Fighter jets for the Air Corps?

Edgarfrndly

Sgt. Bilko 09 wrote: »

I see HMS Defender is giving the Russians a taste of there own medicine

https://youtu.be/MLPYAKL-f2M

A lot of drama about it - Russians say they fired warning shots, but the British stated no such warning shots were fired and that Russia was doing firing exercises some distance away that was not aimed at them.

Basically Russia trying to posture like they actually did something, when they didn't.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/uk-denies-russian-ships-fired-warning-shots-at-british-ship/

Sgt. Bilko 09

Edgarfrndly wrote: »

A lot of drama about it - Russians say they fired warning shots, but the British stated no such warning shots were fired and that Russia was doing firing exercises some distance away that was not aimed at them.

Basically Russia trying to posture like they actually did something, when they didn't.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/uk-denies-russian-ships-fired-warning-shots-at-british-ship/

They fired warning shots, you can hear the shots in the clip on YouTube at 2:57, the Russians stated they dropped bombs further away but that was never detected. There was believed to be a training exercise but it's a bit convenient to say that IMO

Edgarfrndly

Sgt. Bilko 09 wrote: »

They fired warning shots, you can hear the shots in the clip on YouTube at 2:57, the Russians stated they dropped bombs further away but that was never detected.

Yes I see the shots, but they were nowhere near the direction of the ship - which is what the UK are saying.

Sgt. Bilko 09

Edgarfrndly wrote: »

Yes I see the shots, but they were nowhere near the direction of the ship - which is what the UK are saying.

If it's directly at the ship, that's not a warning...

Edgarfrndly

Sgt. Bilko 09 wrote: »

If it's directly at the ship, that's not a warning...

Yes I understand. I don't mean directly at the ship, I mean within the area.

Dohvolle

Sgt. Bilko 09 wrote: »

If it's directly at the ship, that's not a warning...

Unless the ship is 10 miles away, and you shoot at them with a shotgun.....
There is clear protocol for warning shots. Letting off a few rifle rounds from far far away doesn't count.

Sgt. Bilko 09

Edgarfrndly wrote: »

Yes I understand. I don't mean directly at the ship, I mean within the area.

I get you, it's the second attempt from the UK within the last few months doing such a manoeuvre

Edgarfrndly

Side note - I'm no big fan of the British military, but I support them on this. It's a ballsy move. Russia illegally annexed Crimea and its waters should be treated as Ukrainian by the world community.

Larbre34

Quite right.

I wouldn't mind asking Ambassador Filatov:

1. You say that Ireland need not be concerned about Russian military movements in our vicinity, the same military willing to molest vessels undertaking innocent passage in international waters elsewhere (near to a territory your Country annexed incidentally). Care to square that contradiction?

2. If, as you say, Ireland has no need to be concerned about Russian military aircraft, why then are those aircraft, on their part, so concerned that they feel the need to transit busy transatlantic air routes with their transponders switched off?

3. If the Country you represent has such the healthy bilateral relationship with the Government of Ireland that you claim, why do you choose to engage ordinary citizens on the matter in the print media rather than addressing the Department of Foreign Affairs through diplomatic channels? Is it the Government, the citizen or the media that you have the issue with, that caused you to break protocol?

Gary kk

Guys did you all know the Griphen E was around the 60million euro mark but just didn't want to mention it?

Dohvolle

Gary kk wrote: »

Guys did you all know the Griphen E was around the 60million euro mark but just didn't want to mention it?

We knew. Why?
There isn't many in service yet though, over 200 C/D versions that are almost as good in operation. These cost roughly 30 million each, and have very low running costs per hour.

Larbre34

Gary kk wrote: »

Guys did you all know the Griphen E was around the 60million euro mark but just didn't want to mention it?

The Czech Republic leases 14 Gripens from Sweden at the rate of €5 million per annum.

More than one way to skin a cat.

Gary kk

Larbre34 wrote: »

The Czech Republic leases 14 Gripens from Sweden at the rate of €5 million per annum.

More than one way to skin a cat.

That's so cheap. What the f is the state doing. Like really why are they not pushing harder for such a deal while they look at buying.

Also leave the cats alone

Dohvolle

Gary kk wrote: »

That's so cheap. What the f is the state doing. Like really why are they not pushing harder for such a deal while they look at buying.

Also leave the cats alone

Now you are gettin it. The cost to lease and operate a squadron of this type would barely keep the Taoiseach's office in travel expenses for a year.

Flinty997

Larbre34 wrote: »

The Czech Republic leases 14 Gripens from Sweden at the rate of €5 million per annum.

More than one way to skin a cat.

There are more significant associated cost with running them, personal, training. How much man power is associated with running and maintaining them. How many will be lost in accidents.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/state-s-defence-budget-to-exceed-1bn-in-2020-1.4043884

Dohvolle

Flinty997 wrote: »

There are more significant associated cost with running them, personal, training. How much man power is associated with running and maintaining them. How many will be lost in accidents.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/state-s-defence-budget-to-exceed-1bn-in-2020-1.4043884

Negotiate your deal properly then running costs and training could be included. We are in an excellent position to lease Gripen C/D at present, as Sweden are in the process of converting to the E/F. The More E/F orders there are, the more C/D become available, as production speeds up to fulfil orders.

Larbre34

Larbre34 wrote: »

The Czech Republic leases 14 Gripens from Sweden at the rate of €5 million per annum.

Per plane, with the overheads included.

Flinty997

Larbre34 wrote: »

Per plane, with the overheads included.

Somehow I doubt it's paying wages of all the extra personnel for example, or hangers etc.

Larbre34

Flinty997 wrote: »

Somehow I doubt it's paying wages of all the extra personnel for example, or hangers etc.

No, the ancillary costs associated with the planes I should have said. Training, software, spares, tech support. Not sure about ordnance.

The One Doctor

Let's say 20 fighters @ €5m each per year (leased)

Lease - €100m
Fuel - €5m
Training (20 pilots and a simulator) - €30m
Weapons - €50m (stockpiled)
Flight hours per year - 200hrs per pilot x 20 planes x €5000 per hour (very conservative) - €20m
Spares, tech support - €20m
Assume loss of one aircraft per year - €5-30m

So the above comes to €230m per year. We'd need to keep the PC-9s as training aircraft as well.

This is a very conservative estimate. If we bought the 20 fighters (much more likely) it's €730m. Flight hour cost is more like €10-30k.

20 Gripens/F16s/Mirage 2000s are really a €1 billion budget hole with all the costs factored in. If we were not neutral then it would be a lot cheaper as the US or EU would loan us the money.

I would LOVE to see Ireland with jet fighters, because I'm an aviation nut. But the numbers do not work out.

Larbre34

In fairness its not about the showy aspect of fighters, its about a responsible level of national defence.

The numbers add up if people want them to. The state of our Defence Forces is down to an abdication of responsibility by successive Governments over many decades. A responsibility and a cost other Governments have faced up to and which has become part of their national budget just like everything else.

If we were to spend the 2% of GDP (and I calculate this on the lower 'Modified GNI' figure which strips out multi-nationals) we'd be spending €4 billion euro per annum. Even 1% would be 2 billion and more than enough to cater for our needs. As it stands we're spending something like a paltry 0.48%, which is totally unsustainable.

sparky42

Larbre34 wrote: »

In fairness its not about the showy aspect of fighters, its about a responsible level of national defence.

The numbers add up if people want them to. The state of our Defence Forces is down to an abdication of responsibility by successive Governments over many decades. A responsibility and a cost other Governments have faced up to and which has become part of their national budget just like everything else.

If we were to spend the 2% of GDP (and I calculate this on the lower 'Modified GNI' figure which strips out multi-nationals) we'd be spending €4 billion euro per annum. Even 1% would be 2 billion and more than enough to cater for our needs. As it stands we're spending something like a paltry 0.48%, which is totally unsustainable.

Is that .48% on the modified GNI? Thought it was even lower at something like .3%

Larbre34

sparky42 wrote: »

Is that .48% on the modified GNI? Thought it was even lower at something like .3%

Yes, the MGNI figure is about 70% roughly of standard GDP, so that sounds about right

Flinty997

The One Doctor wrote: »

Let's say 20 fighters @ €5m each per year (leased)

Lease - €100m
Fuel - €5m
Training (20 pilots and a simulator) - €30m
Weapons - €50m (stockpiled)
Flight hours per year - 200hrs per pilot x 20 planes x €5000 per hour (very conservative) - €20m
Spares, tech support - €20m
Assume loss of one aircraft per year - €5-30m

So the above comes to €230m per year. We'd need to keep the PC-9s as training aircraft as well.

This is a very conservative estimate. If we bought the 20 fighters (much more likely) it's €730m. Flight hour cost is more like €10-30k.

20 Gripens/F16s/Mirage 2000s are really a €1 billion budget hole with all the costs factored in. If we were not neutral then it would be a lot cheaper as the US or EU would loan us the money.

I would LOVE to see Ireland with jet fighters, because I'm an aviation nut. But the numbers do not work out.

Hangers, Ground Radars, the list goes on and on.

Larbre34

Flinty997 wrote: »

Hangers, Ground Radars, the list goes on and on.

Yeah and if prudent investment had taken place down the years to gradually create a suitable infrastructure, we wouldn't be where we are. But that doesn't give the Government a free pass to throw their hat at it and continue to do nothing now.

Look at it this way, all of the hard infrastructure would be great work for Irish contractors, they'd get half the investment back in VAT and income taxes, and long term it would make the Defence Forces a much better career choice for our young people.

Flinty997

Can't see the political will or the public getting behind this.

Dohvolle

Larbre34 wrote: »

Yeah and if prudent investment had taken place down the years to gradually create a suitable infrastructure, we wouldn't be where we are. But that doesn't give the Government a free pass to throw their hat at it and continue to do nothing now.

Look at it this way, all of the hard infrastructure would be great work for Irish contractors, they'd get half the investment back in VAT and income taxes, and long term it would make the Defence Forces a much better career choice for our young people.

The problem the government keep creating, is the longer you leave something the more expensive it becomes.
The replacement of the Naval Service P20 class was 10 years behind, and cost double what had been proposed as their end of useful life approached.
We waited until the M3 APCs couldn't cut it overseas before looking into replacing them, which ended up costing 1.5m per car. Meanwhile overseas we were using the SISU, it would have been obvious to buy a truckload at that stage, and much cheaper.
We are 60 years behind with regards to replacing our Air Policing aircraft. Once we replaced a 2 seat fighter with an armed trainer, things started to go backwards. Even then, the DH Vampires had 20mm cannon. They were replaced with another Jet trainer with 7.5mm machine gun and nothing else. But without primary Radar, its all pointless. All these things would have been cheaper to upgrade instead of start from zero, which is where we are.
Waiting longer won't make it any cheaper, and the necessity won't diminish either.

Dohvolle

Flinty997 wrote: »

Can't see the political will or the public getting behind this.

The Political will is there.
The public's opinion doesn't count.

Dohvolle

Larbre34 wrote: »

Yeah and if prudent investment had taken place down the years to gradually create a suitable infrastructure, we wouldn't be where we are. But that doesn't give the Government a free pass to throw their hat at it and continue to do nothing now.

Look at it this way, all of the hard infrastructure would be great work for Irish contractors, they'd get half the investment back in VAT and income taxes, and long term it would make the Defence Forces a much better career choice for our young people.

Economy 101.
You have to spend money to make money.

donvito99

Dohvolle wrote: »

The Political will is there.

Have any of the major parties said anything about Defence other than "aren't we brilliant at peacekeeping" or "if your town floods, I have two dozen infantrymen to fill sandbags"?

There is no political will to actually defend the state conventionally, other than in the cyber sphere potentially.

The public's opinion doesn't count.

It does in that they've elected people who do not care.