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
1160161163165166199

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 3,950 ✭✭✭sparky42


    There is always a decision tree of how and when lethal force would be used in such a situation in nations that have the capability to actually do so, for us debating what/when and where such force might be used is relatively pointless as we don’t even know what is in our controlled airspace without being told.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,753 ✭✭✭roadmaster




  • Registered Users Posts: 3,950 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Of course they won’t like anything to do with the U.K., and while still in opposition will like make hay from it and declare how they would do things different, but when they end up in Government, I doubt they would back the spending needed.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,107 ✭✭✭jonnybigwallet


    65 billion budget surplus forecast over next 3 years. No excuse for not bunging a billion at the DF and investing in a decent quantity of jet aircraft and a frigate, as well as a decent pay package for the membership.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,061 ✭✭✭purplepanda


    Mary Lou's speech at the weekend would suggest they have no intention of implementing the Defence Commission report recommendations, however, if they need FF to support them in a coalition, I can't see FF agreeing with this policy.

    Then again FF, FG, LP & GP have also presided over the reduction in real terms in Irish defence spending since the mid '90's.

    SF still have major issues with the Irish Defence Forces, many of their members would like to see Irish defence abolished as some sort of perverted revenge for the Civil War.

    If SF were to increase defence spending when in government & / or coalition, it would be a major stop forward in their credentials to be a proper democratic political party.

    I do think pressure is being brought to bear by EU nations & governments, the USA & UK on the present Irish government, this will continue in future, SF will have to take account of this. They also would have to seriously tone down their traditional Euro scepticism policies.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 24,104 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    I wouldn't argue with a vast improvement in pay, but the problem is, if you hardwire in a stream of expanded current expenditure and base it upon a windfall income, then you could be left holding the baby if that surplus begins to disappear. And that applies to all Govt expenditure, not just DF remuneration.

    However, the Government does seem to be taking a prudent approach to this surplus wedge and are going to split it between long term warchest, debt pay down and one-off capital items.

    Again, while I'd love to see Defence get a big dividend from that, the problem is the very low capacity of the DF to expand at the moment. What I mean is, headcount is so low and expertise to bring in a radical modernisation is so scarce, that you could end up with a load of white elephant ships, aircraft and armour with no one to integrate and man them.

    And so, I think the thing to do is use any additional capital to accelerate the air defence radar and associated systems and to begin replacing current equipment with LoA targets on a one for one basis, while making a huge push for recruitment and much improved career opportunities, with an attractive package for new entrants.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,950 ✭✭✭sparky42


    I’d pretty much agree with this, the Primary Radar purchase could be the major additional ticket item for the current capital plan (though could we get the fecking Flagship actually having steel cut?), and as you mentioned the upper limits of procurement capacity of the DF/DOD would need to be addressed. However perhaps a “two for” as wel instead of upping current spending with additional pay might be accelerating the investment in the DF facilities? Better accommodation or facilities might help retention as well and isn’t anything with “sticker shock”? Outside of one offs, it’s not beyond the capacity of the budget to add say €100 million to the defence budget outside of capital spend I would say.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,143 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    Investing in infrastructure makes a lot of sense.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,107 ✭✭✭jonnybigwallet


    Them PC9's are supposed to have an out of service date of 2025. Why not replace them with PC21's which are considered to be a more viable LIFT aircraft?



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,950 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Because they have far longer than that left, because the mentioned limited capacity of the DOF/DF for procurement can be better spent, because if the AC is still trying to figure out what it might end up being, how about we wait till then before buying more trainers.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 24,104 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    As regular discussions here show, there is no point thinking about Ts unless we have Fs to LI to.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,451 ✭✭✭Dohvolle


    Would you be happier if it was? The point made was someone made the choice.

    Thats the actual job.



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,104 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Yeah it would actually be a good spend of that windfall to do accommodation and facilities for personnel and families generally.

    And the DF medical centre at the Don, and the national Army HQ too, if they could get their feckin act together and make a decision on some of these important elements in the re-org.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,143 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    Don't need a fighter to not shoot it down every time... just saying.... :)

    I just couldn't remember anytime it had happened. Where an unresponsive airliner was shot down to save a populated area.


    Though coincidentally watched "Cry of The Innocent (1980)" recently.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,143 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    Out of curiosity when the Casa go out on Maritime patrol. Where do they fly out of? Do they operate out of any of the regional airfields even for refuelling?



  • Registered Users Posts: 475 ✭✭delusiondestroyer


    While the window shopping by the "experts" on here about which jets would best soothe there wannabe top gun notions..


    The reality is this talk of jets for defence is extremely short sighted and makes me question even our own "experts" advocating for these expensive yet pointless show ponies.


    Let's entertain the scenario that alot of the experts on here are basing our need of such jets on... The dreaded Russians...


    Say they do encroach on our airspace and say they refuse to heed the warnings of the extremely hollow Irish airforce.. what do we do then they ve called our bluff and are saying we will stay our course and if you fire at us we will retaliate with full force.


    What do we do then? Our shiny show ponies are there and ready to go altho outnumbered and technologically outmatched.


    Option 1 : We open fire and down the Russian aircraft we are now in open war with Russia and Russia is entitled now to launch a full force response of it's choosing. We of course are completely banking on our handful of outdated jets to be our saviour.


    Now since we have given the RAF the middle finger because our "experts" on here have deemed ourselves big boys and should be able to defend ourselves. They laugh and gladly leave us to our devices.


    Needless to say our airforce has been made short work of and we are completely at the mercy of Russia.


    Option 2 : We let them fly harmlessly over and get on with our day. Country intact no one hurt win win.


    Option 3 : We do it properly we either completely get onboard with the RAF and have some form of a treaty where we contribute to a combined defense of Ireland and the UK. Or we join NATO and have a proper fully fleshed out military and allow NATO forces to station here.

    This notion that a handful of jets means defense tho is laughable they would be gone in the first meaningful exchange with a force capable of attacking Ireland.



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,104 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    I....

    Actually nevermind, I really can't be arsed.



  • Registered Users Posts: 314 ✭✭Grassy Knoll


    We join NATO IMHO. Equally do we think Denmark or Finland etc could credibly defeat the Russians singlehanded? All being equal I dont, nor do they, as they have voted with their feet and are in a military alliance. However, I don’t hear their defence (albeit much more potent than ours) being decried. The point of defence is to provide some form of deterrent and to also put something on the table so your allies are not doing all!the heavy lifting or assuming all the risk. De facto we are not neutral - in the air domain it has been revealed properly now we are in a (one sided)defence pact with the UK ….



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,107 ✭✭✭jonnybigwallet


    You raise some interesting points and scenarios. Clearly the answer must be that the AC must be more than a token number of "show ponies" but have an appropriate amount of aircraft to be a credible deterrent so that "Jonny Russian" does not even think of giving them the two fingers. I'm not suggesting arming up to the RAF level....but perhaps as many as 16 interceptors.

    BTW...nobody has suggested acquiring out of date gear as you seem to assume.

    Likewise I would argue that the navy needs at least one ship with war fighting capability for interception / shadowing the likes of the Admiral Grigorovitch.



  • Registered Users Posts: 475 ✭✭delusiondestroyer




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 475 ✭✭delusiondestroyer


    We'll be taking the good with the bad then, and have to be prepared to send our lads to Americas next Afghanistan then a prospect im sure would go down like a lead balloon with the general public. But it is our only option if actual functional defence in depth is a concern.

    Denmark and especially Finland geographically need to be in NATO they have no option's and its safer for everyone that they are.

    Ireland is a different ball game though we have multiple options and we can stay out of military alliances and still get the protection we seem to be mad about these days.

    Ego's aside we could very well enhance the "agreement" with the RAF and we would need no jets at all problem solved. Its a win for them as they get to plug a gap in defence and we dont have the expensive outlay of jets that realistically will never be put to use or used in anger... we have survived this long with no issues without an Air Force but now all of a sudden we have convinced ourselves the Russians are fixated on Ireland and are going to attack.. it really is laughable in all fairness...

    But realistically money talks and i cant see us getting jets any time soon as they aren't really needed.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,143 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    We didn't need a 2 billion euro hospital that gives no a single extra bed. But we got that...

    Incidentally we did have people in Afghanistan

    Ireland has no protection. It's completely open. Not sure why you think that's ok.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,950 ✭✭✭sparky42


    So much for the other thread drawing off the usual BS.



  • Registered Users Posts: 475 ✭✭delusiondestroyer


    If you had problems in a thread and you move to another thread and you still have problems has it ever occurred to you that perhaps ye might be the problem?

    Reading thru alot of your comments and Labres drivel i can see why you are both constantly causing issues, endless snide remarks and 0 tolerance to any opinion that doesn't fall in line with your own. And into the bargain you and your little clique attacking posters rather than the post. Typical keyboard warriors.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,143 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997



    The Poll was mine not theirs.

    The irony of attacking the posters not the post complaining about exactly that.

    We can't patrol our borders at sea or in the air. Regardless of any fantasy war scenario we have an obligation to police our territory.

    Even if we disagree other countries are asking us to get our house in order.



  • Registered Users Posts: 475 ✭✭delusiondestroyer


    Big difference between NATO frontline war fighting combat troops and a small detachment of IDF advisors out there doing admin work.

    We had no one of any note in Afghan and had 0 impact on the NATO mission there. Where as if we are actually in NATO our troops would be in combat situations and long tours and all that comes with it casualties ect.

    Ironically the hospital will probably protect and save far more public lives than the squadron of jets ever will.

    Ireland has been completely open since its founding and without incident which in and of itself is proof that we have never had any need of significant military infrastructure. This idea that we can buy a few jets and all that goes with em and suddenly be safe is complete fiction as i stated before outside of being in a military alliance like NATO small countries like Ireland cant in practical terms defend themselves.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,143 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997



    We've had loads of incidents you're just ignorant of them. We've had terror war since the foundation of the state. We've also been bombed from the air for example. Afghanistan is just another example of how ignorant of the subject you are. No offence.



  • Registered Users Posts: 475 ✭✭delusiondestroyer


    Name one poster that i have attacked?

    I posted a counter argument to the "we need jets" and highlight gaping holes in the logic and they took offense that's there problem they seem to get triggered by anyone that doesn't join the bandwagon.

    We don't have any obligations militarily we are a neutral country.



  • Registered Users Posts: 475 ✭✭delusiondestroyer


    Those soldiers in afghan were not there in combat roles they were there in advisor and admin roles.

    Read the article you posted yourself.

    We were bombed once by accident in WW2 now unless you are hardly using that as a reason to justify a fleet of fighter jets.


    In what way would jets have aided in our terror war...


    All due respect that's a strawman reply.

    Ireland is currently one of the safest countries in the world that's a fact.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 12,143 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    Factually incorrect diatribe isn't a counter argument. None of it was logical either.

    There are notable differences between Irish neutrality and “traditional” types of neutral states:

    Basically we are not neutral. The state has an obligation to protect itself and its people. Which it can't.



Advertisement