Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Defending the Irish airspace

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

  • 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.
    i have a great deal of sympathy with that view, but does anyone see even a glimmer of a possibility that the body politic will bestow the DF with the resources to field a fully capable Bde with the requisite mobility, logs, armour, fires, ISTAR etc..?

    i've argued here that a large tanker or logistics support ship for the NS would be a good option, or C-130/A400M type airlift capability for the AC - all are higher on my list than a sovereign AD capability, but if, of all those things, a sovereign AD capability is all that will be offered (or nothing) then i'd say take the AD capability and (perhaps in spite of everything the DOD and politicians in general throw at it), try and make it work, and try and use it to open up thinking to make those other things happen in the future.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by ropebag View Post
      i have a great deal of sympathy with that view, but does anyone see even a glimmer of a possibility that the body politic will bestow the DF with the resources to field a fully capable Bde with the requisite mobility, logs, armour, fires, ISTAR etc..?

      i've argued here that a large tanker or logistics support ship for the NS would be a good option, or C-130/A400M type airlift capability for the AC - all are higher on my list than a sovereign AD capability, but if, of all those things, a sovereign AD capability is all that will be offered (or nothing) then i'd say take the AD capability and (perhaps in spite of everything the DOD and politicians in general throw at it), try and make it work, and try and use it to open up thinking to make those other things happen in the future.
      We should be able to seek, and provide all those things. The very fact that we cancelled helicopters and bought Armoured vehicles instead with the allocated funds show the errors of the system. There should have been money for both.
      For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

      Comment


      • ..
        Last edited by Soarhead2; 14 March 2024, 18:10.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by na grohmiti View Post
          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.
          In broad terms you are correct but again the detail is lost in the sands of time and wistful memories.

          The AC never had an AD capability, the Spitfire spent the majority of their time in Ireland on the ground, there was always a huge shortage of money for fuel and spare parts.
          There was no threat and no role and the aircraft were used mostly for training.

          The advent of the Vampire was a positive step but again there was never any concerted effort to generate any kind of air combat capability, the aircraft were used primarily for training and again the total flying hours were very low.

          This led to the purchase of a pure training aircraft as a replacement and again very under utilized during its service.
          You are making a natural assumption, but these capabilities never existed or were pursued by the AC.

          The new hanger for No. 1, and by default for the GIV, went through an extremely painful planning and development phase, which was a constant battle between the DF and the civil side and numerous efforts to cut costs. The is resulted in delays and in the end there were significant compromises required to get it over the line.

          Comment


          • The State has proved,many times,that it can do big infrastructure when it has the will to do so. Ardnacrusha, Turlough Hill,Moneypoint, M50 (the part where seven bridges, aqueducts and water pipes cross is regarded as an engineering classic) and Shannon and Dublin airports, the Kinsale gas pipe and a host of others. Building a QRA station,with ammunition bunkers, accomodation for man and machine and suitable taxiways would not be beyond the skills and resouirces of the State, even on the existing site of Shannon. If you followed the Swedish model, we have so much motorway road space now that a "road airfield" is entirely feasible.
            I also recall the messing about with the hangars. It got so bad that the builders were on the verge of walking away,because of all the arguing between DoD and the AC,all this while scabs of 1917 brick would fall off the walls and pieces of corrugated iron would sail off the roof in any decent gale.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by na grohmiti View Post
              We should be able to seek, and provide all those things. The very fact that we cancelled helicopters and bought Armoured vehicles instead with the allocated funds show the errors of the system. There should have been money for both.
              Helicopter contract cancelled due to legal action due to political meddling. Given the fact that we would have been one of the first users ...

              Comment


              • Originally posted by ropebag View Post
                i have a great deal of sympathy with that view, but does anyone see even a glimmer of a possibility that the body politic will bestow the DF with the resources to field a fully capable Bde with the requisite mobility, logs, armour, fires, ISTAR etc..?

                i've argued here that a large tanker or logistics support ship for the NS would be a good option, or C-130/A400M type airlift capability for the AC - all are higher on my list than a sovereign AD capability, but if, of all those things, a sovereign AD capability is all that will be offered (or nothing) then i'd say take the AD capability and (perhaps in spite of everything the DOD and politicians in general throw at it), try and make it work, and try and use it to open up thinking to make those other things happen in the future.
                We are likely to end up with a squadron of C130Js than jet fighters trust me

                Comment


                • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                  We are likely to end up with a squadron of C130Js than jet fighters trust me
                  ..... and the problem is ?

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by ropebag View Post
                    worth noting that a Gripen E with three big tanks, full internal fuel and two AIM-120/Meteor, and two AIM-132/AIM-9/IRIS-T is at pretty much MTOW. its not going to be doing any short take offs or throttling back to limit the noise complaints.

                    you need big tanks because it has to fly a long way and you don't have tankers...

                    QRA aircraft tend to do lots of take-off/landing cycles per flying hour because stuff often gets resolved after they've taken off, but before they've spent an hour at M2, so not only do they do heavy take-offs, they do heavy landings. big, long runways required...
                    Just because you can load a lot onto an aircraft does not mean that your have too or would want too. It is a peacetime QRA so a parin on IR AAMs plus the 120rds of 27mm would be sufficient for the Grippen. This is the load-out of the Austrian Eurofighters on QRA. The more fuel is not all good for a QRA especially when it is with external tanks as these generate drag. Even with the extra thrust of the F414 the Grippen wil not super-cruise with those big drop tanks and sometimes the interception time is critical. So I would suggest that 2 of the new large tanks would be sufficient.

                    We all know that the performance figures ae not done at MTOW, mostly things like take-off distance etc are done with 50% internal fuel. So it is safe to assume that the 400m for the JAS39C and the 500m for the JAS39E are with 50% internal fuel. So as the E model is bigger and heavier lets look at the figure;

                    Empty weight: 8000kg
                    Pilot+equipment: 120kg
                    Internal fuel: 3400kg
                    External fuel: 3200kg
                    2x IRIS-T AAM: 200kg
                    120rd 27mm: 60kg
                    Total: 14980kg
                    MTOW: 16500kg

                    Taking the 14980kg and using some of the applied maths from the old school days we can estimate roughly the required T/O distance for the configuration given above and it comes in at just under 1100m. This is within the capability of the airports I listed before even if Sligo is a bit tight at 1200m.

                    Looking again at the Austrian experience in the 1st six months of their QRA going operational with the Eurofighter they launched 73 times in what is some of the most congested airspace in Europe. That is one launch every 2.5 days.
                    Last edited by EUFighter; 3 July 2020, 14:43.

                    Comment


                    • Sligo is not for the faint hearted in a Fokker 50 or an ATR, so popping a Gripen in there would be eye-watering. Think Knock or Shannon instead.

                      Comment


                      • It's exactly 500m. No room for error. Get your approach even slightly off and you are in the bog.
                        For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
                          Sligo is not for the faint hearted in a Fokker 50 or an ATR, so popping a Gripen in there would be eye-watering. Think Knock or Shannon instead.
                          An ATR42 witnfuel for 300nm would need 1025m, at MTOW it would require 1165m. So getting a JAS39E would not be any more difficult, the older C variant needs much less T/O distance. In any case Donegal is even longer!

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by na grohmiti View Post
                            It's exactly 500m. No room for error. Get your approach even slightly off and you are in the bog.
                            What is 500m?

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by EUFighter View Post
                              What is 500m?
                              Sligo.
                              For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                              Comment


                              • It's 1100 metres.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X