Irish Military Online is in no way affiliated with the Irish Defence Forces. It is in no way sponsored or endorsed by the Irish Defence Forces or the Irish Government. Opinions expressed by the authors and contributors of this site are not necessarily those of the Defence Forces. If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
No Role for the Air Corps says Minister for Defence in SAR
Although I would like to be able to compare us to some other nation it seems that New Zealand always manages to come up and so it is here again. One of the major reasons why neither the AC nor the NS has the level of resources they need is the focus in Ireland on the Army. Both New Zealand and ourselves are roughly the same in terms of population and wealth, plus we are island nations. But if one looks at the division of the forces they are very different:
New Zealand
Ireland (est)
Ireland (act)
Army
4539
7520
6878
Navy
2050
1094
899
Air Force
2516
886
752
Total
9105
9500
8529
So although the total armed forces are roughly the same how they are proportioned is not and this affects what each service can do. So what does this have to do with the ability of the Air Corps to provide SAR? It is because the number of tasks allocated to the two Air Forces is very similar as neither have fast jets fighters. Admittedly the area that both the New Zealand Navy and Air Force have to patrol is greater but the tasks in their most basic definition are very similar. And not too be overlooked is that their fleet of 8x NH-90's and 5x AW-109's are providing air lift for an army 2/3 of ours!
The Air Corps (along with the Naval Service) is chronically under-funded and under-resourced. To take on any further tasking would require a major uplift in resourcing and funding.
But NZ doesn’t have a land border, a long history of domestic terrorism and they have an armed police force
Of course the ability to move personnel and equipment via heli would benefit those requirements greatly
But NZ doesn’t have a land border, a long history of domestic terrorism and they have an armed police force
Of course the ability to move personnel and equipment via heli would benefit those requirements greatly
Anything that comes from NI has first to be transported either by air or sea.
Domestic terrorism is a policing issue, at most a para-military and the only army units that should be involved are those specially trained to deal with terrorism: ARW. Domestic terrorism is best defeated with good police intelligence and where necessary political engagement. The elevation of terrorists to the status of "paramilitaries" just plays into their propaganda hands.
The GFA was more than 20 years ago and the point I was trying to make is that our current organisation is too focus towards the army.
Anything that comes from NI has first to be transported either by air or sea.
Domestic terrorism is a policing issue, at most a para-military and the only army units that should be involved are those specially trained to deal with terrorism: ARW. Domestic terrorism is best defeated with good police intelligence and where necessary political engagement. The elevation of terrorists to the status of "paramilitaries" just plays into their propaganda hands.
The GFA was more than 20 years ago and the point I was trying to make is that our current organisation is too focus towards the army.
PWC was written in 1998 and recommended reduction in the number of barracks around the country (many of them along the border), this was to be offset by modernisation of the MT and heli lift. There remains a requirement to maintain the capability to deploy large numbers of personnel and equipment rapidly in response to an any crisis (be it an act of international terrorism or a pandemic.
The threat from domestic terrorism has greatly reduced since 1998 (but it does remain) and the threat from international terrorism has multiplied.
Like NZ the Government uses the DF to respond to natural disasters. For the size of our State and it’s commitments a balanced force is really 3 all arms Brigades plus a larger NS and AC
The expert group is Secure Ireland’s Search and Rescue (SISAR) of which Sen Gerard Craughwell is the Chairperson. Mr Craughwell said: "What we can't do is have the Air Corps managing these services out of the budget it currently has, it must be given full resources to deliver that kind of service." This point was not just that the AC should have a chance at getting the contract but that the "top cover" it provides to the SAR service provider should be covered by giving the AC the necessary resurces and not having to try and squeeze it out of existing resources.
Ger is well intended, but ultimately misguided. In spite of the current head of the Irish Coast Guard telling him the AW139 is unsuitable for SAR in Ireland, he refuses to accept it, instead suggesting that Mr Reynolds remain out of the conversation for fear of being biased, (himself while in the ear of unnamed ex Air Corps SAR officers keen to act in the Civilian Advisory role if and when the AC return to the SAR game).
For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.
Genuine and open question lads. Do you think the Naval Service would be up to taking this on with all available support from Air Corps/Army/CHC?
Assuming whole thing gets pushed out another two years, CHC are engaged on some sort of a 'transition contract' for the first five years, or so, and off-line support thereafter.
Come Easter; as things stand, and we're hoping not, next door could look like the Titanic except with two icebergs and the string section fighting to the death over butter and toilet rolls.
There'll be a supply of adequate young men with relevant-type command hours and nice table manners; who would take your arm off for a full-time reserve commission, a 'transition' payment over 3-5 years, and assured Irish/EU citizenship for themselves and their families post service. Adequate young ladies too, doubtless.
Regarding any potential pay differential; the idea that the eejit in the left seat is coining it while you're doing all the work will not come as a culture shock to any professional aviator.
Ger is well intended, but ultimately misguided. In spite of the current head of the Irish Coast Guard telling him the AW139 is unsuitable for SAR in Ireland, he refuses to accept it, instead suggesting that Mr Reynolds remain out of the conversation for fear of being biased, (himself while in the ear of unnamed ex Air Corps SAR officers keen to act in the Civilian Advisory role if and when the AC return to the SAR game).
I supppsed the point he is making is that the AC already has the aircraft to do the top cover job already..... the Senator doesn’t often say extra personnel and financial resources are also required to do this job (pilots, rear crew, techs etc to allow a 24/7 roster).
Was the 30/45 min response time for top cover to keep the AC (and I’d say a lot of players) out of it ???? Nimrod for RAF SAR top cover was 2 hours!
The person who he has those disagreements is, is the Director of IRCG (on secondment as HoM of an EU mission currently)
Genuine and open question lads. Do you think the Naval Service would be up to taking this on with all available support from Air Corps/Army/CHC?
Assuming whole thing gets pushed out another two years, CHC are engaged on some sort of a 'transition contract' for the first five years, or so, and off-line support thereafter.
Come Easter; as things stand, and we're hoping not, next door could look like the Titanic except with two icebergs and the string section fighting to the death over butter and toilet rolls.
There'll be a supply of adequate young men with relevant-type command hours and nice table manners; who would take your arm off for a full-time reserve commission, a 'transition' payment over 3-5 years, and assured Irish/EU citizenship for themselves and their families post service. Adequate young ladies too, doubtless.
Regarding any potential pay differential; the idea that the eejit in the left seat is coining it while you're doing all the work will not come as a culture shock to any professional aviator.
Full and frank expected and braced for..
If they are finding it difficult to make an argument for the AC to get involved (who have aircraft and pilots).... what could NS do?
Genuine and open question lads. Do you think the Naval Service would be up to taking this on with all available support from Air Corps/Army/CHC?
Assuming whole thing gets pushed out another two years, CHC are engaged on some sort of a 'transition contract' for the first five years, or so, and off-line support thereafter.
Come Easter; as things stand, and we're hoping not, next door could look like the Titanic except with two icebergs and the string section fighting to the death over butter and toilet rolls.
There'll be a supply of adequate young men with relevant-type command hours and nice table manners; who would take your arm off for a full-time reserve commission, a 'transition' payment over 3-5 years, and assured Irish/EU citizenship for themselves and their families post service. Adequate young ladies too, doubtless.
Regarding any potential pay differential; the idea that the eejit in the left seat is coining it while you're doing all the work will not come as a culture shock to any professional aviator.
So the current CHC fleet is worth $91.75m, rather than $97.5m I had first estimated.
Still leaves €600m+ to begin planning around.
Will require changes to establishment. Direct entry for flying officers. Etc. All of it in a hurry.
First class to begin flying lessons, ideally, Summer 2021.
If the Haulbowline Brains Trust aren't running the rule over it already, I think they'd be mad not be making the contacts, with a view to have something in writing by Christmas.
Was figuring on offering these lads/lassies (ex-contractor and similar) a full-time reserve commission, a 'transition' payment over 3-5 years, etc. etc.
Offer the best of them promotion to Lt/Lt Cdr training officers, as appropriate (perhaps even with a pension) to stay post-transition.
Wish the rest of them the best with their future endeavours, unless they want to stay on as a permanent reserve SLt/Lt.
Better minds than mine will wrestle with the details.
One of the current factors affecting the contract negotiations is pilot pay,which the Govt are very keen to see reduced in the next contract, as well as the dilution of some of the Ts and Cs for pilots. They are very, very expensive, in this contract and it is a factor affecting the choice of the next operator. The crash has also had an effect out of all proportion, on the negotiations. The impending report has implications for the current operator, the future operator, the Coast Guard, the AC and by extension the DoD and several other agencies. The current ad for an "aviation manager" for the Coasties is as a direct result of the crash.
What follows neither draws from; nor has any implications for any events in the real world, past, present, or future.
It's a purely philosophical/hypothetical argument of theory. IMO has no association with, nor necessarily agrees with, any of the following.
Have always believed that corporate staff have little incentive to report up and investigate potential, but unrealised, technical issues.
A diligent staff officer is another creature entirely.
One thing an Air Force does well is reporting. Concise, unfiltered, unvarnished.
Major airlines have a Chief Pilot; whose role is, amongst the other functions he/she preforms, similar.
Best practice appears to be to 'pop' the function out of staff, to reduce further the potential for operational conflicts of interest.
We process personal data about users of our site, through the use of cookies and other technologies, to deliver our services, personalize advertising, and to analyze site activity. We may share certain information about our users with our advertising and analytics partners. For additional details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
By clicking "I AGREE" below, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our personal data processing and cookie practices as described therein. You also acknowledge that this forum may be hosted outside your country and you consent to the collection, storage, and processing of your data in the country where this forum is hosted.
Tweet
Comment