Irish Air Corps

klong

Now that the Air Corps has no fighter planes- ok, it hasn't had any real ones since the early 70s and are looking for some new ones, what would be the best one for us considering the role we are/will play in European/International affairs? I for one think we should get a mix of Hawk Mk 100s and 200s.
Also, wandering off the topic title a slight bit, does anybody think we should get a small aircraft carrier, pop a few Ospreys [if they ever get built] on it and use it for the fisheries patrol and UN mission reinforcement roles? Thinking about, it could also be a useful recruiting tool for the defence forces.

Dr_Teeth

I dunno why we'd want fighters, I mean we'd never be able to afford anything that could reliably take out any OTHER type of fighter out there so why bother? I'd go for a bunch of cheap attack helicopters with TOWs or something similar - they'd be more versitile when it came to roles both at home and on peace keeping missions abroad..

Teeth.

Victor

Well, as events this week proved, having fighter aircraft isn't completely a luxury.

klong

Well as it so happens the RAF have equipped 70 or so Hawk 100s to fire Sidewinder missiles in an emergency. The Hawk 200s can fire Mavericks, Sidewinders etc so would be an excellent typ for us.

Magwitch

Screw the hawk, the new Saab, or hell - lets join PFP and get Germany to buy us EuroFighters! And if they are too expensive then lets spring for MIGs, the RAF expressed a preference for the MIG Fulcrum instead of the rehashed and upgraded Harrier, given their projected budget at the time (about 5 years ago).

Of course in the end we will get crop-sprayers or hand gliders, but we can dream.

BTW...Good point about an air force not being a Luxery anymore.

Victor

First off, we have to consider what are the real risks to Irish security.

Domestic terrorism. PIRA, CIRA, RIRA, OIRA, INLA, UVF, UDA and proxies. 'Fast' aircraft would have little use in any such scenario. Helicopters and (in necessary, armed) spotter aircraft would be much more useful.

International terrorism. No specific threat, but in light of the WTC attack, this should be looked at again. In practical terms, passive civil defence and police efforts are likely to be more economic and effective. One risk is the use of Ireland as a springboard for an attack against the USA or the UK.

Trespass by an international power. The USA, UK, France are the most likely, due to proximity, desire / necessity and ability. However, Russia, Germany, Denmark, Spain and The Netherlands should be kept in mind. Scenarios involving these would range from trespass by ballistic missile and other submarines, territorial disputes in the Rockall Basin. Economic, political or counter-terrorist espionage and special operations should also be kept in mind. Covert emergency sheltering by a damaged submarine is also a possibility. The Casa aircraft could be used to drop sono-bouys, however none have been purchased. Naval sonar is virtually non-existent. Most of the coast is covered by Coastguard surface search radar, but of a commercial, not military standard. No fixed military radar, limited transponder-based service at Dublin and Shannon (was Mount Gabriel rebuilt after the IRA attack in the 1980’s?) {edit: add Dooncarton in Mayo} – these are useless against any aircraft with a non-working transponder. Good relations should avoid such a scenario, but this is no guarantee. Response to infringement would be quickest by jet aircraft.

Smuggling. Primarily drugs and weapons, but also expect an increase in Cash (Euros and defunct Euro currencies). Primarily for domestic criminal gangs, but also with Ireland as a trans-shipment point to the UK/Europe and the USA. There is a potential risk of Ireland becoming a weapons source point for international criminals and terrorists. Fast jets could be used to identify and interrogate aircraft.

Fishery protection. Risks from infringement on EEZ and territorial waters by fishing vessels and foreign fishery patrol vessels and aircraft. Likely opponents would be UK, French, Dutch, Spanish, Danish, Norwegian, Japanese and Russian vessels.

Over-flight by rogue / suspicious aircraft and navigation / shipping hazards. This could vary from rogue weather balloons, floating debris, damaged vessels or aircraft and vessels in several of the above categories

Shipping protection. Ireland sits next to the main shipping route between North America and Northern Europe. The only real risk sits in the category of the conventional WWIII threat from Soviet aircraft and submarines.

Other duties

Economic Protection. Ireland is now a much richer country, some individual factories are fundamental on a global scale - including Intel and Pfzier (sp), which makes them targets on a global scale.

Search and Rescue. Primarily at sea. The issue is currently being addressed. A possible extension of this would be the creation of Air Ambulances and the more complicated concept of Combat SAR.

International dutiesIt is unlikely that we will ever be called on to contribute combat aircraft to UN or PPF operations. However, spotting, transport, CSAR and combat support are obvious possibilities.

Transport. Executive / ministerial transport is an existing requirement, however the availability of a dedicated medium transport for overseas support is a possibility. I would suggest the use of a dual fit-out (executive and troop transport) B-737 or similar aircraft. A dedicated military transport would be of less use in current operations. The Casas have a limited capability in this regard, with space for up to one small AFV (no handling equipment / parachutes?) or paratroops.

Photography / Mapping. A capability that hasn't really existed. The availability of military grade satellite photographs on a commercial basis reduces this requirement.

---

In summary, I think what we need to be able to do is monitor our airspace and waters properly.

We need to be able to respond to likely threats or issues. We need to introduce military radar, obtain a workable sonar system and make sure Coastguard radar is centrally controlled.

We need to increase the number and capability of multi-role patrol planes (increase Casas to perhaps 6 a/c with anti-submarine gear sono-bouys and LWTs and anti-shipping weapons - rockets, Sea Eagle, Exocet or AM15).

We then need to create a proportionate, but credible, response force of up to perhaps 10 armed jet-trainers (Hawk comes to mind) - guns, rockets / bombs, sidewinder, ATGM and anti-shipping weapons. These might be expensive as ab-initio trainers, so Cessnas or new models Warriors could be used.

I would prefer no more than 2 models of helicopter (one light, one medium).

Ideal force: 10 BAE Hawk 100/200, 6 Casa CN-235, 6 SF-260 Warrior, 1 B-737, 8 medium helicopters, 4 light helicopters.

klong

Victor- your post was very good, very comprehensive.
Just a few points I'd like to make, however...
The CASAs we have at the moment are only for fishery protection. Under the terms of the purchase, which was part funded by the EU, the CASAs can only be used for that mission, although the ARW wanted to use them, and did a few times, for parachute drops. I've been in one of them, and that AFV you were talking about would have to be really small- from what I can remember they aren't huge inside.
The SF-26os are being retired very soon, so in their place, and in addition to the Hawks, the new Embrarer plane, similar in mission to the SF-260, should be bought. In Brazil they're being used to shoot down drug carrying aircraft.
I was in Baldonnel in February, and I was in the photo building twice. Hidden away in a corner was a Vinten camera pod...could it be carried on the SF-260s?
I think shifting the main focus of our Navy onto fishery protection was a very bad ides- why did we get in consultants anyway? I agree with your point about getting anti-shipping weapons- why not put them on some new, decent sized ships and let the Spanish know we mean business?
The existing military airfields- Gormanston, Baldonnel and Finner- but Gormanston and Finner especially- should be upgraded and given a bigger role to play.
Why have we neglected our military services for so long?

Magwitch

Klong, sucessive Irish governments would have had Kites with fire crackers and disposable party cameras selotaped to them.

The fact remains that the nationality of the Aeroplane manufacturer does have alot to do with the choice. Over the projected life time of an aircraft a good wprking re;lationship must be maintained with the selling nation. For one training and spareparts contracts acount for much of the cost. Secondly the purchase of any expensive military equipment invariably means other non-military trade deals follow.

The mention of Brazil is interesting. A nation with cheap prices and eager to sell its wares at decent prices. They of course also produce a small range of Jet fighter. Berties recent visit may have touch on the issue of aircraft procurement - an economicly and politically astute deal.

Fidelis

Victor, you get way to involved with military affairs that sometimes it scares me

To the point though, Teeth is right, really no point in having fighters, sure the British TA air force would wipe us out

Having low level ground attack planes like the German Alpha Jet or the Brazilian AMX for basic duties would be nice, similarly, a squadron of Bell Defenders would do the trick for anti-armour roles.

Idealistically, a pair of F-16's based in Baldonnel and Shannon would be handy for air space patrols, while a Super Stallion/Sea King at said airfields and another at Finner/Sligo could supply support to the navy and fishery protection.

A Hercules would also be appreciated I'm sure - ferry those new Mowags around the place.

OR we could invest in an anti-aircraft missile system Although the RBS 70's do the job at under 4miles I think.

Victor

Originally posted by Fidelis
Victor, you get way to involved with military affairs that sometimes it scares me

Who me? naw!

Originally posted by Fidelis
To the point though, Teeth is right, really no point in having fighters, sure the British TA air force would wipe us out

Oooh. Tucanos scare me!

Originally posted by Fidelis
Having low level ground attack planes like the German Alpha Jet or the Brazilian AMX for basic duties would be nice, similarly, a squadron of Bell Defenders would do the trick for anti-armour roles.

Alpha jet is a bit dated, not sure if it would be economic to re-open production for a very small run or even get second hand aircraft. AMX not so much, but same comment. Defenders, might be a bit light up against a tank's .50 cal, but at least they would be cheap.

Originally posted by Fidelis
Idealistically, a pair of F-16's based in Baldonnel and Shannon would be handy for air space patrols, while a Super Stallion/Sea King at said airfields and another at Finner/Sligo could supply support to the navy and fishery protection.

You need more than 2, you would need 2 to be ready at any given time, which when you take training, maintaining, repairs, an allowance for losses and the like into account means a minimum of 6-10 aircraft. A decision is pending on medium lift helicopters (speculated that there will be 2 separate orders).

Originally posted by Fidelis
A Hercules would also be appreciated I'm sure - ferry those new Mowags around the place.

Yes, expensive, but quick. Would the Mowag be "too broad at the the shoulders" for the Hercules?

Originally posted by Fidelis
we could invest in an anti-aircraft missile system Although the RBS 70's do the job at under 4miles I think.

Range of Giraffe radar 16 miles or so. Speed of aircraft 500 mph. Reaction time 2 minutes. Nice for defending a single command post, not factories, airports or cities.

rushbrooke

Hello out there,

Does anybody have any info on Fouga Magister jets operating out of Baldonnell inthe late 1960's. I think one may have been on loan from Potez which had some sort of an aerospace industry in Baldonnell at the time.

ButcherOfNog

Hi rushbrooke,

One hell of an old topic you brought up there

We now have a Military forum for discussing these topics, I'm moving the thread there, the guys there can probably help you out if anyone can.

rushbrooke

ButcherOfNog wrote:

Hi rushbrooke,

One hell of an old topic you brought up there

We now have a Military forum for discussing these topics, I'm moving the thread there, the guys there can probably help you out if anyone can.

Thanks for that, I am new to boards.ie but will attempt to find the forum

ambro25

rushbrooke wrote:

Does anybody have any info on Fouga Magister jets operating out of Baldonnell inthe late 1960's. I think one may have been on loan from Potez which had some sort of an aerospace industry in Baldonnell at the time.

I believe Fougas were French, and Potez was (is still?) a French aircraft manufacturer.

Wiki'ed Fouga Magister which features a linkie to the wiki'ed Irish Air Corps

Google is your best friend (maybe even Google.fr - give me a pm'd shout if you want a quick translation of anything you find).

As for what jets to equip the Irish Air Force with, I only just noticed in late August that the Belgians (:eek: ) have a sh*tpot full of F-16s, and now at least a couple of Warts (A-10s) (anyone flying to Brussels South with Ryanair, look out the hangars right of the terminal building if/whenever doors are left open ).

... come to think of it, a few A-10s kinda sense: built like brick sh*thouses, relatively simple and cheap to run, very polyvalent platforms. Not to mention the "don't f*ck with me" factor that immediately attaches to them

cushtac

There's already two threads on this:

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2054967977

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2054975887

I for one think we should get a mix of Hawk Mk 100s and 200s.

Hawks & the rest of the current batch of jet trainers are not fighters and it would be a waste of money to get them. Proper air defence requires much more than buying a couple of trainers & dressing them up.

does anybody think we should get a small aircraft carrier, pop a few Ospreys [if they ever get built] on it and use it for the fisheries patrol and UN mission reinforcement roles? Thinking about, it could also be a useful recruiting tool for the defence forces.

Sorry, but that's a ridiculous idea. The personnel & resources required for one small carrier could nearly outstrip the requirements for the entire NS fleet. The NS is looking at getting a transport ship that could support troops overseas and carry out the normal patrol duties at home so that need is already being addressed.

The SF-260s are being retired very soon, so in their place, and in addition to the Hawks, the new Embrarer plane, similar in mission to the SF-260, should be bought. In Brazil they're being used to shoot down drug carrying aircraft.

The PC-9M replaced the SF-260, there's no need to get another turboprop trainer. We wouldn't be shooting down any drug-smugglers either.

I think shifting the main focus of our Navy onto fishery protection was a very bad ides- why did we get in consultants anyway? I agree with your point about getting anti-shipping weapons- why not put them on some new, decent sized ships and let the Spanish know we mean business?

Where have you been living? The focus of the NS has always been on fisheries protection, the consultants didn't make it so. There's no real problem with the type of ships the NS has, the problem is there's not enough of them or the sailors to crew them.

And why in the name of God would you need anti-ship missiles for fisheries protection?!!? You're not out to kill the offenders :rolleyes:

The existing military airfields- Gormanston, Baldonnel and Finner- but Gormanston and Finner especially- should be upgraded and given a bigger role to play.

Gormo and Finner are gone, there would be no need to use Gormo since it's so close to Baldonnel anyway. If the Air Corp was going to use another location, the best thing it could do would be to move the CASAs to Shannon.

rushbrooke

Thanks for all the info but I am looking for specific info on Fouga Super Magisters operating from Baldonnel in the late '60's. I am aware that the IAC purchased 6 of these aircraft in 1975. Is there nothing you guys don't know ?

cushtac

There were six flying Fougas and one airframe used for apprentice training. Four of the six were ex-Austrian Air Force and the other two were aircraft that had been purchased by the Katangan seperatists in the Congo but had been embargoed in Belgium. All six had been rebuilt by Aerospatiale prior to the Air Corp buying them. The training airframe was ex-French Air Force.

They were all bought in 1975/76, I've never heard of & cannot find any record of one being used before this.

Maskhadov

we should be putting in an order for 22 Eurofighters for national pride alone

Manic Moran

My question is 'What colour were the bloody things?'

I've seen pictures of Fougas that look light grey, painted silver, or bare metal.

I'm leaning 'light grey' right now, but in person what is it?

NTM

rushbrooke

Does anybody have any info on Potez Aerospace Ireland. I know they operated from a factory in Baldonnel from 1960 to 1968 and at one stage employed 120. What I would like to know is :
a. Did they build any aircraft
b. If aircraft were built, what type were they.
c. Who test flew them.

elvis jaffacake

Maskhadov wrote:

we should be putting in an order for 22 Eurofighters for national pride alone

well if Austria can afford 18, we could afford 10:rolleyes:

Maskhadov

elvis jaffacake wrote:

well if Austria can afford 18, we could afford 10:rolleyes:

Just shows what a grown up nation is doing. We are richer than Austria with a bigger threat seeing that were in between UK and US.

BrianD

What is this threat you speak of and how would this country protect itself by purchasing (and wasting) money on buying a squadron of jet fighters?

Morse

BrianD wrote:

What is this threat you speak of and how would this country protect itself by purchasing (and wasting) money on buying a squadron of jet fighters?

I don't see us having any threats, but we might have an obligation to the EU to properly defend our airspace in the unlikely event of a threat showing up over us!.

Nuttzz

isnt the naval service more a priority? they have a large area to patrol with only a few ships, drugs and illegal fishing are more likely to be stopped by a proper naval service than a rake of eurofighters

as for ordering fighters for national pride i think some on this forum are giving us the full details of their wet dreams.....

Maskhadov

The navy is another thread. Seeing that we are going to extend our territorial waters soon we need at least 10 - 15 more patrol ships built to bigger and better specification than the ones we currently have.

The government has set out a list of roles for the Defence Force in a white paper a few years ago. The main job of the air corps is to defend the country against armed aggression. That means having the necessary equipment and aircraft to do that. That means purchasing some jets.

FiSe

rushbrooke wrote:

Hello out there,

Does anybody have any info on Fouga Magister jets operating out of Baldonnell inthe late 1960's. I think one may have been on loan from Potez which had some sort of an aerospace industry in Baldonnell at the time.

Never heard about it, but it doesn't mean it doesn't exist...

Try:

http://www.irishairpics.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard.cgi

This is specialised forum dealing mainly with I.A.C. and some lads there might help you out

Nuttzz

Maskhadov wrote:

The navy is another thread. Seeing that we are going to extend our territorial waters soon we need at least 10 - 15 more patrol ships built to bigger and better specification than the ones we currently have.

The government has set out a list of roles for the Defence Force in a white paper a few years ago. The main job of the air corps is to defend the country against armed aggression. That means having the necessary equipment and aircraft to do that. That means purchasing some jets.

you miss my point to buy fighters for national pride is complete nonsense, we should build another 100 national schools for national pride or world class hospitals for national pride or more universities for national pride.....not fighters

Maskhadov

National pride is never expressed in school buildings.

uberpixie

Maskhadov wrote:

National pride is never expressed in school buildings.

Ensuring the young people in this country don't turn out a bunch of moronic, stupid, chav wannabe scum by providing them with a deacent education which allows them the chance to persue a career that pays them well (keeping them off the dole) and have some sort of intelligence is national pride.

BrianD

Maskhadov wrote:

National pride is never expressed in school buildings.

Well I bet the Austrians don't have people on hospital beds or bleeding to death in a hospital for lack of facilities. Doubt if there too many school buildings that are prefabs. When you take pride in your country by providing for your people then at that point it is worth investing in a military force to defend it.

In any case, there is no threat to this country that warrants the purchase of fighter jets. We've lived through the cold war and the Troubles without them. Why now? In regard to any EU obligations it would be more expedient to oblige those countries who have large airforces in place to take on the role of air space defense.

Mick86

Maskhadov wrote:

National pride is never expressed in school buildings.

National pride can be expressed in anything. People need to be educated in national pride, patriotism and service to the state. Starting with the government.

Nuttzz wrote:

you miss my point to buy fighters for national pride is complete nonsense....

Yes it is. Worse than that, it's North Korean- nuclear missiles and starving peasants. That said Ireland has a duty to provide for it's own defence. We are a grown up country and we should not expect the British to defend us under any circumstances- Michael Smith take note.

rushbrooke

rushbrooke wrote:

Does anybody have any info on Potez Aerospace Ireland. I know they operated from a factory in Baldonnel from 1960 to 1968 and at one stage employed 120. What I would like to know is :
a. Did they build any aircraft
b. If aircraft were built, what type were they.
c. Who test flew them.

Through Ceisteanna Dail Eireann I now know that Potez Aerospace initially planned to build a 24 seater passenger plane, the Potez 840, at Baldonnell. This venture never took off the ground !! and the company eventually concentrated on contract work, employing at peak times 133. Does anybody know what kind of contract work the company carried out ?

Maskhadov

National pride is never expressed at school buildings... we didnt get a load of school childern to walk down o connell street for the easter rising earlier this year did we ??

The thing that bugs me with some of the above posts, people go on about us not needing jets but at the same time our ministers go and ask the RAF and the UK government to do a job for us. Were freeloading and everyone knows it. Time to take care of your own lot

therecklessone

Maskhadov wrote:

Time to take care of your own lot

Exactly.

So the next time I hear of parents queuing overnight at the local Loreto to secure a place for their kid, or the fact that in the absence of a secondary school in the parish I grew up in, kids are having to be bussed further and further afield because the schools that used to cater for them are full to bursting point, or I hear about another friend or member of my family spending 48hrs on a trolley in A&E because of a shortage of beds, I'll think back to this thread and thank the Lord that nobody bought the penis extensions you so obviously crave.

Morpheus

therecklessone wrote:

I'll think back to this thread and thank the Lord that nobody bought the penis extensions you so obviously crave.

Irrelevant argument.

Equating national pride, schools, healthcare and arms expenditure just doesnt add up.

Look, with all due respect, I can see where some of you guys are coming from, but with a little background research, in all fairness, there's more than enough money in our economy to do all three well. For instance, our arms expenditure, when expressed as a percentage of GDP, is one of the lowest in the world (as far as i can tell, it was 0.6% in 2004).

Indeed we annually donate as much if not more foreign aid as we spend on defence.

Look, Ireland has so much money floating around that even purchasing the "craved penis extensions" (how mature of you) of a light fighter squadron and associated spares, training, accomodation, protection, crews, engineers, and more advanced air defence systems, better individual equipment and transport, ships and helo's wouldnt dent the economy that much, we could even spread the purchases over a number of years (standard procedure) so that it doesnt come out of one budget at the same time, we have a small defence force, not an army, to equip. Hell we could even suggest that they provide us with offsets much like the touted Sikorsky debacle that Michael Smith fecked up back in 01 or thereabouts which meant that if we'd purchased the S-92, Sikorsky would send aircraft requiring maintenance to dublins Team Aerlingus or FTS or whatever it was called then, thus creating more work and further reducing our defence expenditure GDP percentage by default.

On the other hand, maybe if the departments of Education and Health respectively, had a ten year whitepaper drawn up indicating how they could cut costs, stream management levels, relocate, downsize (a lot of soldiers lost jobs, took early retirement, took redundancy or its equivelant), re-equip and had to STRICTLY follow it, under intense scrutiny from civil servants and watchdogs and possibly were given a nice "value for money" clause in their mission statement.... you might, just might, have a valid argument.

dont believe me? read this....

To provide value for money military services which meet the needs of Government and the public and encompass an effective Civil Defence capability and to co-ordinate and oversee the emergency planning process

from http://www.defence.ie

It seems our government is obsessed with providing a value for money military service before it worries about trying to protect its interests and civilians.

ambro25

Considering the size, population and likely requirements of Ireland, what's wrong with the Swiss model? Considering further the amount of cash floating around, just let people buy their own fighter jet (mercenary-style) and invoice the GVT for maintenance, training and other running costs...

Cheaper defense for GVT, penis extension for those who want (and can handle) them, out of their own pocket... and voilà!

Morpheus

Im merely disagreeing with the misconception that increased expenditure on defence in modern Ireland causes decreased expenditure on health and on education.

Each fiscal year the various departments fight for their own slice and theres more than enough pie for everyone, some waste more than others because they are a dinosaur that is pissing money through the seams due to top heavy, chaos theory, management systems.

Some are strictly limited by a document (Price waterhouse defence white paper published 2000) drawn up by civil servants who've never seen a gun unless it was loaded with staples. Also drawn up 7 years ago, it doesnt take into account the modern situation post 9-11, its then used as a yard stick to keep the defence budget in check when the military try to get new equipment etc.

BrianD

ambro25 wrote:

Considering the size, population and likely requirements of Ireland, what's wrong with the Swiss model? Considering further the amount of cash floating around, just let people buy their own fighter jet (mercenary-style) and invoice the GVT for maintenance, training and other running costs...

Cheaper defense for GVT, penis extension for those who want (and can handle) them, out of their own pocket... and voilà!

Well the Swiss model of neutrality requires them to be able to independently defend it (as is the Swedish model) and hence the high spend on defence (in comparison to Ireland). Then again we all know how Swiss gave been in the past.

The problem is nobody has demonstrated a real need to change the status quo and purchase these aircraft as there is no requirement for them.

Morpheus

The problem is nobody has demonstrated a real need to change the status quo and purchase these aircraft as there is no requirement for them.

Good thing then that the irish registered learjet was stopped in amsterdam before the drugs were placed on board because, if they'd missed the jets takeoff and alerted our government, we'd have nothing fast enough to intercept it in irish air space. Im not advocating fighter jets, just stating a fact that exhibits a need for some kind of deterrent as im sure that this isnt, wont be and hasnt been the only time that private jets have been used in this manner.

therecklessone

Morph&#233 wrote: »

Look, Ireland has so much money floating around that even purchasing the "craved penis extensions" (how mature of you) of a light fighter squadron and associated spares, training, accomodation, protection, crews, engineers, and more advanced air defence systems, better individual equipment and transport, ships and helo's wouldnt dent the economy that much

My position has been consistent on this. Defence expenditure should make economic and strategic sense. I have argued that available funding should be targeted to meet specific goals, advocating and supporting the purchase of extra maritime patrol aircraft, UAVs to assist in that role, in counter terrorism and in support of the civil power. I have supported the purchase of further helicopters and fixed wing transports for the Air Corps.

I identified the need for increased spending on the naval service long before Maskhadov even realised our territorial waters were due to increase.

All I ask is that people who advocate spending on fighters identify a credible threat that requires interceptor capability for the Air Corps, if that can be established I would support spending on that role. Until then I believe the DF have a series of roles with more pressing needs of financial investment, and despite what you think budgetary constraints do mean that finance is finite.

Proper budgetary control of other government departments is indeed necessary, but will not free up spending for unnecessary military expenditure. Rather, that funding should and needs to be invested in addressing deficiencies in our health and education sectors, in supporting public transport, in R&D to solve our looming energy crisis (a far greater threat to this state than anything our DF may have to deal with)

If posters want to invoke the issue of national pride, then the correct response is to point out that there are 101 issues we should be more concerned with than having a squadron of interceptors on the ramp at Baldonnel.

Finally, purchasing fighter jets for "national pride" is the equivalent of getting a penis extension.

therecklessone

Morph&#233 wrote: »

Good thing then that the irish registered learjet was stopped in amsterdam before the drugs were placed on board because, if they'd missed the jets takeoff and alerted our government, we'd have nothing fast enough to intercept it in irish air space. Im not advocating fighter jets, just stating a fact that exhibits a need for some kind of deterrent as im sure that this isnt, wont be and hasnt been the only time that private jets have been used in this manner.

Belguim, not Amsterdam.

And if our customs service had performed checks of more than 16 aircraft inbound from Europe to Weston last year maybe we'd have achieved the same result?

Morpheus

Belgium so, my mistake.
Improved Customs procedures would be a good idea too. Also hypothetically speaking if an aircraft refused to land and tried to leave our airspace, how would we force them down?

Im still not advocating a fighter squadron but there are answers between turboprop trainer and full spectrum fighter that may suit our needs.

Fixed wing maritime patrol and transport and rotary support and transport are needed areas of investment so were agreed there, however I must point out that I was not implying that by improving the management of other departments, we could increase military funds and I also wrote the post with respect to finite resources, if I gave that impression it was not on purpose.

I disagree with our current defence expenditure outlook but also disagree that we increase defence only at the cost of other areas in the economy.

BrianD

Morph&#233 wrote: »

Good thing then that the irish registered learjet was stopped in amsterdam before the drugs were placed on board because, if they'd missed the jets takeoff and alerted our government, we'd have nothing fast enough to intercept it in irish air space. Im not advocating fighter jets, just stating a fact that exhibits a need for some kind of deterrent as im sure that this isnt, wont be and hasnt been the only time that private jets have been used in this manner.

Why would we need to intercept it? We just wait for it too land!!! A phone call is mighty quicker than any fighter jet.

Don't forget that large quantities of drugs that have been flown into the USA in similar circumstances and undetected despite the presence of an advanced radar system and airforce. Doesn't deterr drung smuglers from South America.

elvis jaffacake

well besides fighter's, what we really need for the air corp,besides more helo's, are 1-2 C130J type aircraft, or if not that size, 3-4 casa 295 sized ones, increase mobility, and will have tangible benifits immediately, while with fighters, you only get the benifit, when they do their primery job, shooting down other aircraft, which I frankly don't think would get them onto the DOD's shopping list at the moment:rolleyes:

Morpheus

BrianD wrote:

Why would we need to intercept it? We just wait for it too land!!! A phone call is mighty quicker than any fighter jet.

Don't forget that large quantities of drugs that have been flown into the USA in similar circumstances and undetected despite the presence of an advanced radar system and airforce. Doesn't deterr drung smuglers from South America.

Point taken, but what if it refuses to land!??? I can see where this is going, but even if we had decent low, medium and high level SAM and nationwide military radar coverage that would still be better than 8 turbo props, a handful of manpads and anti aircraft guns and mobile giraffe radar systems.

elvis jaffacake wrote:

while with fighters, you only get the benifit, when they do their primery job, shooting down other aircraft, which I frankly don't think would get them onto the DOD's shopping list at the moment

If you do some research you will see that most countries with fighters dont fire a shot in anger over the course of their lifetimes, knowing you have the "ability" to shoot me down is often a far far more effective deterrent, which is why i was suggesting something midrange, for example multi-role light-strike with air to air and supersonic capability.

This could be used to support army operations as well as CAP if necessary, and a decent nationwide air defence strategy, admittedly i dont know a huge amount about ground based air defence but I figure that 5 medium and high level launchers with military class radar would be a start?

Surely it wouldnt cost that much for both considering the size of ireland. we definitely dont need JSF's TYPHOONS or GRIPPENS etc, if we come up against a foe with anything like that were toast, but if the govt were shown a viable alternative to the fighters maybe they would consider it?

As I mentioned before we could purchase this equipment over a number of years (ie budgets) and maybe get something back in offsets?

komsomol

we dont need it, end of story.

Our role in the world is to be sandwitched between britain and america and drink our pints of guinness, end of story.


Deaths from suicide bombings: none
Deaths from drug abuse: **** all

Deaths from automobile accidents: alot
Deaths from cancer: alot
Deaths from alcohol abuse: alot


We're a country with the population of 4-5 million, to most countries thats the size of a small city of theirs. Our worst fear is ireland not qualifying for the world cup... Our infrastructure is a mess, we only recently got Broadband for christs sake!

Overall:

why the hell would we need fighter jets!?

Maskhadov

why the hell would we need fighter jets!?

Well if we didnt need them we would ask the RAF to do it for us. Taking care of your own country is all part and parcel of being a grown up western european nation. So the fact of the matter is that WE DO NEED THEM. Case closed.

The real point on this thread should be why wont the government act responsibly and purchase them ? Were a bunch of free loaders living off the english tax payer.

BrianD

Maskhadov wrote:

Well if we didnt need them we would ask the RAF to do it for us. Taking care of your own country is all part and parcel of being a grown up western european nation. So the fact of the matter is that WE DO NEED THEM. Case closed.

The real point on this thread should be why wont the government act responsibly and purchase them ? Were a bunch of free loaders living off the english tax payer.

Well can you give an example since 1945 when we have needed them to defend the State?

The fact of the matter is that a token of squandron of jet fighters is about as useful as a ash tray on a motor bike. We simply don;t need them and they can't be justified. I can think of a number of countries that since 1945 have built up large air forces (either themselves or as client states of either super power) and they have counted for nothing. Iraq had a large airforce.

So where is the threat to Ireland going to come from? The EU to our east? The USA to our west? Maybe Iceland will turn against us? Geography negates the need for an jet force in Ireland. So with no threat, there is no need for the RAF to be involved so we are not freeloading off the UK.

In regard to the defence of the EU, we are much better off to allow those nations with large airforces to do the job. We don't even need to have them stationed here given the size of the country.

Now, if we were to be indoctrinated with the 'climate of fear' that keeps the American population or suddenly get paranoid an investment in an advanced self defence missile system would be a better investment then a few jets.

Maskhadov

You havent recognised the current situation in 2006.

There have been numerous incidents throughout the cold war when we needed to control our airspace but couldnt.

Why does the UK allow the rest of Europe provide its aircover ? Why ? because its a responsible nation and not freeloaders

cushtac

Maskhadov wrote:

Why does the UK allow the rest of Europe provide its aircover ? Why ? because its a responsible nation and not freeloaders

This makes no sense whatsoever. The UK maintains it's own air defence.

Fighters cannot just be bought one day & put into action the next, hundreds of hours of training are needed before the pilots, ground crew and controllers could be considered effective. There's other costs outside of the price of the fighters too - spare parts & weapons, improvements in infrastructure and a comprehensive radar system (either ground or air-based) would all be neccessary. All this adds up to hundreds of millions of Euro.

For a lesser amount the air corp could get more helicopters, maritime patrol aircraft, new transport and utility aircraft - any or all of these would be of far greater use to the Defence Forces both home & abroad.