Should Ireland buy fighter jets?

cold_filter

I suppose this was at it highest post 9/11 when there was a credible attack on the UK by hijacked planes. During the time in question people had said ireland has no airplanes capable of catching an airline flying over the country and that if ireland was under attack itself it would to call in the RAF.

Do you think we should have something capable of neutralising a threat like this or any other unforseen threat?

As the tomcat has been retired we could probably pick up a few of those cheap, or even some F15/F16s?

Nuttzz

this has been done to death, as far as most people are concerned the cost outweights the benefits

Maskhadov

Yes because they are cheap for us now and we are a soverign nation.

AlmightyCushion

It's more than just the cost of buying them. There is also the cost of training, maintenace and various other things. Also I seem to remeber that when George Bush came over for a visit, there was talk of the RAF having a few fighter jets stationed here but there was no hanger big enough for them to be stored. Correct me if I'm wrong people.

Judt

Same as the MBT argument. They'd be nice, but only if you're paying for them... The 9/11 argument resonates with me, and I do find it a tad embarrassing that we can't defend our own airspace, and only recently acquired the capability to do a half-good job of patrolling our territorial waters; and I would rate a few fighter jets for home defence above the need for MBT's or similar, but I can't see it happening. Nor do I see the threat from aircraft falling out of the skies being so high these days that we need it urgently.

So, if I had an extra few million to buy something for the DF, a few fighter jets might be on the cards. But we don't, and they'd still have to fight with the other services for things that, if we had the money, everyone could really use with.

Zambia

Would a missile defence system be worth investing in something like a Rapier System or one more up to date.

You could set it up on the top off the Salt and Pepper Buildings on the Quays.

Mick86

cold_filter wrote:

Should Ireland Buy Fighter Jets

Yawn

Cake Fiend

Ask the 5000+ homeless on the streets of Ireland whether we should buy fighter jets. Or all the people in hospitals around the country waiting for beds.

Dirk Gently

Judt wrote:

and I do find it a tad embarrassing that we can't defend our own airspace,.

defend against what? If someone is going to crash a plane into a target in Dublin they're not going to radio ahead and give a jet time to intercept. They'll just hijack the plane on aproach to Dublin and the first anyone will know about it is when it crashes into the molly malone statue on grafton street. The USAF didn't exactly stop 9/11 from happening.

Hagar

Cake Fiend you have only posted on this forum twice. The post above and an identical word for word, except for the picture, post on St Patrick's day.

There will probably be another thread on aircraft in about 6 weeks I'll give you a heads up then and you can repost the same response. If you're busy let me know and I''l cut and paste it for you.

In the meantime keep up the good work doing whatever it is you do to help the homeless and improve the health service.

Meanwhile back at the ranch...

arybvtcw0eolkf

Cake Fiend I doubt I'm not the only one offended by that picture.

Maskhadov

we should buy 60 Eurofighters.

Boston

Whats boring about this arguement is that it is always the same. People without the first clue of anything talking about buying jets on the cheap and sure we'ed only need about two and all the rest. You're talking about a major investment if you want to secure our air space complete from an attack like 9/11, which to be honest isn't even that logically.

pwd

It would be cheaper to stop using shannon as a military base in order to prevent a terrorist attack.

Boston

pwd wrote:

It would be cheaper to stop using shannon as a military base in order to prevent a terrorist attack.

Actually yea, thats a very good point.

jmayo

Maskhadov wrote : we should buy 60 Eurofighters
You really are pricesless.
Why stop at 60 throw in a few F18s, C17s, Apaches go the whole hog...

Judt

Yarp. Take all my posts in the MBT thread, adjust slightly for aircraft, enjoy. It's the logistics, stupid.

Maskhadov

60 Eurofighters X €44 unit cost = €2.64bn

its peanuts.

Vorsprung

Maskhadov wrote:

60 Eurofighters X €44 unit cost = €2.64bn

its peanuts.

Wahey

Maskhadov's back spouting peanuts! Don't you get that the real cost of 60 jets is way above that figure. Add in training, maintenace, facilities, fuel, it's so so far above that figure. Plus there's no need. Plus we can spend the money on actual threats. Like infections. And miseducation.

And i see your idea of what the Air Corps should buy has inflated since this thread. Did Bertie let you in on some thread that he forgot to tell the rest of us about?! :eek:

Maskhadov

add another €1bn for training, hangars and spare parts. its still cheap.

Vorsprung

You really don't know much about this kind of stuff, do you?

Maskhadov

more than you.

Ruen

You really don't know much about this kind of stuff, do you?

Maskhadov wrote:

more than you.

That is classic, boards is getting funnier by the minute espescially when it comes to military topics(check the one in AH about dog tags)

Vorsprung

Forget AH.

This should be moved to Humour.

Hagar

bigjimthefirst wrote:

Forget AH.

This should be moved to Humour.

I mod Humour too, you're not really helping me much...:D

Vorsprung

Hagar wrote:

I mod Humour too, you're not really helping me much...:D

Maybe the Dreaming forum then

Maskhadov

:d:d:d

OS119

no, Ireland should not buy fast jets.

to effectively undertake the QRA role requires an aircraft of the F-16C/D Blk52 class or above. to have three aircraft on standby 24/7 (minimum reqiorement) and six available to undertake UN/EU missions (Lebanon, Liberia, Kosovo, Bosnia et al) would require an initial fleet of some 36 - 40 airframes with another 14 - 18 purchaced as replacements over the 30+ years of the lifetime of the fleet.

thats about $4billion in up front costs for the airframes - not including training, airfields, maintainence facilities, MLU's and personel. running costs for a 36 - 40 fast-jet air force would run at about $700 million per year, minimum.

do a proper deal with your next door neighbour, get guarrenteed aircover (from a platform thats a damn sight better than F-16C/D and has AWACS and Tanker support) as part of an integrated air defence and ATC network and in exchange spend $1 billion on capital purchases of two LPD/MRV, 30-odd real support helicopters, deployable - and credible - armour, and spend an extra $300million per year on increased international training and getting the RDF upto speed so it can deploy overseas.

Steyr

OS119 wrote:

no, Ireland should not buy fast jets.

to effectively undertake the QRA role requires an aircraft of the F-16C/D Blk52 class or above. to have three aircraft on standby 24/7 (minimum reqiorement) and six available to undertake UN/EU missions (Lebanon, Liberia, Kosovo, Bosnia et al) would require an initial fleet of some 36 - 40 airframes with another 14 - 18 purchaced as replacements over the 30+ years of the lifetime of the fleet.

thats about $4billion in up front costs for the airframes - not including training, airfields, maintainence facilities, MLU's and personel. running costs for a 36 - 40 fast-jet air force would run at about $700 million per year, minimum.

do a proper deal with your next door neighbour, get guarrenteed aircover (from a platform thats a damn sight better than F-16C/D and has AWACS and Tanker support) as part of an integrated air defence and ATC network and in exchange spend $1 billion on capital purchases of two LPD/MRV, 30-odd real support helicopters, deployable - and credible - armour, and spend an extra $300million per year on increased international training and getting the RDF upto speed so it can deploy overseas.

Well said OS119.

Firstly it would take more years and where are the Pilots? The AC is very very strict regarding fly boys, on some Boards they reckon the AC should allow NCO's to become pilots which we should do anyway like the Brits do.

Whats better than the F-16? Are you talking about the Typhoon?:D Oh and we already have AWACS.

Maskhadov

if we did buy them, do we have the young people to fly them ??

I think you need high maths and top quality eye sight

OS119

Steyr wrote:

Well said OS119.

Firstly it would take more years and where are the Pilots? The AC is very very strict regarding fly boys, on some Boards they reckon the AC should allow NCO's to become pilots which we should do anyway like the Brits do.

Whats better than the F-16? Are you talking about the Typhoon?:D Oh and we already have AWACS.

you have a population of 6 million. if you can't find 90-odd helicopter pilots then you have a problen with your national gene pool.

you don't have AWACS, you have a maritime patrol aircraft with an capability to do a very limited Air Search. Typhoon is an order of magnitude better than a late block F-16 in Air-to-Air operations: faster, more manouverable, much longer ranged, better armed, better sensor systems, less observable, and much safer over water having two engines instead of one - the Americans judge it to be second only to the F-22 in Air-Dominance operations.

AlmightyCushion

In an ideal world. Yes having a fleet of top of fighter jets at our disposal to defend ourselves would be brilliant. But right now we simply don't have the money. The costs simply don't outweigh the benefits.

OS119

AlmightyCushion wrote:

But right now we simply don't have the money. The costs simply don't outweigh the benefits.

you do have the money, Irelands GDP is about $126 billion US and its government income is some $62billion US. you could therefore easily afford $3 to 4 billion US in capital purchases (particularly as delivery of 40 airframes would take several years - as would the training of 80-odd Irish fast jet pilots - therefore the capital expenditure would be spread over perhaps 4 years) and $600 - 700 million US in annual costs.

you choose not to.

in my view thats a fair judgement given your geographic location and your political relations with your nearest neighbour - who by comparision is very well equipped with air defence equipment and is reasonably happy to cover your very limited needs in parallel with her own.

in future however your neighbour may want a quid pro quo for her services, may withdraw the service, or indeed may not be able to offer the service given her own vital national interests.

AlmightyCushion

At the moment our infrastructure and health service are in a terrible state so there is no way the cost could be justified. Especially like you point out that Britain is more than willing to help out. I can't see them stopping this service to us anytime in the near future but if they do.......

Boston

OS119 wrote:

in my view thats a fair judgement given your geographic location and your political relations with your nearest neighbour - who by comparision is very well equipped with air defence equipment and is reasonably happy to cover your very limited needs in parallel with her own.

in future however your neighbour may want a quid pro quo for her services, may withdraw the service, or indeed may not be able to offer the service given her own vital national interests.

If someone did take over an air liner and fly it into something here, while the brits stood by and did nothing to stop it despite being able to, there would be political and economic ramifications far outweighing the actual damage done by the plan. It's in their best interest to watch our sky.

Cake Fiend

Hagar wrote:

Cake Fiend you have only posted on this forum twice. The post above and an identical word for word, except for the picture, post on St Patrick's day.

The reason being, each time that this topic is trotted out (again and again...), my point is still valid. There seems to be a distressing number of people who would prefer that the country spend millions on things that fly and go bang than on real issues. Hell, spending more money on armour etc. for overseas troops would be a better idea than buying a load of jets that are going to sit and rust somewhere.

Guy:Incognito

AlmightyCushion wrote:

In an ideal world. Yes having a fleet of top of fighter jets at our disposal to defend ourselves would be brilliant. But right now we simply don't have the money. The costs simply don't outweigh the benefits.

Surely in an ideal world there would be no evil do-ers in the first place?

Mick86

Boston wrote:

If someone did take over an air liner and fly it into something here, while the brits stood by and did nothing to stop it despite being able to, there would be political and economic ramifications far outweighing the actual damage done by the plan. It's in their best interest to watch our sky.

I'd love to know what those economic and political ramifications might be.

BostonB

Mick86 wrote:

I'd love to know what those economic and political ramifications might be.

Very cheap RyanAir seats?

Boston

Mick86 wrote:

I'd love to know what those economic and political ramifications might be.

OK, so what do you think would happen?

you seem incapable of engaging in a little thought process, have a think about Anglo-Irish political and economic links over the last 50 or so years.

Moorzeyyy

The navigation systems and instruments inside the pc-9s is one of the most sifisticated equipment in an air craft in the world!


/ Edit Not impressed with the shouting...

BostonB

Moorzeyyy wrote:

The navigation systems and instruments inside the pc-9s is one of the most sifisticated equipment in an air craft in the world!

Oh dear.

OS119

Boston wrote:

If someone did take over an air liner and fly it into something here, while the brits stood by and did nothing to stop it despite being able to, there would be political and economic ramifications far outweighing the actual damage done by the plan. It's in their best interest to watch our sky.

its only in the UK's interests to police your airspace because you don't.

we police your airspace on your behalf out of the goodness of our hearts, if you - as a soveriegn nation - choose not to secure your own airspace despite having the cash to do so then you need to accept that the 'service' we provide will be on our terms and in our interests.

if something happens over Dublin then, assuming your ATC and government can get its act together and actually let us know, we will try to do something about it. however you should note an aspect of geography. UK AD aircraft are based in eastern England and northern Scotland - a legacy of both World War Two and the cold war - it is going to take some effort to find out there's a problem, get a ministerial order to do something about it (and deciding the ROE's in conjunction with the Irish Government) abnd then getting a Typhoon or Tornado F3 to Dublin in time to solve the problem, rather than provide a CAP for a large, smoking, hole in Dublin city centre.

as to your point, if you choose not to spend money on your own defence despite a significant threat, ask HMG to provide your defence without making a financial contribution and then whinge when that defence doesn't do what you want it to, then the response of HMG will be a good, loud 'Fcuk Off!'

the economic and political effects you allude to will all be negative. for Ireland.

no one in their right mind is going to invest in a country that makes no effort to defend itself in the face of a proven threat and then whinges when other people don't do it for them. should such a thing happen then onlookers will say how sorry they are.

and mutter "Twats" under their breath while moving elsewhere.

Judt

While I agree in principal that Ireland should be able to defend herself from all threats, I would ask where these fleets of hijacked aircraft aimed at Dublin's Fair City would happen to be? If somebody has the balls and the brains to hijack an A340 then he'll fly it the 15 minutes to Cardiff at least. Ireland's security from these threats is down the intelligence end of things, to prevent a boyo with a pipe bomb dropped into a bin in Dundrum Shopping Center.

BostonB

OS119 wrote:

its only in the UK's interests to police your airspace because you don't......however you should note an aspect of geography. UK AD aircraft are based in eastern England and northern Scotland....

So based on your own comments its not priority for the RAF either.

Boston

OS119 wrote:

its only in the UK's interests to police your airspace because you don't.

we police your airspace on your behalf out of the goodness of our hearts, if you - as a soveriegn nation - choose not to secure your own airspace despite having the cash to do so then you need to accept that the 'service' we provide will be on our terms and in our interests.

if something happens over Dublin then, assuming your ATC and government can get its act together and actually let us know, we will try to do something about it. however you should note an aspect of geography. UK AD aircraft are based in eastern England and northern Scotland - a legacy of both World War Two and the cold war - it is going to take some effort to find out there's a problem, get a ministerial order to do something about it (and deciding the ROE's in conjunction with the Irish Government) abnd then getting a Typhoon or Tornado F3 to Dublin in time to solve the problem, rather than provide a CAP for a large, smoking, hole in Dublin city centre.

as to your point, if you choose not to spend money on your own defence despite a significant threat, ask HMG to provide your defence without making a financial contribution and then whinge when that defence doesn't do what you want it to, then the response of HMG will be a good, loud 'Fcuk Off!'

the economic and political effects you allude to will all be negative. for Ireland.

no one in their right mind is going to invest in a country that makes no effort to defend itself in the face of a proven threat and then whinges when other people don't do it for them. should such a thing happen then onlookers will say how sorry they are.

and mutter "Twats" under their breath while moving elsewhere.

Well it's like this mate, if a plan is hijacked over the Irish see, they'll either head back towards Dublin or towards the west coast of England, which do you think is more likely?. So yes, it is in the brits best interest to protect our airspace. Also, I don't think it is a proven threat.

OS119

Boston wrote:

Well it's like this mate, if a plan is hijacked over the Irish see, they'll either head back towards Dublin or towards the west coast of England, which do you think is more likely?. So yes, it is in the brits best interest to protect our airspace. Also, I don't think it is a proven threat.

which is why we police our skies. until its on our airspace - and therefore able to hit a UK target - then its not our problem.

if it does come into UK airspace we can shoot it down. you don't have that luxury.

you also completely ignore the deterent inherent in having such a capability. a person hijacking an aircraft in UK airspace knows there is a significant chance of the Aircraft being shot down and therefore instead of ending his his life in a ball of holy flame that engulfs whatever prestigous target he's chosen, he may well end his life in a muddy field in suffolk having achieved SFA.

indeed in the most extreme example that you alude to, if a wannabe suicide hijacker is over the Irish Sea with a pair of Typhoons to his East and nothing to his west, then its somewhat unlikely he'll opt for Cardiff as a target.

Boston

OS119 wrote:

which is why we police our skies. until its on our airspace - and therefore able to hit a UK target - then its not our problem.

if it does come into UK airspace we can shoot it down. you don't have that luxury.

you also completely ignore the deterent inherent in having such a capability. a person hijacking an aircraft in UK airspace knows there is a significant chance of the Aircraft being shot down and therefore instead of ending his his life in a ball of holy flame that engulfs whatever prestigous target he's chosen, he may well end his life in a muddy field in suffolk having achieved SFA.

indeed in the most extreme example that you alude to, if a wannabe suicide hijacker is over the Irish Sea with a pair of Typhoons to his East and nothing to his west, then its somewhat unlikely he'll opt for Cardiff as a target.

But you just said theres a problem with getting Jets there in time? The see aint exactly huge. Would it not be better to stop a hijacked plan before it reached your air space? Raf do provide support and I don't believe for a second they do so out of the kindness of their hearts, they do it, because we're in your back yard.

Zambia

Ireland could of course spend some cash and have a very basic Air defence. Personnally I think its a little embrassing to not be able to defend against a civilian airliner. While I agree the money could be spent elsewhere , if we where hit by this type of attack in the future. The first thing we would do afterwards is buy a fighter jet.

Plus if we didnt need fighters why did we buy those Fuego things when there was no one prepared to attack us?

Boston

Zambia232 wrote:

Ireland could of course spend some cash and have a very basic Air defence. Personnally I think its a little embrassing to not be able to defend against a civilian airliner. While I agree the money could be spent elsewhere , if we where hit by this type of attack in the future.

But oddly enough you're not embarassed at the state of the health system. OS119 talks about billions in capital lay out and hundreds of million in maintainance and support per year for a basic fleet. I don't think we even spend that type of money on our entire armed forces. How much is your embrassment worth?

The first thing we would do afterwards is buy a fighter jet.

Just the one like? Have you been paying attension.

Plus if we didnt need fighters why did we buy those Fuego things when there was no one prepared to attack us?

And what have they been doing?

Mick86

Boston wrote:

OK, so what do you think would happen?

you seem incapable of engaging in a little thought process, have a think about Anglo-Irish political and economic links over the last 50 or so years.

Ooh an insult at this early stage.

Lets see, for most of the past century Anglo-Irish relations have consisted of us slaughtering their soldiers, policemen and civilians. As soon as we kicked the British administration out of most of the country, we got on the boat and followed the withdrawing troops to nick their jobs before demobilisation. Then instead of being a grown up country about defending ourselves we decided we were the most peaceful people on earth. Everybody loves us so we don't need credible defence and should the sh1t hit the fan it's the duty no less of the British to defend us.

The above is in response to the craven idea that the Brits owe us any favours by the way. Jet fighters should, in my opinion, be way down our military shopping list.