Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Fighter jets for the Air Corps?

Options
18384868889199

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 16,751 ✭✭✭✭banie01


    The RAF equipment plan is seeing all their Tranche 1 Typhoons up for retirement at average of about 42% airframe use.

    Tranche is basically A2A variant with near zero ground attack capability. Similar to Austrian variant that they are looking to get rid of. Long Range, twinjet and updated as far as the tranche 1 can be.


    Our Air policing needs could be met with a squadron of those, and our air transport gap filled with 2 of their soon to be retired C130J's.

    Brexit is going so poorly, if we leave it a while to make an offer we could probably get the lot for a few container loads of rice!


    There's even a handy little sales brochure 😉 covering everything but the Typhoons.

    Interesting that they are claiming the Sig Sauer is suitable for crowd control 😮




  • Registered Users Posts: 1,464 ✭✭✭Sgt. Bilko 09


    The tranche 1 typhoons are there since 2003, being made redundant by the mass order of F35s



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,751 ✭✭✭✭banie01


    Which is why they're been retired with over 50% of airframe time left.

    What's your point?



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,943 ✭✭✭sparky42


    The T1s have been trouble in service though, I mean there’s a reason why Austria is binning them (and the long running issue of why they bought them in the first place), the RAF has been trying to get rid of them for years now.

    As to us buying anything from this, it’s cart before horses all around with no thinking imo. We don’t have enough numbers in the AC right now to meet our current limited tastings and airframes, but somehow everyone on Twitter keeps suggesting how much of a great deal these (mainly the Hercs) would be… As what lawn ornaments when we don’t have anyone to fly or maintain them? If what the AC wanted 20 years ago happened and we had a Herc in service and looking to replace it, why not. But where we are? It makes no sense, no more than suggesting we go out and buy the Type 23 they are flogging of or Argus.



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,751 ✭✭✭✭banie01


    Agree re the Tranche 1s, the suggestion in my post re those is partially tongue in cheek. It is an aircraft that on paper, ideally fits our needs. Twin engine, well equipped and with sufficient range and redundancy for extended overwater OPs.

    The Austrians should never have bought them, but in our case? Were we actually even flying LIFT or replacing existing fighters, they'd certainly be an option.

    I've made my feelings clear on the Herc over on the transport thread. It's a capability gap that we have known about for years and that has been glaringly exposed over the past 18 months with PPE flights and then the sojourn to Kabul.

    The Casa is what we will get, but the capability of a 295 imo still leaves us short.

    The switch to any type of fast jet ops from where we are now? Is as many here have already posted, a matter of political will, fiscal investment and a change of Aer Corps/DF culture that will likely mean it'll never happen. Ideally a lessons learnt report will hammer home how desperately needed Transport is and that will open eyes to the Air policing and Heli issues too.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,747 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    After Katie Hannons show today a lack of fighter jets and new ships will be the least of the DF problems. Heads will be rolling



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,751 ✭✭✭✭banie01


    Just read a summary there and about to give it a listen.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,943 ✭✭✭sparky42


    From some of the articles on the websites at it, I’m not surprised if heads do roll, and by the sounds of it deservedly so.



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,080 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Disgusting revelations.

    And no Typhoons thanks, absolute money pits.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,649 ✭✭✭Beta Ray Bill


    I mentioned on this thread before that spending money on war planes would basically be jobs for millionaires kids that have "nothing to do".

    Air force Pilot gets €29,850 approx P/A (correct me if I'm wrong) and you need seriously high grades to get in. Anyone with those grades will easily get a Job in a Multinational and will be earning near €100k P/A within 8 years, having done 4 years on college. (I know for a fact that Google/Facebook etc will start excellent grands off on €60k P/A)

    My argument was that only people who don't need money and have the best education, could do a job like that. (millionaires kids)

    And I was absolutely "shot down" (no pun intended) for not having a clue and told that the people and/or the recruitment process in the defense forces were of the absolute highest possible standard. And now the Katie Hannon story came out.

    We're a month in now and nothing has happened, 0 accountability.

    Nepotism LOVES zero accountability.

    If it wasn't so wrong, it'd be absolutely hilarious!

    We don't need fighters, if we did we should be buying something like a JAS 39 (new) and not old T1 EF's

    I still think Primary Radar along with a number of MIM-104's (Or similar) is the best most cost effective option.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 40,437 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    second lieutenants start off on 32K plus a 5.5K allowance. Pay for a 1st lieutenant is up to to 47K plus allowances. captains start at 48K and go up to to 60K plus allowances. No idea where you got 29,850 from. that is closer to a sargeant's pay.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,649 ✭✭✭Beta Ray Bill


    I stand corrected (I was looking at an older scale)

    How long to get from entry pay (IE when training starts) to the €60k (roughly), and can everyone get from Captain/Lieutenant -> Commandant/Lt. Cdr

    Just reading that training, takes between 3.5 and 4 years, due to a lack of suitably qualified trainers



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,437 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail




  • Registered Users Posts: 3,649 ✭✭✭Beta Ray Bill


    I had a glanced over this earlier. I've read it now

    Stark reading.... Numbers going down over the last 10 years, 34 pilots passed the 12 year contract and can apply to leave at anytime and another 11 pilots between 10 and 12 years service completed.

    Fighter planes are the least of the Air Corps problems.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,592 ✭✭✭California Dreamer




  • Registered Users Posts: 24,080 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    in a worse-case scenario, the protection of Irish airspace may not be the priority for another sovereign country

    And that, is the very inconvenient truth.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,293 ✭✭✭thomil


    Fighter aircraft may be the least of the Air Corps problems, but they could provide a way to counter the manpower issue somewhat.

    I mean, let's be honest, how many career opportunities are there in the Air Corps today? Flying the PC-9 as an instructor is pretty much the pinnacle of a flying careers as far as I can see. Apart from that, it's mostly transport missions or VIP shuttles in civilian or near civilian aircraft, and many aircraft charter outfits offer better pay and conditions. Flying a PC-12 on the umpteenth test sample run to Munich or to pick up some liaison staff in Brussels is hardly challenging. I have huge respect for the Air Corps and its staff, both enlisted, NCOs and officers, but there's just not much of a challenge.

    Granted, fighter aircraft alone won't solve that issue but a larger, more diverse Air Corps with more challenging flying assignments and more career and leadership opportunities both in flying and non-flying roles could go a long way towards making the organisation a much more attractive employer.

    Good luck trying to figure me out. I haven't managed that myself yet!



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,943 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Good points, getting the AC deployed to any mission outside of the EEZ however is pretty much beyond their capabilities as of now, even if it was just UN/EU operations sadly.



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,080 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Sod the challenge, its a duty. Don't you think they'd rather be operating in a safe environment than in a conflict zone, on a long tour? Like every job, variety is limited after a while.

    Its not like flying Ryanair 738s back and forth to Beauvais is going to be a thrill a minute.

    As for manpower, well, there may come a time where the needs of the State outweigh the vagaries of the economy and the jobs market and some sort of national service may need to be introduced.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,293 ✭✭✭thomil


    "Patriotism" and a "sense of duty" will only get you so far when it comes to attracting new recruits. Like it or not, the Air Corps is effectively just another employer at the moment, and needs to compete against the likes of Ryanair, Aer Lingus and other large airlines when it comes to recruiting flight crews. And right now, apart from the nebulous concept of "serving your country", the Air Corps does not have a unique selling point compared to commercial airlines. Why put yourself through the rigorous of basic military training just to end up serving in a small force that is perpetually starved for funds, with poor pay, antisocial operating hours and subject to military discipline when you can sign up with, say Etihad or Emirates, or even Ryanair, get your entire flight training paid for, have at least a chance of being based close to home, and end up in a well-paid job with lots or transferrable skills should you decide to change employer down the line? When it comes to deciding between serving your country and paying the bills, 90% of people will definitely choose the latter option.

    That is what the Air Corps, but in a more general sense the Defence Forces as a whole need to address. The fact that you're "serving your country" means diddly-squat when you can't even afford a bedsit, pardon me, "studio" anywhere near whatever base you're stationed at. That means: better pay and conditions, and in the long run, more varied career options. Simply drumming on about duty or fantasising about "national service", aka conscription, will do nothing to fix the issue and will likely only exacerbate the current manpower crisis.

    Good luck trying to figure me out. I haven't managed that myself yet!



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,649 ✭✭✭Beta Ray Bill


    According to documentation mentioned above and various news articles. It's taking up to 4 years to train a pilot. This ia a major problem (we're not even talking about advanced planes here, this is effectively elementary flying school)

    In most air forces it's taking 2-3 years (roughly) to train and that point you report to a squadron. (Note at that point, it will take at least another 2 years flying with that squadron for you to become "dangerous" to the enemy)

    The wages need to be upped, and not just in the Air Corp, across the entire Defense forces.

    The ships we have cannot be crewed to due to lack of medics and Chef's of all things (I know for a fact that most of the ships out at sea atm are being crewed by Army Paramedics not Navy Paramedics).

    It all boils down to money/wages. The problem is so substantial with regard the lack of trainers, that the Defense forces may need to look to the private sector to train pilots.

    I'd just like to go on record saying that, I thought the Helicopter doing the fire fighting in Howth there a few months back did an amazing job. They were working for a very long time to try and get it under control. If they had not have been there, the situation may have gotten way more out of control than it already was.

    We have to pay these people, simple as.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,979 ✭✭✭Stovepipe


    Ryanair and flying training paid for? in the same line? you really need to do your homework.



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,437 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Irish Air Corp pilots take 15 months to get their wings. where are you getting 4 years from?



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,129 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    What's the summary.

    Reads like solution to cash starved services is lots of cash. Which almost no wants to give to the service.

    So what's the issue of giving them more money. Well, we don't want to, we'd prefer to spend it on other things.

    Catch 22 in fairness.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,592 ✭✭✭California Dreamer


    Like putting Karen and her 6 kids in their 'forever home'!!!! 🙄



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,129 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    Moral hazard etc.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,731 ✭✭✭Lorddrakul


    Interesting ball park figures for for costs.

    Croatia buys second hand Rafales from France (France24.com)

    Croatia on Thursday signed a deal to buy 12 French Rafale fighter jets worth nearly 1 billion euros ($1.2 billion) that officials said will considerably strengthen its air force amid lingering tensions in the Balkans.

    The contract for the used combat aircraft was signed during the visit of French President Emmanuel Macron to Croatia. It was the first visit by France’s head of state to Croatia since it split from the former Yugoslav federation in the 1991-95 war.

    “The purchase of the planes strategically is what we see as a game changer for Croatia,” Croatian Prime Minister Andrej Plenkovic said at a joint press conference with Macron after the signing ceremony.

    “This will not only give us the ability to avert those who have any aspirations toward our territory but also to become the so-called exporters of security … of stability in southeastern Europe,” he said.


    I know Croatia has its own infrastructure already, having operated MiG-21s from the Soviet era, but in terms of getting a modern fast jet force it is a good guide.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,442 ✭✭✭Dohvolle


    Its a fantastic deal. France are keen to unload their F3s so their frontline units can advance to the F4 versions. Deals of this nature (Similar deal to Greece) is a great way of (a) disposing of older airframes (b) broadening the user profile, giving instructors in France a greater pool of people to train. Getting people on the Rafale chain also opens the possibility of them staying customers of Dassault. For example, Greece and India both used to operate Mirage 2000, which they are replacing with F3-R



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,747 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    If somehow the CoDF said as part of there recomendations that the state should get in to Air Defence game and the french offered us a Rafale deal. Would the Rafale be to much fire power for what we need?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,943 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Realistically any of the 4.5 gen are "too much firepower for what we need", given that we aren't ever likely to deploy them out of the country offensively. But then we return to the usual "what if we buy a trainer and use it as a fighter" argument.



Advertisement