Fighter jets for the Air Corps?

sparky42

WhomadeGod wrote: »

How much does ireland pay the UK to guard airspace?

Nothing, even the agreement we have with them was written by the DOD with zero input from the AC and honestly I don’t ever see it working in a real emergency situation given how long it would take to passé the issue up and down.

roadmaster

The bears have every right to be there its just they forget to put there headlights on!

sparky42

roadmaster wrote: »

The bears have every right to be there its just they forget to put there headlights on!

And in doing so are a navigational hazard that currently we can’t even see, hence why the RAF have to go down the West Coast with them.

roadmaster

sparky42 wrote: »

And in doing so are a navigational hazard that currently we can’t even see, hence why the RAF have to go down the West Coast with them.

I don't think that has anything to do why the raf are following them

Larbre34

roadmaster wrote: »

The bears have every right to be there its just they forget to put there headlights on!

No, they don't have the right to pilot the aircraft in the manner in which they do in busy commercial airspace and somebody should be rattling their cage every inch of their trip.

jonnybigwallet

Gary kk wrote: »

Are you sure about the name of the KAI f25.
I can't find one.

Sorry...got name wrong, it's the FA 50 / TA 50 family of aircraft.
FA 50 is top spec model. Carries sidewinder air to air missiles as well as another type and has 3 20 mm cannon.
Serious bit of kit.

roadmaster

Larbre34 wrote: »

No, they don't have the right to pilot the aircraft in the manner in which they do in busy commercial airspace and somebody should be rattling their cage every inch of their trip.

All the government has to do is freeze some of that dodgy Russian money in the IFSC and they won't be long turning on their transponders.

I see to day in the times PC9s are going to have work done on there ejector seats as potential female pilots are not heavy enough for the seats to work

MAULBROOK

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/weight-requirement-for-air-corps-ejector-seats-a-barrier-for-female-pilots-1.4553741

Or get the pies in to ya lady's

Dohvolle

MAULBROOK wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/weight-requirement-for-air-corps-ejector-seats-a-barrier-for-female-pilots-1.4553741

Or get the pies in to ya lady's

Follow my diet for a week and you too can gain weight. Also, lay off the exercise...

How do other militaries cope?

sparky42

Dohvolle wrote: »

Follow my diet for a week and you too can gain weight. Also, lay off the exercise...

How do other militaries cope?

I actually remember reading an article that suggested the USAF has had similar problems around height issues for women pilots for some time...

Quick google and here’s an article on it:
https://www.airforcemag.com/article/erasing-artificial-barriers/

Larbre34

I'd be asking the question, why did it take so long to get Martin-Baker in to adjust the tolerances, rather than ruling potential pilots out for years? Isn't it a bloody obvious solution? It must have been done in Air Forces all over the World already.

Useless bloody pen pushers.

newcavanman

What i cant understand is why we spend money on a training system, whereas other countries, spend their money on Combat equipment, while subcontracting out the training . We spend the money on training, when theres no effective combat aircraft for the crews to graduate to . About 10 years ago i was up at Gormonston to see the AW139 door gunners practicing on an off shore target . Whats the point, when we all know there is no chance of them either ever using that capability in this country, or operating the Helis in a foreign situation where such a capability might be necessary . Same applies to fixed wing ops in my opinion .

sparky42

Larbre34 wrote: »

I'd be asking the question, why did it take so long to get Martin-Baker in to adjust the tolerances, rather than ruling potential pilots out for years? Isn't it a bloody obvious solution? It must have been done in Air Forces all over the World already.

Useless bloody pen pushers.

There should be questions asked alright, though given that recent HR finding against the AC over a former officer and maternity leave I wonder where the obstacles came from...

Negative_G

Slight thread drift going on here.

Ejection seats aren't a one size fits all. The size of the charge directly affects the ability to safely eject a pilot from the aircraft in different scenarios. "Zero zero" seats are designed to eject someone far enough from the aircraft for the seat to detatch and chute to deployment before they hit the ground.

Other seats require a minimum airspeed on the ground to ensure safe ejection so "zero sixty" (zero altitude & 60kts KIAS) etc.

Reducing the size of the charge will undoubtedly effect the performance of the current seat.

Its a dangerous precedent. What next? Does that AC start accepting applicants who are outside of the height limitations and start adjusting the mechanics of the PC9 to accomodate.

I would be very interested to see how someone circa 50-55kg copes carrying 40-50kg of kit in addition to body armour, webbing, helmet and rifle in the cadet school.

It's not a whole pile different than the fitness test in my opinion. People know whats expected and train and prepare for it. If someone is a few kgs below the min weight at application they can spend a few weeks to bulking up in advance to tick the box on assessment day. In general, its usually easier to put on weight than it is to lose weight.

roadmaster

Don't worry thread drift stopped being an issue along time ago!

Larbre34

Then lets rename it, 'Air Corps - fixed wing - general discussion'

Same could be said for the '3 New Ships' thread. We've already received 4!
Call it 'Naval Service Fleet - general discussion' or something

Dohvolle

Larbre34 wrote: »

Then lets rename it, 'Air Corps - fixed wing - general discussion'

Same could be said for the '3 New Ships' thread. We've already received 4!
Call it 'Naval Service Fleet - general discussion' or something

4 with 3 more on the way....

Larbre34

Dohvolle wrote: »

4 with 3 more on the way....

You can stick a couple of * after that.

Until they're delivered to Haulbowline, never count on anything.

Dohvolle

Larbre34 wrote: »

You can stick a couple of * after that.

Until they're delivered to Haulbowline, never count on anything.

Oh, I can remember when we bought P400 patrol boats to replace the Sweepers.
And Aero Vodochody started delivering L139 to the don 2 at a time.
And Fokker were replacing the Kingairs..
And Humvees etc

ectoraige

Negative_G wrote: »

Slight thread drift going on here.

...

In general, its usually easier to put on weight than it is to lose weight.

I just want to highlight the one thing that I feel we can all agree on.

To try to drift vaguely back on track, before we get the jets that we can't agree on, and won't be getting anyway, what would the investment in long range radar look like?

Would we be looking at a number of fixed ground radar sites with something like Thales' SMART-L, or can we upgrade the P60s radar to allow for long range acquisition and tracking? Traditionally they'd probably be too small to act as radar frigates but perhaps the latest generation of tech had changed that.

Do we have any capability at the moment for short/medium range radar, for example for in-theatre support? Saab's Giraffe systems are well regarded, maybe they'll throw in a few freebies as part of the massive Gripen deal.

Thoughts?

sparky42

ectoraige wrote: »

I just want to highlight the one thing that I feel we can all agree on.

To try to drift vaguely back on track, before we get the jets that we can't agree on, and won't be getting anyway, what would the investment in long range radar look like?

Would we be looking at a number of fixed ground radar sites with something like Thales' SMART-L, or can we upgrade the P60s radar to allow for long range acquisition and tracking? Traditionally they'd probably be too small to act as radar frigates but perhaps the latest generation of tech had changed that.

Do we have any capability at the moment for short/medium range radar, for example for in-theatre support? Saab's Giraffe systems are well regarded, maybe they'll throw in a few freebies as part of the massive Gripen deal.

Thoughts?

You'd need Ground stations for persistent coverage. The P60's masts are rated to take upgraded radar systems but nothing on the scale that would be needed (nor could they produce the electrical load I'd bet), at best like Eithne before them they could offer "Point" radar coverage nothing medium/long range.


We do have a few Giraffe systems on Bv206's but older models.

Dohvolle

ectoraige wrote: »

I just want to highlight the one thing that I feel we can all agree on.

To try to drift vaguely back on track, before we get the jets that we can't agree on, and won't be getting anyway, what would the investment in long range radar look like?

Would we be looking at a number of fixed ground radar sites with something like Thales' SMART-L, or can we upgrade the P60s radar to allow for long range acquisition and tracking? Traditionally they'd probably be too small to act as radar frigates but perhaps the latest generation of tech had changed that.

Do we have any capability at the moment for short/medium range radar, for example for in-theatre support? Saab's Giraffe systems are well regarded, maybe they'll throw in a few freebies as part of the massive Gripen deal.

Thoughts?

The Best option always is to piggyback primary radar on the current ATC radar located around the country. Most of the sites have plenty of spare space for additional antennae.
The key though is not so much the radar themselves, but having a 24/7/365 military presence monitoring all movement in irish airspace.
At present the Air Corps is struggling to keep enough ATC staff for its own operations in Casement Aerodrome.

Larbre34

Primary military radar should be the responsibility of the Army, in my opinion, and should coincide with the re-establishment of the Air Defence Regiment for the purpose of tracking and defence.

The absorption of the AD role into the brigade field artillery components was always a nonsense.

source

Larbre34 wrote: »

Primary military radar should be the responsibility of the Army, in my opinion, and should coincide with the re-establishment of the Air Defence Regiment for the purpose of tracking and defence.

The absorption of the AD role into the brigade field artillery components was always a nonsense.

Don't have to properly fund or equip the regiment of they're only a battery within a regular artillery regt.

Stovepipe

Other militaries simply list a minimum weight requirement instead of asking the seat builder to adjust the seat. If, after having put on a full flying suit,helmet, lifejacket, boots, gloves, oxygen mask and underwear,a person still doesnt meet the weight requirement, then either they bulk up or they become an airline pilot. With regard to the seat, the occupant has to dial in their weight so that the seat computer "knows" how much thrust to apply,via the rockets or charges installed in the firing tube. If you apply the thrust relevant to a 100 kg pilot to a 65 kg pilot, the launch risks killing or severely injuring them,notwithstanding the hazard of ejection in the first place. This has evolved over decades of hard earned and often fatal or critical experience and the AC isn't going to change that. Our Air Arm isn't the first to encounter this and the easiest way around it is to have a minimum weight, to prevent the ejectee being hurt by the ejection process. It has nothing to do with gender whatsoever.

Dohvolle

source wrote: »

Don't have to properly fund or equip the regiment of they're only a battery within a regular artillery regt.

The thing is, they were a combined permanent/reserve regiment of 4 Batterys. Reserve had the guns & Flycatcher, permanent had the Giraffe and missiles and 50 Cal AA. Now the 2 Brigade regiments have a battery each, consisting of Giraffe and missiles & 50 cal only. The reserve element is gone, the Flycatcher retired and not replaced (even though it was barely in service 10 years).
The Only purpose it served after the Reorg was creating someplace for the former 4th Bn to go if they didn't want to travel to Limerick.

source

Dohvolle wrote: »

The thing is, they were a combined permanent/reserve regiment of 4 Batterys. Reserve had the guns & Flycatcher, permanent had the Giraffe and missiles and 50 Cal AA. Now the 2 Brigade regiments have a battery each, consisting of Giraffe and missiles & 50 cal only. The reserve element is gone, the Flycatcher retired and not replaced (even though it was barely in service 10 years).
The Only purpose it served after the Reorg was creating someplace for the former 4th Bn to go if they didn't want to travel to Limerick.

Having been a gun commander in one of the reserve btys I'm well aware of the make up of the regiment and gear.

PDF also had the L70 and flycatchers alongside the missile troop, and the RDF also had the .5, the only difference is that while on paper the RDF btys had a missile troop we in reality didn't have any missiles. Also both PDF and RDF had AD mounts for the GPMG.

I'm not sure which reorg you're referring to (2005 change from FCA to RDF and the introduction of the integrated companies and amalgamation of some inf Bn or the 2012 reorg which saw the disbandment of the ADR) or what the 4 inf Bn have to do with it.

Dohvolle

source wrote: »

Having been a gun commander in one of the reserve btys I'm well aware of the make up of the regiment and gear.

PDF also had the L70 and flycatchers alongside the missile troop, and the RDF also had the .5, the only difference is that while on paper the RDF btys had a missile troop we in reality didn't have any missiles. Also both PDF and RDF had AD mounts for the GPMG.

I'm not sure which reorg you're referring to (2005 change from FCA to RDF and the introduction of the integrated companies and amalgamation of some inf Bn or the 2012 reorg which saw the disbandment of the ADR) or what the 4 inf Bn have to do with it.

Jaysus you are cranky. Chill out "gun commander". I used to shoot pistol against one of your battery commanders. Depending on which unit you were in, that should give you a clue as to who I am.

The 2012 reorg which deleted all but the token reserve presence also disbanded a number of PDF units.
Significantly the 4th Infantry bn was one unit, and those serving in that unit were given the option to join Cav (where there were few vacancies if you were Cpl or greater) Join 1st Brigade Artillery Regiment, which suddenly had an air defence battery, and all the appointments that went with it or if they wished to remain in infantry, join the 12th, make the commute to Limerick every day from cork (1 hr 15 minutes on a good day).
So the result was you had people who had been infantry since the 80s, suddenly landing in a unit with weapons and tactics that they never had any cause to know anything about, either at home or overseas, having to learn about setting up the Giraffe Mk IV, with nobody who was originally in the regiment ever having used it either.

Summary,last rejig of units killed off any interest or capability in the Army doing Air Defence. Retirement of the Cessna means there is nothing available to tow the drogue, even if you wanted to practice AA shooting with the 50 cal, and the last RBS70 shoot the DF were at was also the first, about 30 years after the missile was introduced. 10 missiles in total were fired.

source

Dohvolle wrote: »

Jaysus you are cranky. Chill out "gun commander". I used to shoot pistol against one of your battery commanders. Depending on which unit you were in, that should give you a clue as to who I am.

The 2012 reorg which deleted all but the token reserve presence also disbanded a number of PDF units.
Significantly the 4th Infantry bn was one unit, and those serving in that unit were given the option to join Cav (where there were few vacancies if you were Cpl or greater) Join 1st Brigade Artillery Regiment, which suddenly had an air defence battery, and all the appointments that went with it or if they wished to remain in infantry, join the 12th, make the commute to Limerick every day from cork (1 hr 15 minutes on a good day).
So the result was you had people who had been infantry since the 80s, suddenly landing in a unit with weapons and tactics that they never had any cause to know anything about, either at home or overseas, having to learn about setting up the Giraffe Mk IV, with nobody who was originally in the regiment ever having used it either.

Summary,last rejig of units killed off any interest or capability in the Army doing Air Defence. Retirement of the Cessna means there is nothing available to tow the drogue, even if you wanted to practice AA shooting with the 50 cal, and the last RBS70 shoot the DF were at was also the first, about 30 years after the missile was introduced. 10 missiles in total were fired.

Not cranky at all, just pointing out that I'm well aware of the ADR and that I know what I'm talking about. I was out by the 2012 reorg and in AGS so only had a bare ear to the ground on that reorg. I still hold that if the DF had put some money into getting decent weapons systems for the ADR rather than a token show towards AD then the appetite for maintaining a regiment would have been far greater. Same as we are seeing with the AC lack of investment and poor pay compared to the private sector leads to people not wanting to invest their careers in the organisation.

Dohvolle

source wrote: »

Not cranky at all, just pointing out that I'm well aware of the ADR and that I know what I'm talking about. I was out by the 2012 reorg and in AGS so only had a bare ear to the ground on that reorg. I still hold that if the DF had put some money into getting decent weapons systems for the ADR rather than a token show towards AD then the appetite for maintaining a regiment would have been far greater. Same as we are seeing with the AC lack of investment and poor pay compared to the private sector leads to people not wanting to invest their careers in the organisation.

There was some panic buying in the aftermath of 9/11. That's how the ADR got flycatcher and L70 and the L60 ended up decorating the square. The speed at which both the L70 and flycatcher were dumped showed exactly how useless they were. Fine for point defence just about, but the politicos thought they would be used to shoot down errant airliners! As a man who once probably trained you told me, "all it takes to disable them is a sniper with a wire cutter".
We almost bought L139s the same time but in hindsight, thankfully, that never materialised.