Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Defending the Irish airspace

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

  • That being the case should we just give up this notion of "neutrality " which was introduced by dev so we wouldn't have to fight alongside the same people we has been fighting against only 18 years beforehand. The fact that Monty himself was an adj in Collins Barracks during the Burning of cork says it all.
    Should we accept, like Iceland, that we are incapable of defending our airspace, and officially permit someone else, presumably NATO to do it for us. Our western approach is theirs also.
    Otherwise pay up and defend our own neutral skies from all comers.
    For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

    Comment


    • Remember of course the most likely and most dangerous conventional threat, which have a low likelihood, are major powers.

      16 jets isn’t going to cut it, 56 maybe

      Comment


      • Yeah, it probably behoves us to piss or get off the pot and go one way or the other.
        If we were going to do that though, we'd have done it by now.
        In true Irish style, in the absence of any urgent need to change things - and thankfully, it's hard to see one arising within any of our lifetimes - we'll most likely keep plugging along as we always have in perpetual ambiguity. It'll do.

        As for what would 'cut it' in terms of unassisted air defence in the face of a major aggressor, I'd say that no small nation could ever afford to build and maintain an air force big enough for that.
        Sweden might be an exception, though I'd imagine they're greatly diminished since the Cold War like everybody else.

        Comment


        • Finland has similar aircraft and roles to us. Slightly larger population. Neighbours with a history of invading them.
          60 F18s also. Due to be replaced with either Super hornet, typhoon, lightning II, gripen, or Rafale.
          It can be done.
          For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

          Comment


          • The Finns can justify that sort of expenditure because of their geography and history.
            The fact that they're one of only a couple of countries left in Europe in which most males still do mandatory military service speaks volumes about their attitude to defence.

            We have no such attitude. It's just not something people care about. They've never needed to.

            Comment


            • Our history of military service in most young males amounts to shouting "IRA" in the middle of "Fields of Athenry".

              However, the thing that keeps most fighter jets busy these days, intercepting and making visual contact with commercial aircraft that have declared an emergency via transponder or have lost comms completely, is still something we should be doing.
              So maybe we should just formalised the current secret agreement? Be honest about it?
              For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

              Comment


              • sh*t just rent Shannon to the yanks and let them fund our defense spend on the air corp. "heading to the bunker and awaiting incoming fire"
                Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.

                Comment


                • If it wasn't for the yanks, Shannon Airport would have closed in 2002.
                  I'd love to see them take it over as an airbase, if only to piss off Ed Horgan.
                  For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                  Comment


                  • Young men who shout 'up the RA' in the middle of Fields of Athenry are patriots of the highest order, as are young men who buy Celtic jerseys and have 'Éire 32' printed on the back of them.

                    I won't stand idly by while you disparage the efforts they make on behalf of our nation.

                    Comment


                    • Ah yes, the craic we had the day we died for Ireland.
                      For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                      Comment


                      • And as Danny Doyle said , all our wars were merry and all our songs were sad .
                        Don't spit in my Bouillabaisse .

                        Comment


                        • Defending our airspace is more than just a QRA issue even if that is the first thing we would have to tackle.

                          What are the two many reasons why we would want to launch a QRA jet?

                          The first would be an unidentified civil jet entering our controlled airspace. These could be nothing more than the crew have spilt coffee all over the cockpit and shorted out several systems like communication and thus are not talking to ATC or transponder is down. It could be more serious that the aircraft has been hijacked or that the aircraft has had a system failure like in the Helios crash. Either way it will be the civilian control that will hopefully pick these up. But that means there is a need for the civilian ATC to be linked to a military command and control system.

                          The next reason is a Russian military aircraft which is probing the NATO air defences. Usually these are TU-95 or TU-160 aircraft flying long range missions. Normally they will have been picked up by radar in Norway and most likely get an escort from aircraft either in Norway or from Iceland. But the Russian will be always trying to avoid being intercepted and thus it may be that they are not detected. If they manage this then their next target would be to approach the UK from the west flying over our airspace. This is because everyone knows that we provide an open backdoor into the NATO airspace area. Therefore to deter this we would need first be able to detect and track such potential intruders with enough time to launch a QRA aircraft. Thankfully given that it would be long range bombers performing this mission they would not be at low level so ground based radar should be sufficient but it would be preferable to have “eyes in the sky”.

                          In both cases it means having command and control element that is 24/7. This is very much the non-sexy side of air defence but one without which no number of fast jets can replace. It can be an off the shelf system like the Saab 9AIR system which could be part of a package if we did go for the Gripen as our air component.

                          Then there is the hard element the interceptor aircraft and here it is a trade off in terms of aircraft numbers and length of service. But what can’t be traded off is the number of pilots. Normally there would be 2 QRA aircraft ready to go, that naturally mean 2 pilots ready to go. They have however a second QRA pair on standby as back-up and a tanker also on standby. Currently the RAF operate a system whereby each pilot spends one 24hr periods on QRA per week while on the operational tour. This means that at least 28 pilots are required, but to cover leave etc., this number would be more. Given that each would likely need around 200 hours per year flight time to keep proficiency that means the aircraft fleet would need to provide at least 6000 hours per year.

                          A figure of 6000 hours is about the life of a typical jet fight today. So here comes the calculation for the number of aircraft. 4 are needed for the QRA, 8 would be the minimum to provide for the proficiency training and 4 would be in maintenance. So buying 16 aircraft is the minimum and would only give 16 years of service. But as you do not just buy the aircraft but also the support equipment and infrastructure you normally want the whole system to last a bit longer. Therefore a more realistic figure would be 24-32 aircraft.

                          But that is not the end of the story, fast jet pilots do not grow on a tree next to an airfield. They need a training system which itself needs more aircraft and infrastructure. There are the primary trainers (Grod G115/G120T), the intermediate (PC9/T6) and then the advanced trainer (M346/T50/T7A). Or it the brochure is to be believed the PC21 Training system. And of course the simulators that are part of every training system today.

                          So it would be a big step from today and of course it comes down in the end to money. This is only part of what would be needed to defend a neutral country there are plenty of other needs. So when someone complains that the famous 2% figure is only a NATO demand it can be seen that if you want to do defence properly then that is what it will take. (It can be against GNI not just GDP).

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by na grohmiti View Post
                            That being the case should we just give up this notion of "neutrality " which was introduced by dev so we wouldn't have to fight alongside the same people we has been fighting against only 18 years beforehand. The fact that Monty himself was an adj in Collins Barracks during the Burning of cork says it all.
                            Should we accept, like Iceland, that we are incapable of defending our airspace, and officially permit someone else, presumably NATO to do it for us. Our western approach is theirs also.
                            Otherwise pay up and defend our own neutral skies from all comers.
                            It was also the fact the if dev did join the war effort and we became an united Ireland his grasp on power would have been weakened with the arrival of a large Protestant electorate than did not want his vision of a small holder Catholic land.

                            Comment


                            • On the point of the infamous secret agreement with the UK, is BoJo aware and will he honour it?

                              In the negotiations that will start next week one thing the UK have removed from the table already is Defence and Security!

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by EUFighter View Post
                                On the point of the infamous secret agreement with the UK, is BoJo aware and will he honour it?

                                In the negotiations that will start next week one thing the UK have removed from the table already is Defence and Security!
                                In who's interest is it that the RAF intercept any dodgy ai craft heading for UK airspace through the back door?

                                If anybody wanted to put up a counter-arguement to Ireland acquiring a squadron of fast jets, it might be why is Ireland securing the west coast of Britian from air attack? Just playing devils advocate...
                                '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

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X