Interesting articles

I've seen AC helis on air ambulance duty land and take off from that pitch behind the cricket pavilion in the Phoenix Park many times.

I've only ever seen the helicopter and an ambulance or two on scene and never seen any member of the public there come close to interfering with any of them. Sure, they do get passing interest from people out walking, but never such that crowd control was required, so I would imagine requesting Garda support to secure the landing site is just never done.

I can only assume that the issue arose here because of it being in May 2020, when the first lockdown was in place and the Phoenix Park was absolutely packed with people every day, as I frequently saw. Some sort of collective hysteria must have overtaken whatever people were there that day, such that they didn't know better than to interfere in what was quite obviously a patient transfer.

And has been ignored by everyone since then…

Accept we know the Shaw wasn't really planned as a purchase, but more of an opportunity buy with other factors in play, I wonder if there wasn't a Brexit vote at the time would she have been ordered? More over if anyone was paying attention to that plan surely the first step would be the increasing of the NS manpower first?

Even if we didn’t have the manpower losses, the establishment figures weren’t enough for 9 ships let alone more, yet there’s still no intention to increase that, so again I don’t see any suggestion that there is any official support or knowledge of a plan to grow the NS.

Such an issue, though, is a policy matter for civil authority of the day, not the F.O., or even the General Staff.

I'd love to know where the notion of 12 even comes from. Even if everything being considered for acquisition at the moment arrived tomorrow, it would be a net gain of Zero, with Eithne and the Peacocks making way for a MRV and two Lake-class CPVs. I can't imagine the Flag is considering the enhanced harbour security boats in his calculation.

The 12 ship figure most likely dates back to the study in the 90s.

Exactly. The concept of the first MRV is only now being explored by naval architects advising the Government.

I don't recall any mention at any time about a second.

The original RFP in 2007 or thereabouts had a plan for 2 OPV with an option for a 3rd, and 1 MRV/EPV with an option for a 2nd.

This is from a ministers answer in the Dáil shortly after.

Following Government approval to go to tender, notice of a competition for the purchase of replacement vessels for the Naval Service was sent to the Official Journal of the European Union on 24 August 2007. The competition for the purchase of two Offshore Patrol Vessels, with an option on a third and one Extended Patrol Vessel, with an option on a second, uses a Restricted Procurement Procedure in accordance with EU Procurement Directives. The process comprises two stages - Stage 1, a Request for Proposals and Stage 2, an Invitation to Tender.

The closing date for Stage 1- Request for Proposals was 26 October 2007. Stage 1 Proposals are being evaluated at present in my Department and following the evaluation a detailed specification will issue to those invited to participate in Stage 2 - Invitation to Tender. The “Invitation to Tender” is expected to issue in May 2008, with tenders due for return in July/August of that year. Following detailed tender evaluation it is expected that a contract will be awarded in late 2008/early 2009.

The decision to proceed to purchase the vessels will be subject to further Government approval and agreement on funding, the full requirement for which will not be known until the tender competition has concluded. Once details of costs are known, funding arrangements will be a matter for further consideration in consultation with the Minister for Finance in the context of the Estimates process. It is expected that the cost of the three new ships will be of the order of some €180m excluding VAT. There has been an increase of €1million (10%) in Subhead J - Naval Service Equipment for 2008 to facilitate on-going project development. It is expected that the vessels will be delivered on a phased basis between 2010 and 2012.

Because of the economy crash between then and now, things were delayed. Then we were looking at EPV for €90m and 2 OPV for €45m each. As the building of each ship was delayed, and payment was phased, on top of huge inflation in the shipbuilding industry, each OPV ended up costing in the region of €90m.

Depends on whether or not CoDF tells govt to start taking capital and annual spending on defence seriously to (a)stem the flow of skills from the organisation and (b) provide anything close to a functioning defence force. Spread payment out in the same way you did with the P60s, and it is well within reach. Set €50m aside each year for Naval Capital expense, and you'll have the fleet up to date with 12 modern ships in 15 years.

Not while you keep defence spending at under 0.2% of GDP though. Closer to 1% and you won't have the honkeys and bluffwaffe fighting over scraps in DFHQ. Unless that was the intention first day.

The Commission says that and it will be ignored and the report dropped in the shredder. Just as previous reviews/reports etc have been, pinning hopes on the Commission being a magic bullet is foolhardy imo, it will do nothing to change the political or public position on spending on defence. And given build rates it will be 20 years since the MRV was talked about before she is in service and even longer if there was a second one.

Given that nothing at all will change until 2023 (as it will have to be the next budget at best before anything changes)2 even if the Government was willing to take the political hit in increasing defence spending, not too mention the question of whether the current government will still be around by then, hopping for something in 2022 is a bit of a forlorn hope anyway. I mean did you see one of the Senators standing up declaring no Irish company should be involved in the defence sector last week?

The breathtaking naivety.

This is dumb altogether.

TLDR: All alcohol to be banned in camp in the Lebanon deployment, following an alleged assault, suspected to have been fuelled by alcohol.

There are 400 odd people on tour there, all of which have been subjected to the additional pressures of Covid on their deployments and their family lives.

I'm going to assume 99+% of them are well able to enjoy a beer or two and control themselves. Besides if they try and ban alcohol in just one DF camp, home or abroad, they're going to have a problem.

What this is, is an indictment of the battalion command and the MP contingent therein. If they can't effectively manage one or two incidents of trouble within the Unit, through loss of privileges or the application of appropriate military law, without demoralising 400 other adults,they shouldn't have the job.

Commission on Defence Forces’ report met with sharp criticism from military leaders (irishtimes.com)

Unsurprising that there would be backlash.

Extracts from letter to Irish Times from retired Lt Colonel Joe Ahern, published today: