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

Irish defence force buys US missile 'system' - US gov 'extremely pleased'

Options
  • 14-04-2008 10:57am
    #1
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8,633 ✭✭✭


    US-made missile system to guard force
    By Don Lavery
    Sunday April 13 2008


    A HIGHLY sophisticated American-made guided missile system will protect Irish troops being sent to Chad next month after approval was given for the sale to Ireland by the US Congress.


    In the first overseas deployment of the weapon by the Irish Defence Forces, the Javelin 'fire and forget' anti-armour missile will be part of a layered defence for Irish troops against what is seen as the main potential threat, attacks from rebels or bandits riding in heavily armed 4x4 vehicles.

    The weapon, with each missile round costing about €75,000, has proved to be highly effective against tanks, vehicles, and bunkers when used by US, British and Australian forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    In the biggest ever US weapons sale to Ireland, Javelin was selected in 2004 in a €13m purchase to replace the French Milan missile used by Irish forces which had to be guided to the target. The US Government said it was "extremely pleased" that the Irish Department of Defence selected the weapon.

    However Irish soldiers will deploy to Chad without the protection of the Army's most powerful armoured vehicle, the Panhard AML-90 armoured car, used on the two previous missions to Liberia and Lebanon.

    In use since 1972, Army chiefs admitted that the elderly 4x4 vehicle's shortcomings meant it could not keep up with the modern fleet of 8x8 Mowag Piranha armoured vehicles used by the Army.

    Outgoing Chief of Staff Lt Gen Jim Sreenan said last year that the next vehicle equipment priority was to get a replacement for the AML-90 fleet.

    However yesterday the Department of Defence said: "There are no plans to hold a tender competition for a replacement for the AML-90 at the present time."

    A spokeswoman said the recent procurement of 15 Mowag reconnaissance vehicles provided the Defence Forces "with significant reconnaissance and firepower capability when deployed in peace support operations."

    She added that the new Mowag close reconnaissance vehicles being sent to Chad were armed with machine guns and grenade launchers which "provided significant firepower to the units."

    As well as the Javelin missile system, Irish soldiers will also have the tried and trusted 84mm Carl Gustaf anti-tank gun in use since the early 1960s; the modern AT-4 'throwaway' rocket launcher carried by individual soldiers; and a battery of 81mm mortars to protect them and their base camp.

    - Don Lavery

    Did the defence forces not already have this or did I miss something?


Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 476 ✭✭cp251


    Up to date news LOL! I'm glad the US goverment is pleased. LOL. Well they were never going to give it to us.

    I seem to remember that Ireland was among several countries that had all military aid cut off for voting against something or other which the US was sweet on. I thought that was hilarious because we never got any military aid from the US in the first place. Not much of a punishment. Although, if we knew aid was available maybe we should have taken advantage. A few old F16s wouldn't go amiss or some early model M1 Abrams and a couple Hueys in return for the use of Shannon.............................Oh well!


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8,633 ✭✭✭darkman2


    cp251 wrote: »
    Up to date news LOL! I'm glad the US goverment is pleased. LOL. Well they were never going to give it to us.

    I seem to remember that Ireland was among several countries that had all military aid cut off for voting against something or other which the US was sweet on. I thought that was hilarious because we never got any military aid from the US in the first place. Not much of a punishment. Although, if we knew aid was available maybe we should have taken advantage. A few old F16s wouldn't go amiss or some early model M1 Abrams and a couple Hueys in return for the use of Shannon.............................Oh well!

    I dont see it as 'aid' - the army paid for it and bought it apparently. I think you might be thinking of WW2;)


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,518 ✭✭✭OS119


    darkman2 wrote: »
    I dont see it as 'aid' - the army paid for it and bought it apparently. I think you might be thinking of WW2;)

    the 'aid' bit is the degree of subsidy the US gives when you buy its systems/support.

    the chances of anybody paying the actual cost (unit cost + % of R&D) is about zero. if the US likes you then you'll find a greater percentage of the systems R&D cost being swallowed up as 'spent money' and a percentage of the unit cost being written off as 'keeping US voters in high paying jobs'.

    if the US doesn't like you, then you get to pay the full unit cost (or more) and you get to subsidise US R&D. if you don't like the price you can always go elsewhere....


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 476 ✭✭cp251


    OS119 is right. Indeed we probably paid full price because of our status as a rogue nation. :D

    No Darkman I wasn't thinking of WW2. The US will transfer used equipment to allies as military aid. Sometimes new as well. Colombia for example, might receive helicopters to aid in combatting drugs and FARC guerrillas.

    Ireland hardly used US equipment because of course we are not an ally but totally neutral;) :D

    It always puzzled me why the Air Corps never considered American aircraft. I'm sure we would have got a good deal. The only American aircraft we ever used were the Gulfstream, Learjet and Super King Airs and they are all recent. (Yes I know about the Hudson but that came via the RAF.)

    Imagine the Air Corps buzzing about in silver P51s or T33s or even F104s. Ok that's a bit of a stretch.:cool:


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,380 ✭✭✭Riddle101


    While we're on the subject of buying weapons from America why don't we get some Tanks as well, a few M1's would do us good in Chad, and hey it would be better then only being able to use dRocket Launcers.

    Dose anyone know if Irish APC's have Rocket Launcers on them? i've often thought it would be good protection


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 16,239 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    Dose anyone know if Irish APC's have Rocket Launcers on them?

    No. The guy inside gets out and fires it.
    While we're on the subject of buying weapons from America why don't we get some Tanks as well, a few M1's would do us good in Chad, and hey it would be better then only being able to use dRocket Launcers.

    Because they're stupidly expensive to run, at about $260 a mile.
    It always puzzled me why the Air Corps never considered American aircraft.

    Sikorsky S-92 got selected before the whole brouhaha. In fairness to procurement, they'll buy from anyone if they perceive it to be the best bit of kit that they can afford. A fair bit of equipment is American-made, the SINCGARS radios for example, or the PVS-14 night vision I saw yer man wearing on the Late Late show last week.
    Did the defence forces not already have this or did I miss something?

    Could be the first operational deployment of the system?

    NTM


  • Registered Users Posts: 339 ✭✭ChapOfDRyans


    Are'nt we really lacking now in fire power,by only bring crv's and leaving the 90mm at home.

    i know its scrap but still,we should of brought the mrv's at least.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭cushtac


    Are'nt we really lacking now in fire power,by only bring crv's and leaving the 90mm at home.

    The AML can't keep up with the Mowags over the type of terrain that will be encountered. There's little point in bringing them if they can't be used effectively.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,518 ✭✭✭OS119


    cushtac wrote: »
    The AML can't keep up with the Mowags over the type of terrain that will be encountered. There's little point in bringing them if they can't be used effectively.

    very true, its concerning though that the Irish force lacks the visible punch that the AML provides. Javelin is the dogs danglies when you actually want tpo blow stuff up, but it doesn't have much of a deterent effect (which as we all know is an inherant part of 'peacekeeping' - partcularly the kind of 'peacekeeping' thats required in Chad)

    CVR(T) would be an option here, they are used in A'stan for fire-support, mobile C2, convoy protection and straight-forward intimidation.

    perhaps, (thread creap warning), the 'nacsent capability' that CVR(T) (and as we all know it's utterly undeployable) was bought for should now be upgraded....


  • Registered Users Posts: 339 ✭✭ChapOfDRyans


    Yes with an upgrade they could be deployable but there isnt enough of them(even if they were upgraded) to go to chad.

    Why didn't they send the mrv's over


  • Advertisement
Advertisement