Thanks Thanks:  197
Likes Likes:  456
Dislikes Dislikes:  3
Page 18 of 27 FirstFirst ... 81617181920 ... LastLast
Results 426 to 450 of 674
  1. #426
    CQMS
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    East
    Posts
    218
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by trellheim View Post
    if anyone is interested some years back on this forum I plotted AR strength back to the 1960s off of oireachtas debates down the years
    Can you up date and share here again.

  2. #427
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,703
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    The only element of the DF that have gained any personnel is the NSR
    This was greatly necessary, the units, post reorg, had dropped below levels of sustainability.
    Any chance trell, that you keep the numbers here to those just relating to the NS and NSR? There are enough discussions on AR and Army strength elsewhere on this site.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  3. #428
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,991
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmiti View Post
    Its merely granting a credit that already existed for other seafarers. It's being sold to the DF as a lotto win.
    seafarers always got tax credits. In the north sea environment the Brit revenue are returning all tax less National Insurance to seafaring applicants but with extensive form filling and voyage evidence.
    As regards other manning matters in this thread , it is an indictment of Military training and a dilution of seafaring solidarity and cohesion, that we cannot train our own cooks . The problem is an able rate has a large range of military duties in addition to his professional rating which requires at least 12 weeks of non-stop training to get basics right, followed by branch training for another period before advancement to O/Sea and Able rate. This will be an additional training burden that must be carried out to fit in new cook entrants.

  4. #429
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    23,273
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    seafarers always got tax credits. In the north sea environment the Brit revenue are returning all tax less National Insurance to seafaring applicants but with extensive form filling and voyage evidence.
    As regards other manning matters in this thread , it is an indictment of Military training and a dilution of seafaring solidarity and cohesion, that we cannot train our own cooks . The problem is an able rate has a large range of military duties in addition to his professional rating which requires at least 12 weeks of non-stop training to get basics right, followed by branch training for another period before advancement to O/Sea and Able rate. This will be an additional training burden that must be carried out to fit in new cook entrants.
    We can and do.... problem is they are leaving !

  5. #430
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,991
    Post Thanks / Like
    Rather than recruit trained chefs we should canvas candidates about to complete their courses at the IT's or catering schools and enlist them specially as cook recruits. They should then undergo the recruit syllabus and then be rated Able Cook .

  6. #431
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    23,273
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    Rather than recruit trained chefs we should canvas candidates about to complete their courses at the IT's or catering schools and enlist them specially as cook recruits. They should then undergo the recruit syllabus and then be rated Able Cook .
    In effect they are, the candidates have to have a QQI Level 6 (but don’t need experience).

    They will do a 16-20 week basic course followed by 9 week DE Chefs Conversion Cse.



    There seem to have been plenty of DF chef’s Cses over the last few years so I’m guessing there is a bit of a brain drain and the DF is finding it difficult to replace them.


    Question is (and I did see a case in an ODF report), why don’t the DF survey people who already hold outside qualifications and see if they want to take up relevant appointments ?

  7. #432
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,991
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    In effect they are, the candidates have to have a QQI Level 6 (but don’t need experience).

    They will do a 16-20 week basic course followed by 9 week DE Chefs Conversion Cse.



    There seem to have been plenty of DF chef’s Cses over the last few years so I’m guessing there is a bit of a brain drain and the DF is finding it difficult to replace them.


    Question is (and I did see a case in an ODF report), why don’t the DF survey people who already hold outside qualifications and see if they want to take up relevant appointments ?
    Glad to see the matter in hand as outlined in your reference to basic and conversion courses. military Cooks of decent standard often double job in Hotels and restaurants and are easily weaned away by money or a bit of the business.

  8. #433
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,991
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    We can and do.... problem is they are leaving !
    In today's Irish examiner there is a piece on the shock of a group of Dail members visiting recruit and other accommodations in the CTC. it included mould, cold, and the standard blocked toilets. These are the same Dail members who oversaw the E 1.6m printer and E41m E-voting machines and allowed millions of Defence funds to be returned unspent annually. This year they are happy to return E60m of children's budget unspent. Kehoe's excuse was it would cost millions-so what- it will be there as a legacy for all future recruits and trained men. PDFORRA should be ashamed of themselves that there isn't a written agreed standard for Service conditions for accommodation, dining, medical and hospital support.
    Last edited by ancientmariner; 29th November 2019 at 13:55.

  9. Thanks EUFighter, DeV, Turkey thanked for this post
    Likes X-RayOne, DeV, Flamingo, sofa liked this post
  10. #434
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    23,273
    Post Thanks / Like

  11. #435
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,991
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    In today's Irish examiner there is a piece on the shock of a group of Dail members visiting recruit and other accommodations in the CTC. it included mould, cold, and the standard blocked toilets. These are the same Dail members who oversaw the E 1.6m printer and E41m E-voting machines and allowed millions of Defence funds to be returned unspent annually. This year they are happy to return E60m of children's budget unspent. Kehoe's excuse was it would cost millions-so what- it will be there as a legacy for all future recruits and trained men. PDFORRA should be ashamed of themselves that there isn't a written agreed standard for Service conditions for accommodation, dining, medical and hospital support.
    It is interesting to examine closely the budget structure of the neighbouring nation. It runs at about £46b and is about 1.8% of GDP. about 25% goes on personnel and 34% on various equipment and it's support . The expenditure on buildings and infrastructure reaches 19.5%. They allow nearly 4% for R&D and they have a separate trading agency that buys and trades Defence equipments. If we were meeting western budget standards we would be spending E5bn on Defence and housing our personnel.

  12. Likes EUFighter, Shaqra liked this post
  13. #436
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,991
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    It is interesting to examine closely the budget structure of the neighbouring nation. It runs at about £46b and is about 1.8% of GDP. about 25% goes on personnel and 34% on various equipment and it's support . The expenditure on buildings and infrastructure reaches 19.5%. They allow nearly 4% for R&D and they have a separate trading agency that buys and trades Defence equipments. If we were meeting western budget standards we would be spending E5bn on Defence and housing our personnel.
    The perennial Defence Review 2019 has come and gone and there was an input by a Naval Lieutenant in the SIGINT/Fibre/ Cyber area. In general a watchful Defence Organisation needs to SEE all of it's defence area, it needs to detect and classify, and have assets to intercept targets or traffic of all known natures. Leaving out getting a unit ready for UN deployment or a single ship mission, do we have any ready capability to deal with now! Can we equip a hot mission. The answer lies in the fact that Defence Force budgets have been passed through a fiscal sieve and the loose change returned to the exchequer at the end of the year. We get academics to Review history and how well we did but much, much more is needed.

  14. Likes na grohmiti liked this post
  15. #437
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,703
    Post Thanks / Like
    I note a recent dail committee questioned the junior minister with responsibility for defence on the need for supplementary estimates at the years end to fund an increase in pension funds, in spite of the surplus returned from the pay subject being returned to the exchequer.
    Basically amongst the things in the DoD that isn't fit for purpose is the actual defence budget. They give back some, while begging for more.
    We can barely maintain capability to deal with foreseen activities. Unforeseen activities however would see occupants in Newbridge break out in a sweat and reach for the valium. The department is not fit for purpose.
    I glanced at articles highlighting the contributions to the DF Review from the NS and clearly there is nothing inaccurate in what is put forward. Mention even of how the NZ Navy have invested in a second hand offshore support ship to deal with the subsea threat, which they also identified.
    Meanwhile we build ships with the bare minimum of sub surface sensors.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  16. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Likes DeV liked this post
  17. #438
    Hostage Flamingo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Over the water
    Posts
    4,292
    Post Thanks / Like
    I can’t see how pensions are reckoned as part of defence spending. Does the same go for other departments?

    By that logic, Ireland could increase it’s defence spending to 2% of GDP by giving all pensioners a 150% increase, and not a penny for serving troops or equipment...
    '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

  18. Likes DeV liked this post
  19. #439
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,991
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Flamingo View Post
    I can’t see how pensions are reckoned as part of defence spending. Does the same go for other departments?

    By that logic, Ireland could increase it’s defence spending to 2% of GDP by giving all pensioners a 150% increase, and not a penny for serving troops or equipment...
    A budget is for the whole department including , pay and pensions. The notional budget of 890m Euro includes 259m euro for pensions and 106m Capital ceiling. we spend 0.3% of GDP on Defence and for that no sustainable capability--no ready assault brigade--no ready Battalion reserve- no air intervention squadron- no anti-submarine capability- no MCM capability. Just ad hoc and first up best dressed for missions. Terms like capital ceiling mean keep the spending below that figure.

  20. Thanks na grohmiti, Flamingo thanked for this post
    Likes EUFighter liked this post
  21. #440
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,703
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Flamingo View Post
    I can’t see how pensions are reckoned as part of defence spending. Does the same go for other departments?

    By that logic, Ireland could increase it’s defence spending to 2% of GDP by giving all pensioners a 150% increase, and not a penny for serving troops or equipment...
    At present our pay&pensions:non pay ratio is about 70:30, and it was only strong words in the first white paper that got it to that. If you increased the overall buget to 50:50, without any change in strength, all that would happen is you get to spend 1.6Bn instead of the current, 235m on non pay items, and what would the point of that be? (sarcasm).
    The real problem is this capital ceiling. I am unsure what purpose it serves other than to stop the DF from getting any notions.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  22. Thanks Flamingo thanked for this post
  23. #441
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,991
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    The perennial Defence Review 2019 has come and gone and there was an input by a Naval Lieutenant in the SIGINT/Fibre/ Cyber area. In general a watchful Defence Organisation needs to SEE all of it's defence area, it needs to detect and classify, and have assets to intercept targets or traffic of all known natures. Leaving out getting a unit ready for UN deployment or a single ship mission, do we have any ready capability to deal with now! Can we equip a hot mission. The answer lies in the fact that Defence Force budgets have been passed through a fiscal sieve and the loose change returned to the exchequer at the end of the year. We get academics to Review history and how well we did but much, much more is needed.
    Just reading the published Defence review which confirms we know nothing about defence and a lot about neutrality. There is a commitment to continue with the MRV but the MCM element hinged around the replacement of the Peacocks has been put back on the shelf. This means when the MRV arrives we will be a 7 ship navy. The spend up to 2025 is estimated at E540m and I presume that is the new Pilatus aircraft, MPA's, and the MRV. In the mantime we revert to 6 ships.
    The review includes mentioning the Garda and mutual interaction but also mentions that the next 3 year review will be a strategic Defence Review. That type of review brings hairshirts and doing more with less everything including barracks, bands, brigades, lands, and fiscal restraints. In the meantime we have no hard edge, no air surveillance, no air defence , and an inventory that has been replaced by most modern defence forces.

  24. #442
    Commandant EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,870
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    Just reading the published Defence review which confirms we know nothing about defence and a lot about neutrality. There is a commitment to continue with the MRV but the MCM element hinged around the replacement of the Peacocks has been put back on the shelf. This means when the MRV arrives we will be a 7 ship navy. The spend up to 2025 is estimated at E540m and I presume that is the new Pilatus aircraft, MPA's, and the MRV. In the mantime we revert to 6 ships.
    The review includes mentioning the Garda and mutual interaction but also mentions that the next 3 year review will be a strategic Defence Review. That type of review brings hairshirts and doing more with less everything including barracks, bands, brigades, lands, and fiscal restraints. In the meantime we have no hard edge, no air surveillance, no air defence , and an inventory that has been replaced by most modern defence forces.
    We should not be expecting anything this century as the DoD are focused on "22nd Century Military".

  25. #443
    C/S CTU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,300
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    We should not be expecting anything this century as the DoD are focused on "22nd Century Military".
    Would that be 22nd Century BC?
    Well, government doesn't stop just because the country's been destroyed!
    I mean, annihilation's bad enough without anarchy to make things even worse!

  26. #444
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,703
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    Just reading the published Defence review which confirms we know nothing about defence and a lot about neutrality. There is a commitment to continue with the MRV but the MCM element hinged around the replacement of the Peacocks has been put back on the shelf. This means when the MRV arrives we will be a 7 ship navy. The spend up to 2025 is estimated at E540m and I presume that is the new Pilatus aircraft, MPA's, and the MRV. In the mantime we revert to 6 ships.
    The review includes mentioning the Garda and mutual interaction but also mentions that the next 3 year review will be a strategic Defence Review. That type of review brings hairshirts and doing more with less everything including barracks, bands, brigades, lands, and fiscal restraints. In the meantime we have no hard edge, no air surveillance, no air defence , and an inventory that has been replaced by most modern defence forces.
    That's the plan. Let the DF numbers fall in time for the SDR which will happily suggest further barrack closures to reduce hardship on those travelling to far flung places to do duties (Galway, Dundalk, Kilkenny) opening up more properties to sell so the beancou terms can boast at their next interview how they managed to balance their budget.
    Defence and Security are very low on the DoD priorities.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  27. Likes CTU, Flamingo liked this post
  28. #445
    Hostage Flamingo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Over the water
    Posts
    4,292
    Post Thanks / Like
    Has it hit the stage yet where there are more Civil Servants in the DoD than there are serving? It must be getting close.
    '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

  29. #446
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,991
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Flamingo View Post
    Has it hit the stage yet where there are more Civil Servants in the DoD than there are serving? It must be getting close.
    With smaller numbers we need more bang at Battalion and Brigade level. At Brigade level at least 3 x 155mm tracked gun, Multi hyper sonic anti-air missile system. Then at battalion level 6 light guns L118 with APS sighting, Rapier missiles , in addition to usual support weapons, and of course towing vehicles for the light guns.

  30. #447
    BQMS Auldsod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Wesht
    Posts
    675
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientmariner View Post
    With smaller numbers we need more bang at Battalion and Brigade level. At Brigade level at least 3 x 155mm tracked gun, Multi hyper sonic anti-air missile system. Then at battalion level 6 light guns L118 with APS sighting, Rapier missiles , in addition to usual support weapons, and of course towing vehicles for the light guns.
    It sounds like you're talking about a brigade that could do some heavy metal warfighting. Unfortuntely not something the DoD will be in any way interested in!

  31. #448
    Rittmeister Herald's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    906
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Auldsod View Post
    It sounds like you're talking about a brigade that could do some heavy metal warfighting.
    Down with this sort of thing!!!


    Sgd

    D.O.D

  32. #449
    Brigadier General
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    2,984
    Post Thanks / Like
    We were very proud of holding the high moral ground being the first in the world to ban smoking in pubs and getting rid of plastic bags.
    Wouldn't we be a shining light in the world to be the first to ban our armed forces.

    Don't laugh the nancy boys are in charge.
    Last edited by sofa; 18th December 2019 at 23:03.

  33. #450
    BQMS Auldsod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Wesht
    Posts
    675
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by sofa View Post
    We were very proud of holding the high moral ground being the first in the world to ban smoking in pubs and getting rid of plastic bags.

    Don't laugh the nancy boys are in charge.
    Good policy moves though to be fair! The Nancy boys are right sometimes!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 4 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 4 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
  •