the star article on irish top guns!!!!!!!!

muppet01

Hi.
Without trying to undermine the work undertaken by the IAC did anyone else read the tripe written by the star today in relation to the IAC PC9

Quote "F16 pilots look inside the aircraft and are jealous of the technology"

I think its fair to say that the IAC are a committed,professional and modern arm of the defence forces but with a helicoptor bias.Why have pc9 trainers without leading into fast jets (BAE Hawk?????)

FOGOFUNK

I know I read it, was gas.

Almost like wartime propaganda, "come on the lads!!!!"

muppet01

Did you notice the pilot " checking his rocket pod before take off" It was empty!:D

FOGOFUNK

Yeah that was a good one. It was ridiculous article all in all. Fisher Price trainers, Now isnt the time for an upgrade though.

muppet01

In fairness they are not fisher price trainers.they are modern aircraft but are in no way capable of protecting airspace or anything else for that matter.Also why buy the 139's but not deploy them overseas.lets lease the hips and not use our shiny new choppers for real work.................

diverdriver

The PC9s are great trainers as a lead into combat aircraft. Pity we don't have any. The Air Corps remains the best flying club in the country and frankly as it stands is a waste of money. We need maritime patrol aircraft and we need helicopters for the army. The former could be done by civilian contractors and the latter by the army. Everything other role could be done by civilian subcontractors.

As it happens, after 9/11 serious consideration was given to equipping the Air Corps with some sort of jets to intercept rogue airliners. Something like the L39. They were affordable. One big snag though. The Air Corps doesn't have any form of military radar. They rely on civilian radars. It would have cost about €200 million to equip the Air Corps with a suitable military radar. So that idea was snuffed out.

You see the problem really isn't buying F16s or whatever. It's supporting fast jets that's unaffordable.

It's time the Air Corps was disbanded and civilianised. The only real role that it should be left with is helicopter support for the army. But frankly it cannot even do that now with it's sports car helicopters and their inabilitly to deploy anywhere outside Baldonnel, let alone Chad.

I say that sadly as a long term cheeleader for the Air Corps and once hopeful candidate as a cadet. But it's time is past. It has no real role anymore.

Captain Chaos

The L39 is also very limited at protecting airspace, its performance is not great for quick reaction intercepts, it has short range and does not have the speed to intercept airliners unless it was placed in the path of one. The L39 is best suited to light ground attack, and carry missiles for self defence or shooting down choppers, they are just faster PC9 with more weapons options.

If you're going to get fighters to patrol airspace, you need something with an afterburner and can exceed Mach 1+. Something cheap and easy to maintain like the JAS-39C/D, F-16 performance in a smaller and cheaper package. But its not going to happen. The IAC in its current state is a big waste of money and should be shut down until there is funding for a proper airforce with a proper base and support assets.

Steyr

Captain Chaos wrote: »

If you're going to get fighters to patrol airspace, you need something with an afterburner and can exceed Mach 1+. Something cheap and easy to maintain

F5/F20 Tigersharks?

Also does anybody have a link to the article?

diverdriver

The F20 never entered service and existed only in prototype form. If we wanted cheap. Russian equipment would qualify. A few upgraded Mig21s.

Captain Chaos, the L39 was seriously considered at the time, from my man on the inside. But frankly something like the Hawk or Alpha Jet might have been better.

Steyr

diverdriver wrote: »

Captain Chaos, the L39 was seriously considered at the time, from my man on the inside.

So much so they were going to be built in Ireland.

Captain Chaos

diverdriver wrote: »

The F20 never entered service and existed only in prototype form. If we wanted cheap. Russian equipment would qualify. A few upgraded Mig21s.

Captain Chaos, the L39 was seriously considered at the time, from my man on the inside. But frankly something like the Hawk or Alpha Jet might have been better.

I know the L39s were seriously considered, I read many articles in respected papers all about the L39 and showing proper pics of it about 3 or so years ago. It's a good thing didn't actually didn't go with them and it was pointed out at the time that while they were a major upgrade in capability they would still be lacking in certain areas such as patroling airspace and intercepting un-ID'ed aircraft.

diverdriver

So much so they were going to be built in Ireland.

?? A bit unlikely, assembled maybe. We simply do not have the expertise here in Ireland. Even assembly would be unlikely. In any case the quantities involved would be miniscule and not economically viable.

BostonB

Captain Chaos wrote: »

The L39 is also very limited at protecting airspace, its performance is not great for quick reaction intercepts, it has short range and does not have the speed to intercept airliners unless it was placed in the path of one.

This was all argued before on boards, and the reality is by the time you know theres a problem with an airliner, in a 9/11 situation it will be all over too fast for any fighter to do anything about it. But ok, intercepting airliners for other reasons might be credible reason for having fighters.

Captain Chaos wrote: »

If you're going to get fighters to patrol airspace, you need something with an afterburner and can exceed Mach 1+. ...

While thats ideal, I think the Harriers in the Faklands did an ok job with what they had available.

Captain Chaos wrote: »

The IAC in its current state is a big waste of money and should be shut down until there is funding for a proper airforce with a proper base and support assets.

Well thats true. How useful are the PC9s? The only thing they do well, is the one thing we don't need. The reality is its a token force.

Steyr

diverdriver wrote: »

?? A bit unlikely, assembled maybe. We simply do not have the expertise here in Ireland. Even assembly would be unlikely. In any case the quantities involved would be miniscule and not economically viable.

It was definately talked about i can assure you.;)

fireplace1982

The elephant in the room....we are a neutral country..

Neutral like switzerland and sweden with their Air Forces...no

If the Defence Forces were to look to the government for the budget for fuel for a fighter force they would be laughed out of the room, never mind the cost of the aircraft and maintenance. Imagine trhe headline tomorrow... 'Irish Air Corps secure 400 million to Buy and Run fighter Jets to defend our Neutrality". There would be a riot

Never...gonna...happen.

Walter Mittying to extremis:)