Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Defending the Irish airspace

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

  • Originally posted by DeV View Post
    In which case it is no problem having them based on Baldonnel
    no, you're confusing tasks that are time critical and those that are fuel critical. if they are based near Dublin and have to go out on a Bear hunt you've used the best part of 300 miles of their (already limited) range on communting. if they are based at Shannon and have to put manners on some GA idiot over Dublin they can still be intimidating him in 14 minutes - thats, reasonably, enough time.

    Conningsby is further from London than Shannon is from Dublin.

    Baldonnels location might useful for Air Policing over Dublin, but it has huge disadvantages with being so close to a large population centre - your Gripens are going to make a lot of noise, and the noise generated by a Gripen at MTOW going balls-to-the-wall is not something to be sniffed at.

    of course, the best option is to base all AC aircraft at some base out on the west coast, and if you felt the need for particular occasions like EU summits etc.. you could forward deploy to Dublin.

    Comment


    • Have you guys costed the HAS's required for the aircraft plus the hardened weapons storage for the AAM's and the associated security for the whole operation, even having a parallel taxiway, with whatever runway you selected, improved to be a secondary runway..

      There are huge capital costs required to bring whatever airbase is chosen up to anything close to a NATO standard fighter station.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Charlie252 View Post
        Have you guys costed the HAS's required for the aircraft plus the hardened weapons storage for the AAM's and the associated security for the whole operation, even having a parallel taxiway, with whatever runway you selected, improved to be a secondary runway..

        There are huge capital costs required to bring whatever airbase is chosen up to anything close to a NATO standard fighter station.
        HAS are not required and have been shown with the advent of more PGM not to provide protection, except if you are Swiss and have your hanger inside a massive mountain.
        The Hungarian AF is in NATO and has JAS39's on QRA alert, they do not use HAS hangars.
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8UEgBnqixY

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Charlie252 View Post
          Have you guys costed the HAS's required for the aircraft plus the hardened weapons storage for the AAM's and the associated security for the whole operation, even having a parallel taxiway, with whatever runway you selected, improved to be a secondary runway..

          There are huge capital costs required to bring whatever airbase is chosen up to anything close to a NATO standard fighter station.
          i think this is overstated - you don't need HAS to operate fighters, you just need traditional hangers. HAS are for warfighting (and i'd question their efficacy at that). the AC - one hopes, already has some form of hardened bomb dump for the rockets and the 0.5 - building new is expensive, building more of what you've already got is less so.

          the whole lot is a big investment, but if you can persuade govenment and the wider body politic to invest €1bn (or whatever) in something really important, you can probably persuade them to invest €1.5bn in it.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by EUFighter View Post
            HAS are not required and have been shown with the advent of more PGM not to provide protection, except if you are Swiss and have your hanger inside a massive mountain.
            The Hungarian AF is in NATO and has JAS39's on QRA alert, they do not use HAS hangars.
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8UEgBnqixY
            Plenty of others still have HAS's, you have to agree that there is still a huge Infrastructure defecit that needs to be addressed.
            This will add hugely to the Capital cost of this endeavor.
            Weapons storage and management are costly and man power intensive.

            These are areas that the AC has no experience in and the base is not set up for, what kind of increase in the establishment do you envisage.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by ropebag View Post
              i wouldn't get too mired in the location vs threat vs speed thing - Dublin is nine minutes flying time from Shannon at 900mph, stick Readiness 5 on top and you're looking at having a pair of Gripen 30,000ft over Temple Bar 14 minutes after the phone call gets made. if you want to go hard, you could have a pair of Meteors over Dublin Castle in 11 minutes (somewhat less, perhaps..?)...
              Not with big gas bags and a full load of missiles, I would love to see the Drag Index chart with the required external stores.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Jetjock View Post
                Speed isn't the issue looking West. It's range.
                The north Donegal coast is actually a lot closer to Baldonnel than Shannon, and that's with going around the border.

                Comment


                • One of the items that came up in the IDFOC Webimar last week was that when we are looking at our future defence we should look at the EU dimension and especially what capabilities the smaller nations can share. This could be that we have an arrangement with Sweden that they have a fighter detachment in Ireland providing QRA. That we then provide sea-lift and full ISTAR capability for our two nations. Each nation does a specialty and shares that with the other(s).

                  For those who have not watched I have tried to link the post to keep comments together but if that does not work the second link is the original.
                  https://forum.irishmilitaryonline.co...l=1#post477280
                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PjAp...3LFiz3Xqi5jBkD

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Rhodes View Post
                    The north Donegal coast is actually a lot closer to Baldonnel than Shannon, and that's with going around the border.
                    Who knows what the future will bring, it could be that when we do decide to get a squadron or two of fighters that NI has left the UK, then we have a big old dis-used air base not too far from Donegal in Ballykelly.
                    (I can already hear the comments rolling in)

                    Comment


                    • Most who have HAS have them for historic reasons, and they were built before smart bombs. Few are upgrading their HAS to make them stronger,and the portable shelter is becoming more popular worldwide.
                      Parallel taxiways are an asset that the airfield owner would quickly get onboard with, as it improves the field capacity too.
                      For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by na grohmiti View Post
                        Most who have HAS have them for historic reasons, and they were built before smart bombs. Few are upgrading their HAS to make them stronger,and the portable shelter is becoming more popular worldwide.
                        Parallel taxiways are an asset that the airfield owner would quickly get onboard with, as it improves the field capacity too.
                        My point is, in all the talk of response time's to Dublin from SNN etc, that the costs are huge for a limited operational need.
                        So do we do it half arsed and have the aircraft sitting on the ramp in Bal with the weapons in the store in the Curragh, or do we do it properly and have all the associated Infrastructure and manpower available 24/7.

                        One option is a joke and the other drives the costs way up, or does the Defence Forces concentrate, whatever increased funding that might be available, on achievable military capabilities that enhance the force at home, and may be transferable to an overseas mission.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by na grohmiti View Post
                          You haven't heard a Mig 21.
                          Loudest thing I ever heard was an original engine 707. That was _loud_

                          Comment


                          • Mig-21 is second only to the Mighty B-1B!

                            The early burner design on the -21 has a very distinctive sound.

                            B-1 shakes your very core!!

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Charlie252 View Post
                              B-1 shakes your very core!!
                              Four roaring F-101's .... and sometimes they have that old school Concorde crackle ... love it. The C-5A Galaxy's were another special sound, like 100000 screaming electrolux vacuum cleaners going off all at once. Nothing beats heavy metal!

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Charlie252 View Post
                                My point is, in all the talk of response time's to Dublin from SNN etc, that the costs are huge for a limited operational need.
                                So do we do it half arsed and have the aircraft sitting on the ramp in Bal with the weapons in the store in the Curragh, or do we do it properly and have all the associated Infrastructure and manpower available 24/7.

                                One option is a joke and the other drives the costs way up, or does the Defence Forces concentrate, whatever increased funding that might be available, on achievable military capabilities that enhance the force at home, and may be transferable to an overseas mission.
                                You keep saying the costs are huge, but they really are no greater than the costs incurred introducing any new aircraft type into service.
                                The difference is, for whatever reason, we let this type of capability lapse with the retirement of the Spitfires. It's a basic function of any military air arm. BASIC. When the Air Corps was formed in 1922, the first aircraft it had in it's inventory was transport. The second aircraft the Free state bought on the first days of independence were not transport aircraft but fighters.(Avro 504K, in active service 9 years by then and Bristol F2B Fighter/recon first introduced just 7 years before. Martinsyde F4 also purchased at the outset, first flew in 1918.) Then it started buying Bombers (DH9).
                                Now if the founders of the state thought we needed Fighters and Bombers at a time when there was no such thing as a long range fighter or bomber and relations with the only nation capable of reaching us with their aircraft was good why did we chose to give up completely at the dawn of the Jet age?
                                1956 Ireland was the height of the Inter Party Government, where it was almost impossible for any decision to be agreed upon, while the population left the country in waves for better opportunities overseas. We managed to Join the UN while Dev was making speeches about why we should not join the Common Market. Former Blueshirts held the post of minister for defence and thus were reluctant to make any dramatic militarist moves. So the Defence Forces, across the board, stagnated.
                                We lost the Air interceptor capability then and have not sought to have it restored, even though the cost to do so in the interim would have been far cheaper to build it from zero now. A single seat Vampire could be brought into service in 1956 for the equivalent of under €1m in todays money. When we replaced the Vampire with the Fouga in 1976, we could have instead got a Hawker Hunter for €2.5m in todays money, or better yet an English Electric Lightning F2 for €4m in todays money. (we would probably have been able to get Second Hand ones from the UK for less at this stage, as they were replacing theirs with Phantom F4. At which point in the Mid 80s or early 90s we would have been in a position to upgrade to something more modern, but cost effective (Tornado would have cost us €50m each in todays money but that's the going rate for 3rd Gen jet fighters.) If we had gone with F5 instead of Hunter, an upgrade may have been offered to extend their working life.
                                By Comparison the SF260W cost €0.5m each in todays money and a Fouga new would cost €2m in todays money. Instead, the government of the time apologised for spending on defence, and blamed it on the various terrorists at work, and the EEC forcing their hand to spend anything at all on security. Indeed DeValera Junior was quite critical of the Defence Estimates of 1976 as the Defence forces was leaning towards becoming an ATCP only force, at the expense of Military capability. He pointed to the lessons from WW2, before which Ireland's military stood pretty well prepared in the circumstances, compared to others.
                                And we would be having the same conversation today, looking at the same cost implications, but the infrastructure would already be there.
                                It can be done.
                                When the Tail of the G4 used to stick out of the Hangar, a new hangar was built with no fuss.
                                The Grass runway's at Baldonnel were upgraded to concrete in 1954 in time for Vampires. Quad radar was installed in 1984, hardly a time when we were awash with money either.
                                Last edited by na grohmiti; 2 July 2020, 16:01.
                                For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X