Irish Air Corps

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.

Maskhadov

I meant why doesnt the UK allow mainland Europe provide its aircover ??

€3 or €4bn would more than plenty for 22 Eurofighters. We can send all of our pilots to another country to train (we currently have mexicans over here training on the PC9). The costs invovled arent much. If you divide €4bn by 30 years you see how cheap the aircraft really are.

Yes I agree we need more helicopters, transport planes and maritime patrol aircraft. If we spent the same on defence as the rest of europe then we would have a good defence forces.

Manic Moran

BrianD wrote:

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

There was the occasional Canberra overflight in the 60s or 70s, wasn't there?

When's the last time Ireland needed field artillery units to defend the State? You have those.

NTM

patbundy

Manic Moran wrote:

There was the occasional Canberra overflight in the 60s or 70s, wasn't there?

When's the last time Ireland needed field artillery units to defend the State? You have those.

NTM

true,when was the irish goverment was used aswell

FiSe

Oh yea, artillery pieces, lovely polished and paraded in front of general Irish public. Beautiful museum pieces

Anyway, this discussion isn't about money, or is it? If yes, so how come, that Czech AF has few brand new Grippens, some ALCA trainers and their Police are getting 8 new Eurocopters 135's, them "poor eastern europian" bastards now will have 12 of these for police and medical use only, plus some Bells 412... I am not talking about their military 'copters now... Country about the same size like Ireland.

My point is:
- money is not a mater here, there're millions wasted every month
- military / fighter jets aren't so important at this stage
- IAC should have at least some jets for training and keep pilots up-to-date with this type of aircrafts
- if the need/will for fighter jets arise, it would be much easier and cheaper to pay for them and for any/or additional crew training


Oh, by the way, Irish Fougas are silver overall, this paint gets dirty and very "tired" as times go by. But it's silver really

komsomol

theres only one fogua left in ireland, and it doesn't have a jet engine. Air Corps canibalised them all ages ago. Same with most of our aircraft, they dont even have the proper funding for spare parts.

bit of unless topical information there for ya.

FiSe

komsomol wrote:

theres only one fogua left in ireland, and it doesn't have a jet engine. Air Corps canibalised them all ages ago. Same with most of our aircraft, they dont even have the proper funding for spare parts.

bit of unless topical information there for ya.

You've heard it somewhere? If yes, so don't trust everything you hear...

cushtac

Maskhadov wrote:

€3 or €4bn would more than plenty for 22 Eurofighters. We can send all of our pilots to another country to train (we currently have mexicans over here training on the PC9). The costs invovled arent much. If you divide €4bn by 30 years you see how cheap the aircraft really are.

Where are you getting these figures? Are you factoring in the cost of future upgrades for all the equipment involved? And training abroad isn't cheap, especially the kind of training needed for fighters. The reason the Mexicans are training here is because Pilatus arranged it as part of a plane buy, the Air Corp is getting a few rather expensive smoke pods out it.

Maskhadov wrote:

Yes I agree we need more helicopters, transport planes and maritime patrol aircraft. If we spent the same on defence as the rest of europe then we would have a good defence forces.

We have a good Defence Force, but even if we spent percentage of GDP on as the rest of Europe we couldn't afford all of the above. If a choice has to be made the kit that will be of the most use should be bought.

FiSe wrote:

Oh yea, artillery pieces, lovely polished and paraded in front of general Irish public. Beautiful museum pieces

The DF actually has modern & useful 105mm light guns, as used by both the US, Australian & British armed forces.

FiSe wrote:

Anyway, this discussion isn't about money, or is it? If yes, so how come, that Czech AF has few brand new Grippens, some ALCA trainers and their Police are getting 8 new Eurocopters 135's, them "poor eastern europian" bastards now will have 12 of these for police and medical use only, plus some Bells 412... I am not talking about their military 'copters now... Country about the same size like Ireland.

Firstly the Czechs joined NATO, requiring them to modernise their armed forces. As a result they've spent an average of 2% of GDP on defence since 1993. Secondly their police helicopters would not be included in the defence budget.

FiSe wrote:

- money is not a mater here, there're millions wasted every month
- military / fighter jets aren't so important at this stage
- IAC should have at least some jets for training and keep pilots up-to-date with this type of aircrafts
- if the need/will for fighter jets arise, it would be much easier and cheaper to pay for them and for any/or additional crew training

- money does matter here, there may be millions getting wasted every month but that doesn't mean the public are going to want to see it getting spent on a massive jump in defence spending.
- agreed.
- the AC doesn't need jet trainers, it has the PC-9M.
- it doesn't work like that, using fighters effectively means hundreds of hours training for all involved with the equipment they'd be using.

FiSe

Firstly the Czechs joined NATO, requiring them to modernise their armed forces. As a result they've spent an average of 2% of GDP on defence since 1993.

But, is there something about jet fighters? I mean, Czechs could have some type of agreement with Slovaks - MiG29's, or Poles - F16's or Germans. But, they've decieded to go this way instead...

Secondly their police helicopters would not be included in the defence budget.

I haven't said that, but this is was one more point about the money issue... Their EC135's costs 3,5 - 4 mil euro each, roughly, so don't quote me on that. Which, probably goes from Department of Justice - Police - pocket and, back on island soil, this is "nothing" in Irish budget, so one more time, is it really about money?
Garda doesn't have their own pilots, no matter the name of GASU stand for, and all three 'planes have IAC -military?- numbers. But it doesn't matter here.

The point is, again, how come, that some, in our eyes, poor nation can afford to buy jets and helicopters, pay for their pilots and mechanics, their training, their excercise? Now they are in Sweden on shooting practice...
With, I have to say, public on "their" side, the only discussion was and still is Grippens or F16's?
Czechs don't need jets, but they have them, do Belgians need jets? Portugees? Dutch? I don't think so, but they have them as well...
I don't want to be smart arse here or stir water, I just want to know why some people out there fighting against fighters so hard?
Just give me one more reason, no money, no public, no hypothetical agression, no "need for other equipment" frase and I will say: "Ireland is better off without jets..."

cushtac

FiSe wrote:

But, is there something about jet fighters? I mean, Czechs could have some type of agreement with Slovaks - MiG29's, or Poles - F16's or Germans. But, they've decieded to go this way instead...

They wanted to join NATO, which meant they had to contribute to the collective air power somehow. They decided to get modern fighters, which insn't surprising since they already had fighters from the Warsaw Pact days.

FiSe wrote:

I haven't said that, but this is was one more point about the money issue... Their EC135's costs 3,5 - 4 mil euro each, roughly, so don't quote me on that. Which, probably goes from Department of Justice - Police - pocket and, back on island soil, this is "nothing" in Irish budget, so one more time, is it really about money?

How much do you think fighters cost?

FiSe wrote:

Garda doesn't have their own pilots, no matter the name of GASU stand for, and all three 'planes have IAC -military?- numbers. But it doesn't matter here.

The GASU aircraft are flown by the Air Corp because the law prohibits state aircraft being flown by civilians, so they were entered on the military register. The planes were bought by the Gardaí and all the costs are covered by the Gardaí, so they're definitely not military assets.

FiSe wrote:

The point is, again, how come, that some, in our eyes, poor nation can afford to buy jets and helicopters, pay for their pilots and mechanics, their training, their excercise? Now they are in Sweden on shooting practice....

Are we sure they're that poor? But let's assume they are, how do we know they can afford it? How do we know they're not skimping on some other area of public spending in order to afford this kit?

FiSe wrote:

With, I have to say, public on "their" side, the only discussion was and still is Grippens or F16's?

The public is on their side because they went through years of Soviet oppression & they are determined that it won't happen again.

FiSe wrote:

Czechs don't need jets, but they have them, do Belgians need jets? Portugees? Dutch? I don't think so, but they have them as well...

The Czechs, Belgian, Dutch and Portuguese all fear or feared Russian agression and feel they need them. The Czechs, Belgians and the Dutch have all suffered invasion & oppression within living memory, it's as good a reason as any to protect yourself.

FiSe wrote:

I don't want to be smart arse here or stir water, I just want to know why some people out there fighting against fighters so hard?
Just give me one more reason, no money, no public, no hypothetical agression, no "need for other equipment" frase and I will say: "Ireland is better off without jets..."

It's not that Ireland is better off without jets, it's that Ireland is better off getting other stuff first.

I'm not against fighters, but you have to look at this realistically. Defence is not an important issue with the voting public, therefore it's not an important consideration for the politicians. We didn't have the money or the inclination to fund defence on the scale that was needed, this has gone on so long that this idea has become ingrained. If we strike oil big time & the dosh comes flooding in, then we can buy them. But until then the government of the day will always find something better to spend the cash on.

Manic Moran

I believe the Czechs don't need to fund a Naval Service at 30 million per yacht, plus expenses.

NTM