DF Commission Report

jonnybigwallet

Fair point Grassy.

Larbre34

There was never a question but that the new C2 structure would need legislation, not just the Defence Acts, but in various finance and public service instruments too.

I don't see any good reason why the Govt with the Attorney General, shouldn't begin that drafting exercise forthwith. Its not like there are any constitutional limitations, thanks to Articles 13 and 15.

I agree about the ATCP. We can move well away now from the optics of The Troubles era of the Army escorting defendants into Green Street and minding cash consignments. We do have tactical Garda units well capable of the task and as can be seen on TV regularly, it is the unmarked SUVs of the Garda ERU that escort high security and gangland prisoners to Court these days.

There will of course be situations where Army assistance will need to continue, such as the movement of blank currency paper from the Airport to the Mint, potentially worth billions if compromised, where an Army convoy and two or three helicopters in escort is appropriate and that should be provided for.

Also and hopefully never to be employed, the Army is also trained in public order measures, in case of serious civil disorder and that insurance policy should be maintained.

Larbre34

A bare bones C-295 doesn't offer a solution for genuine tactical airlift. It is simply too small to deploy armoured vehicles alongside troops, which may be necessary to bolster peace enforcement missions in future.

While I wouldn't refuse a good condition C-295 for use in utility transport - and more particularly to perform air ambulance services within Europe and leave the new MPAs to their primary role - I think our best bet is to enter a shared tactical airlift agreement of the sort already seen in central and Eastern Europe.

For instance, the remaining neutrals within the EU, ourselves, Austria, Malta and Cyprus could easily put an A400M or two into joint service or tag on the existing or an improved Austrian C-130K fleet.

donvito99

What is the scenario that requires an Irish airlifter to transport an Irish armoured vehicle?

Larbre34

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119337744#Comment_119337744

If one is destroyed by the act of belligerent or otherwise written off by incident or accident in theatre. A loss of one or two APCs or AFVs in the Golan would render the deployed battalion unsafe and / or unable to perform tasks, even for a period.

In another scenario, if the ARW has to be deployed in response to circumstances, either abroad, or in a remote location domestically, the joint airlifting of personnel with a vehicle or vehicles may be needed, such as this ACMAT type, hardened mission support vehicle.

The C-295 cannot deploy so much as a Land Cruiser.

Grassy Knoll

One of the benefits of no military equipment industry pe se is we are in theory untied to any manufacturer etc. This should mean we can buy the best out there for our needs be it APCs, specific helis, etc. We can see the problems some of our neighbours have when they have to 'shop local' ... Also has been stated before, don't be the launch customer ... go tried and tested every time ...

donvito99

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119337836#Comment_119337836

There is absolutely no justification for an airlifter domestically.

Peacekeeping is peacekeeping. Buying an aircraft to move a Mowag to Lebanon is a case of the tail wagging the dog.

A deployment of the ARW a la Afghanistan is legitimate, but the chances of a unilateral deployment are slim to none and only the largest militaries are capable of this sort of thing.

I agree with you re contributing to the EATC. An extra 295 makes some sense in that it supports the primary DF role of MPA at lower of cost. If it gets us occasional access to an A400M, let's do that.

roadmaster

So is there a timescale for these actions such as new commands, apcs, aircraft and the most important pay

roadmaster

Is there an actual issue with the roles of the ERU and ARW and who should be doing what?

Also it mentioned better communcation between Garda and Army intellagence services and again who is doing what

Surley after 9/11 Intellegence agencies talk alot more particuarlly ones working for the same country

Grassy Knoll

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119338150#Comment_119338150

I know where you are coming from, but the issue with 'offsets' is the promise of an offset could become the deciding (political) factor in equipment choice, with a sub optimal decision taken on this basis. Given our history has been largely piecemeal investment, with the odd purchase of a few dozen pieces of hardware we on balance have probably got lucky. However, if you go down the road of considerations wider than the efficacy, reliability, tactical suitability etc be careful because the political weighting will be skewed toward the local jobs / investment piece first and maybe only if you are lucky it will be the best equipment option for the DF ... That is my humble opinion only.

Larbre34

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119340987#Comment_119340987

I wouldn't imagine there is a particular issue that confuses between elite Garda and Army units - one is domestic civil policing, the other is green and black military taskings, including ATCP for terrorism or other threat to life and public safety, and the latter is VERY exceptional.

In terms of routine communications, intelligence and information sharing though, there has been a gap in terma of speed and quality identified for some time, and steps were taken to address this in recent years, though they did fly under the radar somewhat.

The National Security Committee has long existed, bringing together Senior Garda Brass, Defence Forces Chiefs, Sec Gens for Justice, Defence, Foreign Affairs and the Taoiseach, but now a new Centre within the Taoiseach's Office operates wholly on matters of threat identification and mitigation and analysis of information flow.

This PQ of last year describes it best:

The National Security Analysis Centre (NSAC) was established by the Government as part of the implementation of A Policing Service for the Future giving effect to recommendations in the Report of the Commission on the Future of Policing in Ireland.

Its primary remit is to provide high-quality, strategic analysis to the Taoiseach and Government of the key threats to Ireland’s national security. The strategic analysis of threats is undertaken by personnel seconded from the various Departments and other State bodies with functions in the security area, and through liaison and close co-ordination with those partner Departments and agencies, including the National Cyber Security Centre. There is also ongoing liaison with EU and international counterparts and others.

The Director of the NSAC was appointed on establishment and a Deputy Director joined in 2020. The work of the Centre is supported also by administrative personnel from the Department of the Taoiseach with salaries and operational costs where needed, funded from the Departments’ Vote.

The Centre has been active over the last year in supporting aspects of the Government’s response to the public health emergency caused by Covid-19 and, recently, in support and co-ordination for the Ministerial group overseeing the response to the cyber-attack on the HSE.

As part of the working out of HLAP and to see the direction of travel which might be preferred it’s useful to keep an eye on agenda setting pieces.

https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/evolving-irish-neutrality-military-opportunities-and-political-obstacles

This piece sees distance between Ireland and Nordic neighbours and promotes a closer relationship with the UK before NATO or the EU which is hardly mentioned.

Larbre34

The Royal United Services Institute is an old school Tory-World think tank.

After Brexit, the Brits badly need allies of another slant in Europe (Johnson Ukraine relationship). You should take anything published by RUSI, even penned by an Irish fella, in that context.

While a better working relationship with GB is desirable, Ireland's wagon is firmly hitched to the EU on all fronts. London's polemicists will just have to get used to that.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119343320#Comment_119343320

Nonetheless interesting that it is published and with an Irish author. Tensions between UK influence over policy and other possibilities are clear from it.

Larbre34

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119344627#Comment_119344627

Their vested interests are a British Conservative angle.

I get that thats their audience too, but pardon me if I judge the suggestion of a formal Irish / British Joint Expeditionary Force to be b0ll0x and totally outside the realistic conversation taking place about Irish defence matters.

A lot of interesting reaction to the Commission and govt response across social media and msm. RACO have a link to an article that cuts to the root of the problem and as it says, once seen it cannot be unseen.

For me It raises other questions as to why the answer to Quinlan’s question is probably “no” and how we arrived at such a state and who benefits. Because it has not happened by accident.

The HLAP is not an implementation plan. Any faltering or backsliding on the steps to 2028 and beyond will reveal that the problems are not nuts and bolts but the imposition by stealth of an undiscussed, unanalysed, vision for the country. Such a vision is fundamental to the state’s existence and it belongs to the people themselves in constitutional change.

https://twitter.com/_idfoc/status/1549294565777182721?s=21&t=gqAlSTrMwi_gWy7W3nsbYg

roadmaster

Will we see an RFT for a Primary Radar this year?

Larbre34

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119406804#Comment_119406804

I'd have thought the first step will be something similar to the Naval MRV, ie retaining consultants to establish the specific environment and infrastructure required to give coverage and then base a tender for physical equipment, technology and training on the analysis.

roadmaster

Could we also see a bit of a reorg with air defence and there mobile radar movinng from the army to the new air force

ancientmariner

We are where we are due to selection of equipment types not been properly co-ordinated or fully within the unit about to be equipped. In the Navy's case Communications lay with the Signal Corps covering everything from HH/radios, radars and main TX/RX systems, gunnery was a matter for Director of Ordnance, Aviation was OC Air Corps. we are now looking for primary radar/secondary radar and were happy to scrap a system on P31 with a range of 137km for 2m square target and greater of course on secondary for Code Charlie.

If we are to have a national primary Military radar, then it must co-ord with Euro control/ATC, and Battlefield Military radar must have it's own organisation. The MRV and all ships should have a tracking radar for both surface and air .

roadmaster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119407357#Comment_119407357

Would you not just transfer the full unit of personal to the new air force command and just get them to change uniform

ancientmariner

Just something to think about. The MOD at decommissioning, in July at NB, stated that the Service would be known as NAVY henceforth. In all matters Naval , who does what, with what equipment, should be a naval decision, with a naval budget, and consultation within PDF or commercial providers as necessary. The decision on screens for Primary radar may require those assessing threats on those screens, to have some knowledge of Dimensional navigation and associated library of target type ID. We will have to have some agreement with NATO for Linkages and two-way information flows and access to their library of targets.

Artillery should be busy with SHORAD and Longer range AD units and their associated radars. Likewise they should be developing mobile Coastal Defence units to deal with Black Sea type incidents. Getting rid of CDA per se doesn't fit in with Island defence. There is a lot to do but hopefully not Empire building.

Larbre34

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119407159#Comment_119407159

No, but in all liklihood, not all those writings are comprehensive and/or contemporary.

I would still foresee a consultants assessment, working with the DF, before a tender is issued.

roadmaster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119407966#Comment_119407966

For training and resouces, It would be better to have all your radar operators under one umbrella, i know they are different systems but its all in the same sphere

ancientmariner

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119409196#Comment_119409196

The nature of radar associated with mobile systems such as ships, aircraft, terrain AD units you will find the operator is part of the "Lock-On" weapon and engagement procedure and part of a specific unit. Primary radar operators are scanning and tracking and identifying often from comparative libraries of echoes compiled over time by Western Agencies.

roadmaster

When looking at the recomendations in the report what is the most important equipment that needs to be got 1st for day to day ops for the defence forces.

Is it Extra helicopters, Primary Radar, Fixed wing transport, The MRV or new APCs or are all equally important

Larbre34

Completely agree. I wouldn't buy so much as a new Hyundai Van without first changing the paradigm on recruitment, pay, conditions and retention.

On top of reforming pay and allowances, I would be looking at time for training contracts, ie, if you join as an apprentice or pilot cadet, for example, and it takes 5 years to reach qualification, then you owe the DF five more years before you may leave. This is common practice in other roles in the public service, where in-service education is paid for.

I'd also like to seeing increasing association between the DF and other Third Level institutions, to establish an ROTC similar to the American model, while students are still studying, to identify talent and generate an interest in a DF career.

Manic Moran

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119407335#Comment_119407335

Given the 'size' of Irish air defense, I don't see it. Generally speaking (the Germans being the main exception, and there was some back-room dealing to result in it), nations which do have air defense folks as part of the air force generally only have the medium/long-range stuff as air force control, the Army still retains the front-line/battlefield role. Unless Irish air defense is going to suddenly sprout Patriots or S-300s, it seems fairly un-necessary.

roadmaster

I parked in columb barracks during the week for the festival in Mullingar, Sad to see the barracks so run down

Larbre34

Not surprising though, its been vacant for over 10 years.

Hopefully the new LDA housing redevelopment will begin there soon, but its Military days are over for good, thats for certain.