. The Russians can’t get away from the fact that in a real war, radar and interceptor bases in Norway, Scotland and Iceland form a barrier that they simply can’t breach, the GIUK gap in professional parlance (which I’ll come back to).

    Secondly the cost of acquiring and operating interceptors are horrendous, and they add very little value in our situation, just google Austria and Typhoon Fighter, they have 15 of them but can afford to fly them so rarely that they have an expected life of nearly a century, they can’t afford the sophisticated weapon, only have 12 pilots and are desperate to get out of the deal. There are also massive issues surrounding bribery. More importantly the acquisition of Eurofighters have stopped the Austrian armed forces restructuring, helped by a looney left who won a referendum to retain conscription because they argued that it would stop people doing the civilian alternative. Fighters would hover up money from the defence budget and would add nothing in an actual conflict against Russia.
    Going back to the Russians they’ve long since worked out that they can’t breach the GIUK gap, they couldn’t do it in the Cold war they can’t do it now. What they can do is use hybrid warfare and exploit ethnic and political tensions in neighbouring countries, look at Georgia in 2008 and the Ukraine from 2014 onwards. For those of us who read books, its exactly the same thing the Russians did in 1878 when they detached Bulgaria from the Ottoman Empire. And the Russians are also helped with a left, especially in Ireland that is vehemently anti American and as a result ignore the fact that Putin is a really nasty cnut, who has looted his country of its natural resources and enriched a small minority, who essentially control everybody else.

    Essentially, a much better investment for the air corps would be to build on what we have and develop the ability to deploy a maritime patrol aircraft overseas on joint missions or three to four helicopters to support a battalion ala chad, and the army can work with european powers on peace support missions in Africa the midddle east and Balkans
    Last edited by paul g; 1st February 2015 at 23:44.

  30. Thanks apod thanked for this post
  31. #46
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,212
    Post Thanks / Like
    Putin will survive as long as he can keep jailing his opponents, and terrifying his electorate, and changing the state laws to allow him serve another term.

  32. #47
    Lt Colonel
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    2,090
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by paul g View Post
    Which brings us back to the Tu-95, and what to do? The problem is that we are geographically isolated and protected by NATO powers, and spendingon defence to replicate NATO spending would be sa waste of money. Looking at the mission at the weekend the Tu 95 were first intercepted by the Norwegian air force that then passed them over to the British, flying from lossiemouth. In real conflict they’d be shot from the sky long before they got anyway near our west coast. NATO has a technological and geographic edge over the Russians that simply can’t be bridged. The Russians can’t get away from the fact that in a real war, radar and interceptor bases in Norway, Scotland and Iceland form a barrier that they simply can’t breach, the GIUK gap in professional parlance (which I’ll come back to).
    Agreed - there is no justification for spending anything on fighter aircraft, I brought the Bears into this thread because of the potential for closer working arrangements with the RAF.

    What was mooted in the 80's and perhaps would still make sense in the medium to long term, is improved radar surveillance - if it could be achieved without hitting more pressing DF requirements.

    The Russians have caused a few flaps of late with their submarine fleet - and it's not difficult to imagine them in our waters. Again if a better detection capability could be achieved without horrendous expense, perhaps it's worth doing.

    Both of those are areas that could be explored in either joint Irish-UK/Irish-EU projects.

    While Putin's leadership seems unassailable - the economic issues facing Russia are quite horrendous. It'll be interesting to see how it plays out.
    Last edited by pym; 2nd February 2015 at 00:36.

  33. #48
    C/S
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    3,137
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by pym View Post
    Agreed - there is no justification for spending anything on fighter aircraft, I brought the Bears into this thread because of the potential for closer working arrangements with the RAF.

    What was mooted in the 80's and perhaps would still make sense in the medium to long term, is improved radar surveillance - if it could be achieved without hitting more pressing DF requirements.

    The Russians have caused a few flaps of late with their submarine fleet - and it's not difficult to imagine them in our waters. Again if a better detection capability could be achieved without horrendous expense, perhaps it's worth doing.

    Both of those are areas that could be explored in either joint Irish-UK/Irish-EU projects.

    While Putin's leadership seems unassailable - the economic issues facing Russia are quite horrendous. It'll be interesting to see how it plays out.
    The bluffwaffe would love to have what they call a recognised air picture, and a military radar wouldn't break the bank, however

    The left/republicans would freak totally freak if something like that happened. It also opens a whole load of legal issues, and frankly would be counter productive given the threat level . I think that ireland has moved on a lot in the last 15 years and in another 15 years there will be lots of voters with emotional ties to Eastern Europe and family there, and the anti british element in irish society is dying out, (in fact we're starting to dislike the british for the same reasons the rest of europe do)

    Putin will cause problems for the west, and frankly I think there is a chance that Greece will be to 2015 what the Ukraine was to 2014, a crisis that nobody saw coming.

    But honestly, playing to our strenghts and things like istar company and improving the types of units we can deploy along with in the longer term improving our air and naval contribution at a European level to the eu battlegroup concept or naval monitoring missions is a much better response than co-operation with the british that would give Sinn Fein, Fianna fail, pana and a host of lefties a big stick to beat a government that is movin slowly towards supporting European defence arangements
    Last edited by paul g; 2nd February 2015 at 01:24.

  34. Likes RoyalGreenJacket liked this post
  35. #49
    Major General
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    Fair enough but I reckon that the sacred cow of the "ould enemy" needs to be shattered,it has acted as a glass ceiling to too many positive movements for too long since the UK have ceased to bankroll the exclusively Loyalist regime in the 6 counties .

  36. Likes sofa, Truck Driver, Schmigs, Flamingo liked this post
  37. #50
    Commandant Jetjock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,754
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ropebag View Post
    the costs involved of setting up a sovereign fighter force - airframes, techs, training, aircrew - would be astonishing. i wouldn't bet on much change of €5 billion over 5 or 6 years, and it would only be operational for perhaps 2 of those. it would be a 'courageous' politician who went for it.
    Actually it would only cost that type of money if you are to look at the totally unrealistic prospect of buying aircraft. Leasing aircraft is a surprisingly achievable prospect.

    The recent extension of the Gripen C lease deal to Czech Republic amounts to roughly €60 million per anum for 12 aircraft. Inclusive over the 10 years of the contract are training on type of 25 pilots and 90 techs, updates to keep the aircraft at the latest standard and the necessary logistical support. There is noting prohibitive in cost there for a country of our size.
    The total inclusive cost quoted by a Janes survey per flight hour for Gripen is $4700 vs $18,000 for Eurofighter. Fleet operating costs based on a 2000 hr year would be less than €10m per anum.

    Fast jet training could be completed under a bilateral arrangement at Valley, again at relatively low cost. The PC-9 actually does not leave a pilot very far short of required standard. Nothing a short course on a LIFT like Hawk 100 series wouldn´t quickly correct.

    The myth that fighter jets are utterly unachievable for Ireland needs to be dispelled. There are realistic options out there that wouldn't swallow the defence budget. We are the only country in the North Atlantic from Norway to Mauritania without an ability to police our airspace. At some point the country needs to awaken to the fact that calling oneself neutral actually places a greater need (not a lesser one) to take responsibility for policing ones own borders and to maintain a minimum capability for same.

  38. Thanks The real Jack, ODIN thanked for this post
    Likes sofa, Truck Driver, Tempest, ODIN, Silver, ias liked this post

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •