Should the Air Corps be scrapped?

darkman2

It's funny when you listen to a representative of the Air Corps on a radio program and then they are asked "what do the Air Corps do?" - the response is often stuttering and frankly cringe worthy as they struggle to explain what the usefulness of the Air Corps is. They have no jet fighters and only a handful of helicopters (which act as a taxi service for when a GAA club needs opening by a Minister).


So what is the point in a: continuing the delusion that the Air Corps is little more then a bad joke? and b: wasting money on it? Why are these pilots being trained in propellar aircraft and for what? It's all a delusion really.


In my view it would be better for esteem just to get rid of it. What do you think?


(also just want to say it's not the fault of the pilots or staff that this accurate perception is there, they are fine individuals - but rather it's the imbiciles that run the country)

Poccington

Scrap the Air Corps as part of the DF and make what was formerly the Air Corps an Army asset.

Organise it into something along the lines of the AAC over in the BA. Ditch the Government jets etc. and start to look at getting a proper air asset available to the troops that need them and once they have the capability, start to deploy them Overseas.

Once we get back Overseas again that is :pac:

Flying Abruptly

I was actually thinking recently that hypothetically if terrorists for what ever reason hi-jacked a commerical airline over Ireland, would the Air Corps actually be able to do anything to prevent an attack.

The top speed of the PC-9 is 593 km/h and an A320 (for example) is 871 km/h. So if they did intercept it, they wouldnt have much time as the A320 could just out run it.

I know it mightnt be as simple as that and other things would probably have to be taken into account. The Irish government would probably have to call on a Typhoon from the UK (max speed of 2495 km/h) to help as it would probably intercept alot faster.

Edit: I realise I've quoted max speeds which probably cant be sustained for long periods but the crusing speeds also tell the same story.

ANXIOUS

Flying Abruptly wrote: »

I was actually thinking recently that hypothetically if terrorists for what ever reason hi-jacked a commerical airline over Ireland, would the Air Corps actually be able to do anything to prevent an attack.

The top speed of the PC-9 is 593 km/h and an A320 (for example) is 871 km/h. So if they did intercept it, they wouldnt have much time as the A320 could just out run it.

I know it mightnt be as simple as that and other things would probably have to be taken into account. The Irish government would probably have to call on a Typhoon from the UK (max speed of 2495 km/h) to help as it would probably intercept alot faster.

Edit: I realise I've quoted max speeds which probably cant be sustained for long periods but teh crusing speeds also tell the same story.

I could be wrong but i think that the agreement is already in place. It comes under the eu. Realisticly speaking Ireland wouldnt be teh end target for the terrorists so it would be in Britains interest to deal with it, also flying at the speeds you qouted they wouldbe be over ireland for long.

Flying Abruptly

ANXIOUS wrote: »

I could be wrong but i think that the agreement is already in place. It comes under the eu. Realisticly speaking Ireland wouldnt be teh end target for the terrorists so it would be in Britains interest to deal with it, also flying at the speeds you qouted they wouldbe be over ireland for long.

I didnt know that, I must look it up, thanks.

I realise that they wouldnt be over the country for too long, but my main point is why bother having the PC-9s at all then if they would be of no real use in an emergency situation.

I wouldnt really be in favour of disbanding the whole Air Force, it just needs to be brought up to modern standards...but then whats the point if the UK has our backs...

concussion

More heli's please!

Steyr

Flying Abruptly wrote: »

but my main point is why bother having the PC-9s at all then if they would be of no real use in an emergency situation.

They were bought to ensure AC Jockeys are up-to-date with Modern Trainer Aircraft with "Jet-like" characteristics so if the stuff hits the fan they would have no major issues moving onto fast air.

I believe thats the general idea.

petergfiffin

Was only thinking the same thing myself also lately and to be honest I think pretty much all of it should be privatised especially if you look at the main roles of the AC:

1. Troop transport
Overseas transport is already carried out by other nations or private operators, the Air Corps do not send aircraft overseas to support UN operations and in all reality probably never will.

Heavy lift/cargo transport is already outsourced and as can be seen, private operators can open up access to aircraft we can only dream about e.g. the Antonov-124 that's been used already.
Within Ireland what you're really looking at is helicopters being primarily used for familiarising troops with helicopter operations which could easily be opened up to private operators, this might actually make more sense as it may allow troops to train on Mi8s which are used for UN operations, it could also open up a wider variety of aircraft types. Given these would be used only for training they would not need to be of military spec - especially when you consider our AW139s aren't anyway.

There may be a case for keeping a small number (say 2) helicopters for use by ARW for armed operations but I'm sure it could be worked into any agreement with an operator that from time to time aircraft may be required to carry weapoons and may also be required to assist in armed operations (ultimately it will be civilian pilots with army gunners). I know people will make comments about abilities of civilian vs military pilots but most if not all SAR pilots are ex military anyway.

2. Air Ambulance
Should be privatised same as most countries in the world. I think this should be done as part of a national Air Ambulance strategy which would see the contractor also providing road-side evacuation and inter-hospital transport.

3. Garda Support
From what I can see most police forces either use private operators or have "police" pilots, there is no real reason why this needs to be a military task.

4. Ministerial transport
ABSOLUTELY should be privatised, why should military aircraft be diverted from what they were bought for to ferry around politicians who want to make a big arrival? Also, by privatising it the cost to the tax payer becomes very clear.

5. Air Defence
Let's be honest, to try and do this properly would take investment that would make Nama look like a church gate collection!! If we really think it's an issue the simplest thing is to enter into an arrangement with the British where they would provide air defence which we would either pay for or trade for something else. Aircraft from the West coast of Britain could easily cover Ireland, and before people go on about the whole "what if terrorists want to crash an airliner into the Square?", the fact is in the US, inspite of all their power, they couldn't prevent it either.

6. Army cooperation
This could either be outsourced to the same people who get the contract for Garda Support, the Army could get a larger investment in UAVs or the Air Corps would move back into the Army with a much smaller number of aircraft & pilots.

7. Maritime patrol
This has already been outsourced in the UK, albeit that seems to be for patrols closer to the shore but I'm sure there are plenty of companies who can operate much further out. Also, it would do away with the requirement for maritime patrol aircraft to be based on the East coast, you could simply locate them in Shannon/Galway/Sligo which would help reduce fuel costs. I think any agreement would have to be that the operator provides a min of 4 aircraft to be available on a 24x7 basis. It may well be here that the Naval Service contracts these services directly through the DoD.

Existing aircraft would either be transferred to the Army (where applicable) and the remaining aircraft would be sold. The money from the sale of the aircraft would be ring-fenced to provide new UAVs for the Army (and potentially Naval Service). Baldonnel could then be sold with the money being used to fund redundancy payments for those members who have sufficient service and do not want to transfer to the Army. Also, there's nothing to say some of these private operators could not be companies formed by ex-AC members.
So that's my 2 cent!!

pondasher

Not alone should the Air Corp be scrapped but also certain elements of the Navy. We just need to retain the Coast Guard role that the navy presently performs but that is all.
Former F.C.A. now called the Army Reserve should also be scrapped.
It is a platform for immature adults who want to play soldiers and fire weapons at the taxpayers expense.

El Guapo!

pondasher wrote: »

Not alone should the Air Corp be scrapped but also certain elements of the Navy. We just need to retain the Coast Guard role that the navy presently performs but that is all.
Former F.C.A. now called the Army Reserve should also be scrapped.
It is a platform for immature adults who want to play soldiers and fire weapons at the taxpayers expense.

To be honest thats a ridiculous generalisation and an insult to any of the lads who serve in the RDF.

PeterIanStaker

pondasher wrote: »

Not alone should the Air Corp be scrapped but also certain elements of the Navy. We just need to retain the Coast Guard role that the navy presently performs but that is all.
Former F.C.A. now called the Army Reserve should also be scrapped.
It is a platform for immature adults who want to play soldiers and fire weapons at the taxpayers expense.

Complete nonsense. As the previous guy said, its an insult. I wore that uniform for eight years & I'm proud of it.


F**k the begrudgers.

BigDuffman

pondasher wrote: »

Not alone should the Air Corp be scrapped but also certain elements of the Navy. We just need to retain the Coast Guard role that the navy presently performs but that is all.
Former F.C.A. now called the Army Reserve should also be scrapped.
It is a platform for immature adults who want to play soldiers and fire weapons at the taxpayers expense.

Open the flood gates

concussion

pondasher wrote: »

It is a platform for immature adults who want to play soldiers and fire weapons at the taxpayers expense.

Wow, it's like you've known me all my life! You're bang on wrt the second part - it is great fun banging off a few hundred rounds of 364x40 when someone else is picking up the tab.

Morpheus

some ill informed posting here...

It is a platform for immature adults who want to play soldiers and fire weapons at the taxpayers expense

first of all pondasher - can you back up your opinion about your fellow boards (and RDF) members here please?

Scrap the aircorps? yes but completely remove indigenous air capability? NO.

We dont have much of one now, but we do have one. we have pilots trained to fly military jets, military turboprops, single and multi engined, carry out green and black ops from helis, night flying using NVG and the ability to quickly move company sized elements around in country in case of emergency. A unit that will not down tools and refuse to work, that is not subject to all the restrictions of civilian flying and almost a hundred years experience of operating military aircraft in ireland.

Solution for aircorps... split it into two...

1: Maritime patrol and surveilance... moves to naval control completely, augmented by an increase in patrol assets (more patrol planes and naval UAV's) buy navalised helis and naval flight crews who DONT operate off tiny flight decks on between the hours of 10am and 4pm mon - fri.

2: Army Air Corps, AW139 and EC135 and PC9s increase number of helis to a larger fleet and send them AND support crews over seas on UN missions, either upgrade PC9s to COIN capability or buy a small number of cheap attack heli's and send them over seas when necessary.

Increase artillery units and send them over seas... basically change army to that of an expeditionary force with its own indigenous air artillery and anti air defence capability so that we dont send soldiers abroad with the UN dependent completely on the whims of another security council member when were in a pickle and require air or arty support.

buy the EPV for the navy, hell buy two buy 4 opv's replace the ancient hulks were using now. get decent proper navy blue/green assets with flight deck capability AND HANGARS that are modular and can be used to carry cargo too.

I dont have time to evaluate my thoughts properly as im in work but thats my 2 c.

Morpheus

actually ignore pond, he hasnt posted on military before, just trolling.

DylanJM

Solution for aircorps... split it into two...

1: Maritime patrol and surveilance... moves to naval control completely, augmented by an increase in patrol assets (more patrol planes and naval UAV's) buy navalised helis and naval flight crews who DONT operate off tiny flight decks on between the hours of 10am and 4pm mon - fri.

2: Army Air Corps, AW139 and EC135 and PC9s increase number of helis to a larger fleet and send them AND support crews over seas on UN missions, either upgrade PC9s to COIN capability or buy a small number of cheap attack heli's and send them over seas when necessary.

Took the words right out of my mouth Morphéus.

Steyr

CASA's should be Navy Operated and ideally in a perfect would we would/should have 8 or 10, does anybody know their available hours? They ideally would be based on the SE,S,W and NW coastline at available Airports such as Waterford/Cork/Kerry/Shannon/Sligo or Donegal.

Capt Blackadder

You might be able to answer this Steyr. What would a mid model C-130 go for? With parts and plenty of hours left on the air frame. I remember seeing Norway selling 5 a few years ago. Buy lets say 5. Enough to transport a company and at least a decent amount of support weapons and ordinance a great distance fast. Give them the ability to mount sensors for maritime duties. When over seas missions come again, release some to transport duties. A very basic idea, with not much thought put into it. Feasible?

Steyr

Norway offered to sell 4 C-130H Variant Hercules to Indonesia for US66Million, thats with a upgrade/retrofit before sale.

Before that the US and Australia offered to sell 6 C-130E and J Variants to Indonesia at special discounts with deliveries starting in 2012, they also would have undergone retrofits too. Those Hercules would have been a grant from the US and that included Foreign Military Financing and Spareparts.

Steyr

Just while its in my head, while at RIAT, when the Kiwi 757 was doing her Demo the Commentator mentioned that since the RNZAF dont operate Attack Jets anymore bar the 757 that its RNZAF Pilots go to the RAAF ( Australian AF ) to learn how to fly and fly the RAAF's fast Jets, a sort of exchange programme but not a short term basis more long term.

Would be a great idea for the IAC. Dream i know for us but just thought id mention it.

Avgas

Just to put that cat among the pigeons...why not think about a mainly UAV based air corps ?

We do not absolutely need a manned MPA aircraft...surplus Hercs, Orions or more Casa 295s or just re configured ATRs would be great but the labour costs and economics are always against us.....we will never be able to afford more than a handful of such.....maybe a mid size UAV could be the best economic answer...with palletized loads...one optimized for land recce/ISR....another for marine MPA.....perhaps a weakness would be lack of stores carrying ability which a larger proper aircraft has.....useful for certain missions.....SAR, etc.

The same platform would be ideal for overseas PK support and could in time be 'evolved' for some sort of CAS 'overwatch' role....

Okay there are still some issues with use of UAVs as routine assets near civil airspace...but FAA and Eurocontrol are working on protocols and policies to smooth that AFAIK.

Why not join the curve?

The MATS role can be done better by Ryanair.
The PC9M is a lovely bird, great endurance which in theory would make it useful little COIN number BUT you would have to spend a lot on ESM, ECM, etc, and probably some type of stand-offish weapon rather than merely 12.7mm pods and rockets, to have a chance of surviving a serious opponent.....

The only thing we really really do need pilots for are big capacity choppers...but the last time we had them was when the Pope came............and my vote would be for some ultra long range super Puma/Cougar types.....or Mi17s...why not? 6-9, or rebuilt S61...mentioned in another thread a few ages back.....

Steyr

Avgas wrote: »

Just to put that cat among the pigeons...why not think about a mainly UAV based air corps ?

The same platform would be ideal for overseas PK support and could in time be 'evolved' for some sort of CAS 'overwatch' role....

I agree with everything in your post but be careful, your talking sense:)

concussion

A poster on another Irish military site had some very good reasons for keeping a manned maritime aircraft, I'll have a look tomorrow for the post. Some good idea's though Avgas, as always - where have you been recently?

petergfiffin

There are a lot of great suggestions about how capacity could be improved, but let's face it, if it hasn't happened in the last 10 years when we had plenty of money then it's very unlikely to happen for the next 10 or 15. Even when the Air Corps were given the opportunity to upgrade the fleet they bought training turboprops (very nice as they are) and green civilian helicopters, neither of which add anything to our overseas capacity, they totally passed over the opportunity to buy military grade helis be they MI8s, Blackhawks, second hand Pumas or even Hueys.

If we accept there is almost certainly not going to be any increase in capacity for the Air Corps then the question still stands, is the Air Corps we have now (and likely to have for the next 20 years), something which is vital to the country or do we just scrap it and give the work to people who may be able to provide the exact same or better service for less of our tax money?

punchdrunk

petergfiffin wrote: »

If we accept there is almost certainly not going to be any increase in capacity for the Air Corps then the question still stands, is the Air Corps we have now (and likely to have for the next 20 years), something which is vital to the country or do we just scrap it and give the work to people who may be able to provide the exact same or better service for less of our tax money?

if it boiled down to absolutes like this,the unfortunately I'd be in the scrap it camp because the only thing they seem able to do 100% effectively is MATS which in my mind is totally irrelevant anyway

but personally I think that without spending billions of euro
if we simply...

1)made extensive use of training abroad via exchange programs to expand experience levels

2)dumped MATS

3)removed tech payed members from most non tech jobs in the Don,if your a specialist in some area then why the hell are you manning the gate!

4)put an end to the mon-fri 9-5 mentality,your not a fecking bank

5)introduce NCO pilots

then we might get somewhere

Morpheus

agree with all of the above.

kill MATS completely

expand heli fleet to include Medium lift mil spec and small number of light attack
helis

give pc9s green COIN role and upgrade to even basic level of COIN with some sort of ECMs

hand the navy finner and casa's.

hand the gardai their choppers and tell them to FO and train their own pilots

NCO pilots for new army air corps.

helis' for navys new EPV's (get river class OPVs too)

more UAVs

even a couple of mobile long range SAM batterys we could dot around country would be a deterrent mitigating a CAP squadron we dont need - prob cheaper too

why are techs manning gates!? give the new army air corps their own infantry company and equiment for providing security of bases.

Poccington

petergfiffin wrote: »

There are a lot of great suggestions about how capacity could be improved, but let's face it, if it hasn't happened in the last 10 years when we had plenty of money then it's very unlikely to happen for the next 10 or 15. Even when the Air Corps were given the opportunity to upgrade the fleet they bought training turboprops (very nice as they are) and green civilian helicopters, neither of which add anything to our overseas capacity, they totally passed over the opportunity to buy military grade helis be they MI8s, Blackhawks, second hand Pumas or even Hueys.

If we accept there is almost certainly not going to be any increase in capacity for the Air Corps then the question still stands, is the Air Corps we have now (and likely to have for the next 20 years), something which is vital to the country or do we just scrap it and give the work to people who may be able to provide the exact same or better service for less of our tax money?

It should be noted that it wasn't the AC that passed up the opportunities, it was the DoD with help of course, from the Department of Finance that passed up these opportunities.

The DF doesn't sign the cheques or decide what equipment we get, the civvie's in the DoD and DoF do.

The DF may have an opinion on the kit they'd like to get but at the end of the day, they get what they're given and do what they're told by the civvie's. That's the attitude of a Government which doesn't take Defence spending seriously and it's the attitude which is prevalent still to this day in the DoD.

Poccington

Morphéus wrote: »

why are techs manning gates!? give the new army air corps their own infantry company and equiment for providing security of bases.

We don't have the numbers to just throw the AC an Infantry Coy.

Unless the Don becomes an Army Barracks anytime soon, they're just gonna have to man the gates.

Morpheus

would it be a huge leap of faith to build a barracks on site there? is there enough room for example for an infantry unit to exist there? Or better yet, give them their own Military Air Police unit to do base security at all bases... AND train THEM to provide security for our (meagre) assets when they are sent (rarely) abroad.

isnt that what grown up militaries do?

hk

For what i see in the papers, there might be new times ahead for the AC with the GOC just been promoted to D COS OPS, maybe a new perspective at the upper levels as a result?

punchdrunk

i'd hand over the security to the integrated RDF

Poccington

Morphéus wrote: »

would it be a huge leap of faith to build a barracks on site there? is there enough room for example for an infantry unit to exist there? Or better yet, give them their own Military Air Police unit to do base security at all bases... AND train THEM to provide security for our (meagre) assets when they are sent (rarely) abroad.

isnt that what grown up militaries do?

There already is an MP Detachment over in the Don.

If you move an Infantry Unit from one barracks over to the Don, it just means the barracks that the Infantry Unit came from is going to lose it's biggest manpower source and every single other Unit in the barracks is going to suffer quite a bit as a result.

I know for a fact from being in the Don a number of times that not every single person over there is up to their tits in work. Every barracks has Regimental duties and every Unit in the barracks gets stuck in, why should the Don be any different? If they're that upset about there Techs being on the gate, well then don't put them there. After all, it's the people in the Don that decide who goes on the gate.

Steyr

Poccington wrote: »

The DF may have an opinion on the kit they'd like to get but at the end of the day, they get what they're given and do what they're told by the civvie's. That's the attitude of a Government which doesn't take Defence spending seriously and it's the attitude which is prevalent still to this day in the DoD.

That the problem right there.

Morpheus

Poccington wrote: »

There already is an MP Detachment over in the Don.

If you move an Infantry Unit from one barracks over to the Don, it just means the barracks that the Infantry Unit came from is going to lose it's biggest manpower source and every single other Unit in the barracks is going to suffer quite a bit as a result.

I know for a fact from being in the Don a number of times that not every single person over there is up to their tits in work. Every barracks has Regimental duties and every Unit in the barracks gets stuck in, why should the Don be any different? If they're that upset about there Techs being on the gate, well then don't put them there. After all, it's the people in the Don that decide who goes on the gate.

are the MP's Air MP's??

What are their basic tasks in the DON if not providing access security to the countrys only remaining military airbase? A Tech shouldnt be on a gate, he should be under an engine cowling or up to their tits in grease/oil/aircraft parts etc...

Steyr

AFAIK the EC135's are serviced by McAlpine.

pondasher

Morphéus wrote: »

some ill informed posting here...



first of all pondasher - can you back up your opinion about your fellow boards (and RDF) members here please?

Scrap the aircorps? yes but completely remove indigenous air capability? NO.

We dont have much of one now, but we do have one. we have pilots trained to fly military jets, military turboprops, single and multi engined, carry out green and black ops from helis, night flying using NVG and the ability to quickly move company sized elements around in country in case of emergency. A unit that will not down tools and refuse to work, that is not subject to all the restrictions of civilian flying and almost a hundred years experience of operating military aircraft in ireland.

Solution for aircorps... split it into two...

1: Maritime patrol and surveilance... moves to naval control completely, augmented by an increase in patrol assets (more patrol planes and naval UAV's) buy navalised helis and naval flight crews who DONT operate off tiny flight decks on between the hours of 10am and 4pm mon - fri.

2: Army Air Corps, AW139 and EC135 and PC9s increase number of helis to a larger fleet and send them AND support crews over seas on UN missions, either upgrade PC9s to COIN capability or buy a small number of cheap attack heli's and send them over seas when necessary.

Increase artillery units and send them over seas... basically change army to that of an expeditionary force with its own indigenous air artillery and anti air defence capability so that we dont send soldiers abroad with the UN dependent completely on the whims of another security council member when were in a pickle and require air or arty support.

buy the EPV for the navy, hell buy two buy 4 opv's replace the ancient hulks were using now. get decent proper navy blue/green assets with flight deck capability AND HANGARS that are modular and can be used to carry cargo too.

I dont have time to evaluate my thoughts properly as im in work but thats my 2 c.

I rest my case buy these guys games consoles it would be cheaper

DylanJM

Buy who a games console?

Avgas

Maybe would people agree bashing the air corps has gone a bit too far here?

No disrespect, but i find talk of game consoles a bit silly.

There are many fine people in the Air Corps who are aware of its problems and would like to see change. The problem as ever is lack of money, and a cult of inaction as regards initiative and leadership.

I'd be very critical of the way they've handled the procurement process during the Tyger era.....and they've arguably bungled the heavy SAR mission 4ever...that will be an outs sourced job for the forseeable future....but they had help AFAIK from the (un)civil (mis)service...

Just think IFi.... the Sikorsy S-92 deal had gone through....when was it...back in the later 1990s.....it would look a different Air Corps today........

But i just think historically ...the land army have excessively dominated our defence forces...I mean I'm not denying we're always going to need an excellent infantry corps as the bedrock of any DF structure...but we are an Island......and we're on major air routes...during the Cold War it was crazy not to have directed much more defence spending into air defence(which could well be land based SAMs, etc.), and coastal defence........today it seems that overseas/expeditionary PK ops, like Chad, is where its all at.......... and territorial air & coastal defence of our own island maybe seems old hat.......but things can change rapidly.......some type of aerial policing and monitoring role is arguably required....at the very least a proper radar network to monitor who is flying around our skys........even if suspect 9/11 type incidents would be more than likely handed off to........RAF Eurofighters....(BTW does anyone know how realistic is that..how long would it take a pair on alert to make out to well beyond Shannon for and interception?)

Also we may need to be more assertive in policing our fishing grounds, and above all, claims to the seafloor mineral wealth (if its there!).....

So I would be against scrapping our air corps.....Maybe...this is really going to raise heckles.....maybe we should create a seemless DEFENCE FORCE...which integrates land, air and naval units and while allowing for some 'traditional specialism' differences in rank and uniform...basically an entirely unified service........bit like the USMC?

Maybe the entire Corps model needs a massive kick in the posterior on the grounds it inhibits 'jointness', is often out of date, perhaps lack flexibility and just create 'bunker' mentalities?

I await outrage and possible banning.

DylanJM

Avgas wrote: »

maybe we should create a seemless DEFENCE FORCE...which integrates land, air and naval units and while allowing for some 'traditional specialism' differences in rank and uniform...basically an entirely unified service........bit like the USMC?

Maybe I'm missing the point, but I don't really see any advantage in that. What would you hope to achieve by consolidating the 3 different services?

Morpheus

model the whole outfit like that of a Marine Expeditionary Force with all of its own indigenous armour, arty, air naval and support units!? I think I suggested that somewhere here before!

something of a scaled down (as in we dont have sea lift capabilities) version of this? And i dont mean the infantry become marines, but these are units of roughly 2000 - 3000 personel in size.

All under the ONE command obviously!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2a/1st_Marine_Expeditionary_Force.png

Avgas

[QUOTE=DylanJM;67177067]Maybe I'm missing the point, but I don't really see any advantage in that. What would you hope to achieve by consolidating the 3 different services?[/QUOTE]

Well I'll concede such a move could be a dogs breakfast...like our National HSE....but the idea would be achieve long-term organizational and administrative savings and create greater joint capabilities...something like what Morpheus suggested...apologies If I'm reinventing your wheel....:)

I think the Canadian and Belgians have something of a merged joint force structure but distinctive air and naval forces are both much larger and distinctive in each case......so they are sorta semi-integrated only......

I guess what I don't like is the way our Air Corps and Naval Service/Navy seem distinctly 'secondary' to the main event-our Army, under current structure. I'd be looking for a shift in doctrine and philosophy.....an integrated force capable of a spectrum of aid to civil power missions, expedtionary peace support, and residual national territorial defence capabilities.......

Maybe this is drifting too much off OP?

Steyr

Avgas wrote: »

The MATS role can be done better by Ryanair.

Seconded and use EI too, EI can be used for transatlantic Ops or anything further than Europe and FR can be used for Europe.

On The Joe Duffy Show a few weeks ago an Air Corps Person ( Possibly EXER ) i believe said that MATS was needed as they can go anytime etc, i dont buy that one bit, nothing to stop them chartering an Aircraft from EI or FR for when they are needed.

If the UK can charter use of BA777's then i done see why we cant use FR's 737's or EI's A330's.

DylanJM

apologies If I'm reinventing your wheel....

Invent away Avgas

I was just wondering what the major benefits would be.

troubleshooter

Morphéus wrote: »

model the whole outfit like that of a Marine Expeditionary Force with all of its own indigenous armour, arty, air naval and support units!? I think I suggested that somewhere here before!

something of a scaled down (as in we dont have sea lift capabilities) version of this? And i dont mean the infantry become marines, but these are units of roughly 2000 - 3000 personel in size.

All under the ONE command obviously!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2a/1st_Marine_Expeditionary_Force.png

Where would the money come from?

It was also change it from a defence force to an expeditionary one, wheres there to invade?


Get rid of the lear jets, let the politicans take commerical flights like in other countries, get some medium size military helos, not civilian ones painted green with the saving.

Keep or upgrade the prop light attack aircraft, they play a useful role in simulating air attacks on exercise.

xflyer

On The Joe Duffy Show a few weeks ago an Air Corps Person ( Possibly EXER ) i believe said that MATS was needed as they can go anytime etc, i dont buy that one bit, nothing to stop them chartering an Aircraft from EI or FR for when they are needed.

Exactly, in fact there is no need to charter from EI or FR, not that they could be available on short notice anyway. But there are plenty of executive jet operators out there. Even you and I, if we had the money could be in the air in a couple of hours. One phone call is all it takes.

The MATS function is a luxury we taxpayers cannot afford. The whole Air Corps is well overdue for reform. It's the least military of the services. It has a minimal operation role, cannot deploy overseas, cannot defend the airspace, has mostly non military aircraft.

It needs to be turned into a robustly military unit not simply an expensive flying club or a nursery for future airline and SAR pilots.

unclecessna

Morphéus wrote: »

We dont have much of one now, but we do have one. we have pilots trained to fly military jets, military turboprops, single and multi engined, carry out green and black ops from helis, night flying using NVG and the ability to quickly move company sized elements around in country in case of emergency. A unit that will not down tools and refuse to work, that is not subject to all the restrictions of civilian flying and almost a hundred years experience of operating military aircraft in ireland.

Lol, are you for real? Where to start....the Air Corps haven't had any military jets since 1998/1999 and the jets that they do have are civilian buisness jets,

military turboprops - given,

single and multi-engined qualified Pilots - well unless you are a single engine flight instructor, banner-tower or cropduster pilot then whether you are a commercial civil or military pilot you will be qualified as such in any case so that's not exactly a big deal,

carrying out green and black ops(when the helicopters in question aren't being diverted to be used to transport Government Ministers at great cost) are practiced for - given,

''night flying using NVG and the ability to quickly move company sized elements around in country in case of emergency''.......kind of, the problem is that a lot of the time several of the AW139's are grounded for maintenance etc which is a story in itself given that they are pretty much brand new.....

''A unit that will not down tools and refuse to work, that is not subject to all the restrictions of civilian flying and almost a hundred years experience of operating military aircraft in ireland. ''.....regarding the first part, it would be nice to think so and in theory they absolutely should but think back a few years to the the event that led to the Air Corps losing their SAR capability. As for them not being subject to all the restrictions of civil aviation - yes in theory but at the end of the day most civil Pilots will be found to be operating in weather conditions that the Air Corps do not dare to venture probably due to their own military regulations.
As for the near 100 years of military experience..again true on paper but I would suggest you seek out a good book recently released on the subject ''Military Aviation in Ireland 1921-1945'' by Michael O' Malley a former Air Corps Officer. It's very revealing on the subject and I suspect you might change your opinion after reading it. The Air Corps's operations and experience from those years comes off as very amateurish to be honest.

I don't think many here actually have had real experience dealing with or serving in the Air Corps. The Air Corps is a very laid back organisation compared to the Army and private civil aviation organisations. The personnel are very aware of this fact and know how good they have it so the boat rarely gets rocked. The morale is very good because most peoples working hours are about 9 to 4 with an hours lunch break during which Baldonnel effectively closes down. And of course for most there the weekends are free.

A lot of time technicians etc will be working on their own private projects of souping up their cars with the tools available to them and even their boats in some cases believe it or not. And back when that whole robot-wars fad was on a lot of time was put into building those I kid you not. Most people in the Air Corps are not exactly over-worked as you will have gathered by now.

And of course the way the Air Corps mainly earns it's keep is with the Ministerial Air Transport Service so their is no way they would even consider dropping that.

For a military service it really has very little military pretext despite the increase in army helicopter ops in recent years and it won't change because simply put the status quo is a comfortable way to earn a living the way things are for the Air Corps decision makers.

It's a shame because I think that in the long term it will hurt them.

LordSutch

Why has the Irish Air Corps got these (PC-9M) propeller planes . . . .



When they could have these (BAE Hawk Jets) . . .



I'm just guessing that the BAE Hawk is the smallest military jet trainer available on the international market these days, I also know that India bought a few dozen just the other day from Mr Cameron, so why does the Irish Air Corps only have propeller driven planes (in the 21st century) ? > Why not replace them with Hawk's ?

Steyr

LordSutch wrote: »

so why does the Irish Air Corps only have propeller driven planes (in the 21st century) ? > Why not replace them with Hawk's ?

You have me, i have long been an advocate of the IAC having Hawks as they can be sidewinder equipped are cheap and very effective, basically they are an all round great aircraft.

Steyr

If i was to purchase the Hawk it would be the T2 ( Hawk 128 )

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAE_Hawk

Hawk 128 (Hawk T2)

The Hawk 128 is the new Advanced Jet Trainer (AJT) for the RAF and Royal Navy. The Mk. 128 includes modern LCD displays instead of conventional instrumentation, and allows preparation for flying modern fighter aircraft, particularly the all "glass" Typhoon. It uses the Rolls-Royce Adour 951 engine. The UK Ministry of Defence awarded a Design and Development Contract to BAE Systems on 22 Dec 2004,[18] building on the design of the Australian Mk. 127 and the South African Mk. 120s. A £450 million contract was signed in October 2006 for the production of 28 Hawk 128s.[19] The MoD had originally announced its intention to order 20 aircraft with options for 24 more. The aircraft's maiden flight occurred on 27 July 2005 from BAE Systems' Warton Aerodrome and lasted for 1 hour 18 minutes.[20]

Corsendonk

Well I think if you read the Lisbon Treaty it included a clause that allowed for member states to come to a member state aid in the event of a terrorist attack. So pick up the phone and ring the French or English if we have a hijacking in Irish airspace.

Steyr

Corsendonk wrote: »

So pick up the phone and ring the French or English if we have a hijacking in Irish airspace.

That already happens with the RAF. I think what is annoying people here is that we can not do it for ourselves which is absolutely disgraceful. And dont get me wrong im a huge fan of the IAC and DF as a whole and have family in the IAC.