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
Ireland - lack of air and naval defence.
Options
Comments
-
-
Well, let's face it if the Chicoutimi had been a nuclear sub instead of a diesel-electric there might have been a different outcome to that incident.
I doubt it, the RN has fires aboard their SSN's/SSBN's fairly regularly since they've been in service, can't remember the exact number but it's something like 1 every 2-3 years, ranging from minor to fatal ones.0 -
so do these 3 primary radars have coverage of the whole the country? https://www.iaa.ie/surveillance-radar0
-
There are 4 sites, the 3 new ones and the (psr)primary radar at dublin. The whole country is covered0
-
It's surprising a security analysist was unable to locate this info0
-
Advertisement
-
Todd Toddington III wrote: »It's surprising a security analysist was unable to locate this info
https://www.newstalk.ie/Russia-a-real-and-present-danger-to-NATO-states
Tom Clonan says "we have no primary radar to speak of"
and then says "We cannot see them, We're probably the only country in the EU that cannot see into our own airspace with primary radar."
and repeats himself,"IAA cannot monitor Russian Aircraft with their transponder off because we don't have primary radar."
John Crown does asks whether we have "no defense radar"
and again says UK told us of the planes ( because they came from that direction!).
he also said it twice on twitter https://twitter.com/TomClonan/status/565581151969239043 think we're the only EU member that cannot 'See' into its own airspace with PRIMARY radar.
https://twitter.com/TomClonan/status/565570967234437120 IAA have NO primary radar.0 -
He's (Tom Clonan) is giving evidence on behalf of Clare Daly and Mick Wallace in the case of being charged wit unauthorised entry to SNN. He may have another agenda.0
-
We're going to need a radar before we start the space programme. Surely we need to show the Soviets whose boss by, not only building a radar bur by crushing their spirits by blasting into space. That'll show em.
I would oppose any significant amount of money being spent on Ireland's air defences so we can have some kind of token defence against... Who exactly?
Irish water is an expensive jobs programme but we actually need water.0 -
El_Duderino 09 wrote: »We're going to need a radar before we start the space programme. Surely we need to show the Soviets whose boss by, not only building a radar bur by crushing their spirits by blasting into space. That'll show em.
I would oppose any significant amount of money being spent on Ireland's air defences so we can have some kind of token defence against... Who exactly?
Irish water is an expensive jobs programme but we actually need water.
So you'd rather your water is paid for by Council Tax, Motor Tax, and Water Meters (yea, they were getting money from Motor Tax to supply water) rather than spending money on Defence?
You'd rather pay three times for one thing, than pay for something else once?0 -
IrishTrajan wrote: »So you'd rather your water is paid for by Council Tax, Motor Tax, and Water Meters (yea, they were getting money from Motor Tax to supply water) rather than spending money on Defence?
You'd rather pay three times for one thing, than pay for something else once?
Pay 3times? 3streams paying for one thing I think you mean.
Dodgy maths aside, we need one and have absolutely no need for the other.0 -
Advertisement
-
El_Duderino 09 wrote: »Pay 3times? 3streams paying for one thing I think you mean.
Dodgy maths aside, we need one and have absolutely no need for the other.
Of course! Let's just get rid of our Defence Forces. Give the naval service to the Gardai or the Coast Guard, throw the guns into the ocean, and sell the uniforms to some African despot somewhere.
It's not like we need a military to ensure Ireland's territorial integrity, it's not like we might need EOD to dispose of the dozens of bomb that need to be disarmed every year, it's not like we need to send people to U.N. mandated missions, it's not like we need well-trained soldiers to protect foreign diplomats or Heads of State. It's not like we need soldiers to counter the IRA/INLA et al's actions on the borders. It's not like, with Catholic population overtaking Protestant population, that we might need to police Northern Ireland and stop Troubles 2: Electric Boogaloo from taking place.
Let's take the €885 million defence budget, and give it away in Foreign Aid, or spend it on the HSE and hire some more administrators (despite us being heavily overstaffed).
Heck, why don't we just give the money to the TDs so they can fly to Paris to have their hair done, and fly to U.S. for a pair of shoes? Surely that's a better allocation of our resources.0 -
He's (Tom Clonan) is giving evidence on behalf of Clare Daly and Mick Wallace in the case of being charged wit unauthorised entry to SNN. He may have another agenda.
willing to give the worst case scenario for anyone, perhaps in court that might not have as much impact (to the case, on the judge) but when he does the same with the media they play it up and verge into the just wrong.
he been in the media recently talking about foreign fighters, russia military flights and Shannon could be target.0 -
El_Duderino 09 wrote: »We're going to need a radar before we start the space programme. Surely we need to show the Soviets whose boss by, not only building a radar bur by crushing their spirits by blasting into space. That'll show em.
I would oppose any significant amount of money being spent on Ireland's air defences so we can have some kind of token defence against... Who exactly?
Irish water is an expensive jobs programme but we actually need water.
Why does every bloody discussion always come back to Irish Water FFS?!0 -
IrishTrajan wrote: »Of course! Let's just get rid of our Defence Forces. Give the naval service to the Gardai or the Coast Guard, throw the guns into the ocean, and sell the uniforms to some African despot somewhere.
It's not like we need a military to ensure Ireland's territorial integrity, it's not like we might need EOD to dispose of the dozens of bomb that need to be disarmed every year, it's not like we need to send people to U.N. mandated missions, it's not like we need well-trained soldiers to protect foreign diplomats or Heads of State. It's not like we need soldiers to counter the IRA/INLA et al's actions on the borders. It's not like, with Catholic population overtaking Protestant population, that we might need to police Northern Ireland and stop Troubles 2: Electric Boogaloo from taking place.
Let's take the €885 million defence budget, and give it away in Foreign Aid, or spend it on the HSE and hire some more administrators (despite us being heavily overstaffed).
Heck, why don't we just give the money to the TDs so they can fly to Paris to have their hair done, and fly to U.S. for a pair of shoes? Surely that's a better allocation of our resources.
Well that went from 0-crazy in 2 posts. I didn't propose any of the measures you suggested in that semi-lucid rant above. I think this thread is about Ireland's air and naval defense. Specifically a radar which we absolutely don't need. E1 spent on a Fancy Dan radar is a euro wasted.
I don't want to tell people on the military forum that the Irish army is seen by most people as an elaborate welfare programme. I imagine we need some of them to wear their costumes while they escort the president and some to go peacekeeping with the UN. We don't need half as many toy soldiers as we have. Since you brought it up I imagine we could halve the budget without being inconvenienced in the slightest. Not sure I agree with how you propose to spend the saving though.
Ireland's geographical position makes it more valuable to the US, UK and Europe than we could ever afford to pay to defend it. In other words if anyone tried to invade, it would be worth their money to defend us in a way we could never afford to do. If on the other hand any of them decided to invade us we would go broke before we could muster anything but token defence. We have 7500 in the army. That's hardly enough to defend any one city let alone the country so were already depend on either:
1 Nobody will invade.
2 If someone does invade, someone else will defend us.
Back to my original point, no to the radar unless it's part of a space programme0 -
El_Duderino 09 wrote: »Well that went from 0-crazy in 2 posts. I didn't propose any of the measures you suggested in that semi-lucid rant above. I think this thread is about Ireland's air and naval defense. Specifically a radar which we absolutely don't need. E1 spent on a Fancy Dan radar is a euro wasted.
I don't want to tell people on the military forum that the Irish army is seen by most people as an elaborate welfare programme. I imagine we need some of them to wear their costumes while they escort the president and some to go peacekeeping with the UN. We don't need half as many toy soldiers as we have. Since you brought it up I imagine we could halve the budget without being inconvenienced in the slightest. Not sure I agree with how you propose to spend the saving though.
Ireland's geographical position makes it more valuable to the US, UK and Europe than we could ever afford to pay to defend it. In other words if anyone tried to invade, it would be worth their money to defend us in a way we could never afford to do. If on the other hand any of them decided to invade us we would go broke before we could muster anything but token defence. We have 7500 in the army. That's hardly enough to defend any one city let alone the country so were already depend on either:
1 Nobody will invade.
2 If someone does invade, someone else will defend us.
Back to my original point, no to the radar unless it's part of a space programme
We went from zero to fed up in 2 posts. Aye, €1 on a radar system that might last 20-25 years is a waste, let's just give more money to people on the dole so they won't have to work a day in their life.
The DF is welfare? Incredibly poor welfare in that case, since like 30% of its budget is spent on pensions. Cut it by half? We're going by the bare bones are the minute, and you want to cut it by half? Are you off your rocker? If you're going to cut anything, cut the god damn social welfare bill. We spent like €19.5bn on welfare. You're complaining about the Army being like welfare, well cut the actual god damned welfare budget. The dole is too lucrative, people don't want to work.
And how we would stop them with 4000 men? They fought to control a country nine times our size, against 60-75,000 insurgency fighters. I guess since defending the State isn't going to come about, we might as well just disband the military.
7500 would defend a city. It'd actually defend 2-3, depending on how well armed they are, how populated the city is, the willingness of the other side to commit atrocities, what the weather is like, how easily you can get supplies to them... And so on. Even dismissing fighting a conventional war, we would still need to buy weapons and ammunition to fight the war, and if its the British, you think the Americans are going to be the ones throwing pennies into buckets?.. Or do you think we already have hundreds of thousands of rounds squirreled away for a rainy day? Or will Damo and Tiriiisha be the ones to donate their welfare payments?
Here's a compromise: Anyone in receipt of unemployment benefit for more than 6 months has to attend military training in the Reserves. They don't get extra money, instead they won't get their welfare cut off. They can avoid this, by, you know, getting a job.0 -
this is interesting
Russian Inspectors to Fly Over Spain, Portugal Under Open Skies TreatyTHE Treaty on Open Skies, signed on March 24, 1992, in Helsinki, established a regime of unarmed aerial observation flights over the territories of its 34 member-states, which include the majority of NATO countries, Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, Georgia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, as well as Sweden and Finland
http://sputniknews.com/military/20150301/1018902982.html#ixzz3TDpjeRa0
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_Open_Skies
24 Russia military surveillance Open Skies Treaty missions have taken place over the UK since 2002 http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2013-09-02d.166929.h&s=open+skies+treaty#g166929.q00 -
IrishTrajan wrote: »We went from zero to fed up in 2 posts. Aye, €1 on a radar system that might last 20-25 years is a waste, let's just give more money to people on the dole so they won't have to work a day in their life.
The DF is welfare? Incredibly poor welfare in that case, since like 30% of its budget is spent on pensions. Cut it by half? We're going by the bare bones are the minute, and you want to cut it by half? Are you off your rocker? If you're going to cut anything, cut the god damn social welfare bill. We spent like €19.5bn on welfare. You're complaining about the Army being like welfare, well cut the actual god damned welfare budget. The dole is too lucrative, people don't want to work.
And how we would stop them with 4000 men? They fought to control a country nine times our size, against 60-75,000 insurgency fighters. I guess since defending the State isn't going to come about, we might as well just disband the military.
7500 would defend a city. It'd actually defend 2-3, depending on how well armed they are, how populated the city is, the willingness of the other side to commit atrocities, what the weather is like, how easily you can get supplies to them... And so on. Even dismissing fighting a conventional war, we would still need to buy weapons and ammunition to fight the war, and if its the British, you think the Americans are going to be the ones throwing pennies into buckets?.. Or do you think we already have hundreds of thousands of rounds squirreled away for a rainy day? Or will Damo and Tiriiisha be the ones to donate their welfare payments?
Here's a compromise: Anyone in receipt of unemployment benefit for more than 6 months has to attend military training in the Reserves. They don't get extra money, instead they won't get their welfare cut off. They can avoid this, by, you know, getting a job.
It's difficult to parse out the actual questions from the ranting. If you want me to address any aspects of the above post let me know. Beyond that it stands as a monument to straw-manning.0 -
El_Duderino 09 wrote: »Well that went from 0-crazy in 2 posts. I didn't propose any of the measures you suggested in that semi-lucid rant above. I think this thread is about Ireland's air and naval defense. Specifically a radar which we absolutely don't need. E1 spent on a Fancy Dan radar is a euro wasted.
I don't want to tell people on the military forum that the Irish army is seen by most people as an elaborate welfare programme. I imagine we need some of them to wear their costumes while they escort the president and some to go peacekeeping with the UN. We don't need half as many toy soldiers as we have. Since you brought it up I imagine we could halve the budget without being inconvenienced in the slightest. Not sure I agree with how you propose to spend the saving though.
Ireland's geographical position makes it more valuable to the US, UK and Europe than we could ever afford to pay to defend it. In other words if anyone tried to invade, it would be worth their money to defend us in a way we could never afford to do. If on the other hand any of them decided to invade us we would go broke before we could muster anything but token defence. We have 7500 in the army. That's hardly enough to defend any one city let alone the country so were already depend on either:
1 Nobody will invade.
2 If someone does invade, someone else will defend us.
Back to my original point, no to the radar unless it's part of a space programme
[MOD]
1. we don't wear costumes, we take an oath to defend this country and its civilians and protect its democratic constitution and we wear the uniform of our nation including the national flag with pride.
2. If we were invaded, yes indeed, someone else in the EU may very well come to defend us, but not until many of your own countrymen may already have spilled their blood defending the innocent free people of this country.
3. Some of the comments may be insulting to members and former members of the military. Please feel free to debate issues but be careful to adhere to the forum charter, some of what you have written may be deemed disrespectful.
4. Apologies for the initial manner in which i replied, i should probably give myself a card for being baited so easily whether intentional or not.
[/MOD]0 -
Apologies to anyone I offended. I'll leave you to it.0
-
http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2015032400013?opendocument#L00550Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Defence Information on Simon Coveney Zoom on Simon Coveney if he remains satisfied that the Defence Forces are adequately equipped to detect incursions into Irish air space by potentially hostile intruders, manned or unmanned; if counter offensive measures need to be updated; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11647/15]
Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: This question concerns the need for the Air Corps to be in a position to monitor and, if necessary, intercept aircraft intruding into Irish air space, as well as being in a position to identify the purpose of the mission.
Deputy Simon Coveney: I answered a similar question earlier. Under the current strategy which dates back to the 2000 White Paper on Defence, the role of the Air Corps is limited to surveillance and some limited defence capacity.
hostile unmanned aircraft... which country is keeping Deputy Durkan up at nght?Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: Would the Minister agree that in the course of that risk assessment, it might be useful to include the use in some quarters of unmanned aircraft which continue to be employed in many locations throughout the globe? In the context of discussion with his EU colleagues, has any consideration been given to the vulnerability of neutral states within the European Union whereby there might be a security deficit compared to best practice internationally?
Deputy Simon Coveney:The Deputy will be glad to hear we already use drones, or unmanned aircraft. The Army uses them in terms of surveillance, target accuracy and so on.
The Naval Service is also testing drones and considering their use to push back the horizon and improve surveillance capacity. We have some technology companies that are developing and designing new drone technology. Ireland will be one of the world's leading countries in designing and developing the next drone technology which will actually attract more civil than military use. It is a space in which we are very active. Enterprise Ireland and Science Foundation Ireland have been examining it also.
we're always leading the world in everything aren't we.0 -
Advertisement
-
Coveney hits out at Russia for military flights through Irish-controlled airspace http://www.newstalk.com/Coveney-hits-out-at-Russia-for-military-flights-through-Irishcontrolled-airpsaceThe Defence Minister has lashed out at Russia for flying military planes through Irish-controlled airspace without permission.
it doesn't read like a lashing http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2015032400008?opendocument
https://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2015-03-24a.86&s=calm+speaker%3A76#g100Simon Coveney: We need to try to have a calm response to these things.
Simon Coveney is NOT happy about Russian war planes flying close to Ireland http://www.thejournal.ie/russian-planes-irish-airspace-2010461-Mar2015/He said that monitoring up to 40 or 50 kilometres off the Irish coast and out into the Atlantic Ocean would require long-range radar equipment which “has a cost” that is currently being examined by his department.
https://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2015-03-24a.74&s=radar+speaker%3A76#g77We have radar capacity along the west coast that covers the vast majority of our air space, as it happens. If the Deputy is talking about further out to sea, 30 km to 50 km into the Atlantic and into international air space, he is talking about long-range equipment, which has a cost implication.
still need clarity how far we can see, its civilian thing too so they can't so its an operational secret.0 -
At least Coveney looks like he believes the DF needs investment. I'd probably prefer him to take over FG than Varadkar.0
-
IrishTrajan wrote: »At least Coveney looks like he believes the DF needs investment. I'd probably prefer him to take over FG than Varadkar.
and continue in the grand tradition of deciding our foreign policy based on who we can sell beef to0 -
expectationlost wrote: »http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2015032400013?opendocument#L00550
hostile unmanned aircraft which country is keeping Deputy Durkan up at nght?
we're always leading the world in everything aren't we.
Well we did come up with the worlds first submarine (Holland)
A Mayo man "Brennan" invented the first guided missile (a wire guided brennan torpedo - used to protect ports - the launching rails for which are still in the slipway in the harbour forts in Cork) - he also invented one of the first helicopters for the RAF.0 -
-
Todd Toddington III wrote: »It's surprising a security analysist was unable to locate this info
here he is again
https://twitter.com/TomClonan/status/582218952086011904The only primary radar in Ireland is operated by Air Defence Regt - Small range. IAA have 2ndary radar-cannot 'see'At these sites we have eight new Mode-S Radars and three new Solid State Primary Radars, in addition to a traditional MSSR/PSR combined Radar at one of our Dublin sites. - See more at: https://www.iaa.ie/surveillance-radar#sthash.k3o5i4RA.dpuf
tell me I am misunderstanding what IAA is saying about primary radar or Tom Clonan is wrong?
https://twitter.com/TomClonan/status/582218682685923328And so - IAA cannot see or detect Russian or NATO aircraft in our controlled airspace unless they want to be seen
which was in response to an article in the ST
Jets undetected over west coast ST paywall
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/ireland/article1537552.ece?CMP=OTH-gnws-standard-2015_03_28IRELAND does not have long-range radar capacity along its west coast that could identify aircraft travelling with their flight transponders switched off, and the government is studying the cost of installing such a system, Simon Coveney, the defence minister, has revealed.
I did some very rough measuring on google earth, Im not sure im right, but the question arises does anyone expect us to build radar that could see ~300kms beyond our territory across the entire Irish controlled international airspace box? I don't think anyone actually does. So what exactly are they considering?
https://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2015-03-24a.74&s=radar#g77We have radar capacity along the west coast that covers the vast majority of our air space, as it happens. If the Deputy is talking about further out to sea, 30 km to 50 km into the Atlantic and into international air space, he is talking about long-range equipment, which has a cost implication.
so we could not see the aircraft that travel in irish controlled space 50kms out in january but could we see them if they wer 25kms out as they were in february?
although Coveney says
https://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2015-03-24a.35&s=radar#g43The only reason we knew they were there was the United Kingdom had informed us. The focus must be on our capacity to understand and know what is travelling through our airspace. We do not have long range radar capacity to do this along the west coast.
or because they were coming from the their direction?0 -
First you must understand the problem:
I had a simplistic understanding of this myself and if im honest googled this: however heres a best attempt at what I remember reading - open to correction:
Transponders:
Aircraft fly with a device called a "transponder". its by usually switched on.
it receives radio signals from secondary radar - interrogating it - and it sends a code back in answer. To do this it re-transmits on the same frequency as the querying radar.
Now to radar: there are two types available to the Irish aviation authority:
Primary and Secondary radar.
Primary radar sends out a pulse of radio energy into the airspace around it which then reflects off any objects in it (planes) and bounces back to be received by the primary radar station again. These "radar" signals will be reflected off an aircraft, Primary radar works regardless of the aircraft's transponder. This gives a basic bearing and distance of the aircraft relative to the radars location which can then be converted into a ground position for display to the Air Traffic Controllers. At this point we just know there is an aircraft a certain distance and bearing away from the radars position.
A Secondary "surveillance" Radar does similar however, as mentioned above, it works in conjunction with the aircrafts transponder. its radar signals are processed and then re-transmitted by each aircraft's "transponder" providing greater information on the aircraft itself.
Thus, a cooperating aircraft will be detected by primary and secondary radar.
A non-transponder transmitting aircraft (eg. russian bomber with transponder turned off) will just be detected by primary radar, albeit with no info on what it is etc. This is why almost every EU country except ireland have interceptor aircraft to police the airspace around them and provide a modicum of safety for transponding
aircraft.
It was a cheap trick the russians pulled and one we can actually do nothing about - at the minute.
The UK thankfully intercepted and shared the information on the aircraft with our government or at least with our air traffic control.
If you think of the thousands of flights and hundreds of thousands of innocent people transiting through both near international AND irish airspace daily, this was a serious incident and served to highlight the literally laughable state of our ability to police our own airspace.
like ive said. take 100m out of the O/S aid budget per annum and invest in getting a leased Saab Gripen squadron of aircraft for the aircorps from sweden - like slovakia and czech republic have done. 78m or thereabouts per year is all it costs.0 -
First you must understand the problem:
I had a simplistic understanding of this myself and if im honest googled this: however heres a best attempt at what I remember reading - open to correction:
Transponders:
Aircraft fly with a device called a "transponder". its by usually switched on.
it receives radio signals from secondary radar - interrogating it - and it sends a code back in answer. To do this it re-transmits on the same frequency as the querying radar.
Now to radar: there are two types available to the Irish aviation authority:
Primary and Secondary radar.
Primary radar sends out a pulse of radio energy into the airspace around it which then reflects off any objects in it (planes) and bounces back to be received by the primary radar station again. These "radar" signals will be reflected off an aircraft, Primary radar works regardless of the aircraft's transponder. This gives a basic bearing and distance of the aircraft relative to the radars location which can then be converted into a ground position for display to the Air Traffic Controllers. At this point we just know there is an aircraft a certain distance and bearing away from the radars position.
A Secondary "surveillance" Radar does similar however, as mentioned above, it works in conjunction with the aircrafts transponder. its radar signals are processed and then re-transmitted by each aircraft's "transponder" providing greater information on the aircraft itself.
Thus, a cooperating aircraft will be detected by primary and secondary radar.
A non-transponder transmitting aircraft (eg. russian bomber with transponder turned off) will just be detected by primary radar, albeit with no info on what it is etc. This is why almost every EU country except ireland have interceptor aircraft to police the airspace around them and provide a modicum of safety for transponding
aircraft.
It was a cheap trick the russians pulled and one we can actually do nothing about - at the minute.
The UK thankfully intercepted and shared the information on the aircraft with our government or at least with our air traffic control.
If you think of the thousands of flights and hundreds of thousands of innocent people transiting through both near international AND irish airspace daily, this was a serious incident and served to highlight the literally laughable state of our ability to police our own airspace.
yes my understanding is also very basic but my understanding is the same as yours, Tom Clonan is saying we don't have primary radar, while the IAA website says we do ( putting our limited range mobile defence weapons systems aside)
as Simon Coveney surely increasing radar range would be better to do then buying aircraft, would you suggest buying radar that could see 320kms?0 -
" - like slovakia and czech republic have done. 78m or thereabouts per year is all it costs."
To get them. yes . But the more expensive bit will be running them - training pilots -ect-
Bit like a 17 y.o. buying a second hand S class on done deal - but can't afford the tax- insurance or garage bills. The 5litre engines a bit thirsty and he hasn't got a licence yet anyway -Slava ukraini 🇺🇦
0 -
Advertisement
-
Markcheese wrote: »" - like slovakia and czech republic have done. 78m or thereabouts per year is all it costs."
To get them. yes . But the more expensive bit will be running them - training pilots -ect-
Bit like a 17 y.o. buying a second hand S class on done deal - but can't afford the tax- insurance or garage bills. The 5litre engines a bit thirsty and he hasn't got a licence yet anyway -
Or the garage to store it or al the bits to add on either.0
Advertisement