Some IAC PC9M's possibly to go to storage.

Steyr

Seen this on www.worldairpics.com

Quote Corsair.

There's talk of putting some of the PC9s in storage due to lack of student pilots. Never mind forming a display team.

http://www.worldairpics.com/forum/in...p?topic=1828.0


Gutted if this was to happen. I really hope this is just a rumour.

vulcan57

Steyr wrote: »

Seen this on www.worldairpics.com

Quote Corsair.

There's talk of putting some of the PC9s in storage due to lack of student pilots. Never mind forming a display team.

http://www.worldairpics.com/forum/in...p?topic=1828.0


Gutted if this was to happen. I really hope this is just a rumour.

Is it really the lack of student pilots or the lack of money to pay for them?

ronnie3585

vulcan57 wrote: »

Is it really the lack of student pilots or the lack of money to pay for them?

I believe it's the latter. No cadets are being recruited this year, sign of the times I suppose.

I know I'll probably get flamed for saying this in this forum but I don't think it's a bad thing that they aircraft are bring taken out of active service and put into storage. I said it when they were purchased and I'm still saying it, they are a waste of tax payers money. For what it's worth, I believe that the Army is also a waste of money.

This is a neutral country that does not need a large regular army. Fair enough there is a very good argument for having a small dedicated peace corps to go to places like Western Africa, East Timor etc but I cannot see the need for having vast amounts of regular soldiers. This country desperately needs a good Coast Guard service. Such a service could be provided if all unnecessary money that is pumped into the armed forces was spent more wisely.

Scruff

ronnie3585 wrote: »

I believe it's the latter. No cadets are being recruited this year, sign of the times I suppose.

probably right

I know I'll probably get flamed for saying this in this forum but I don't think it's a bad thing that they aircraft are bring taken out of active service and put into storage. I said it when they were purchased and I'm still saying it, they are a waste of tax payers money. For what it's worth, I believe that the Army is also a waste of money.

This is a neutral country that does not need a large regular army. Fair enough there is a very good argument for having a small dedicated peace corps to go to places like Western Africa, East Timor etc but I cannot see the need for having vast amounts of regular soldiers. This country desperately needs a good Coast Guard service. Such a service could be provided if all unnecessary money that is pumped into the armed forces was spent more wisely.

oh good christ not this tired arugement being brought up again :mad:
Bugger off to the the politics board if ye want to to discuss that.
I'm not saying you're not entitled to your opinon just that i dont think this is the forum for it.

ch252

Ah scruff tis only a bit of healthy debate, it applies here too!

Ronnie, that's very true but at the same time, the air corps are very necessary, as they fly the coastguard heli, the CASA and the Garda EC-135. We do also need an army, they cover bomb disposal too, but I agree there are better ways of spending money than on soldiers for a war that Ireland probably won't be getting into

Scruff

darragh-k wrote: »

Ah scruff tis only a bit of healthy debate, it applies here too!

Flyer1

Shortage of bucks i'd say. Heard the cadets aren't getting much flying as things are.

If they Air Corps ever want someone to fly the PC9's they wont have to look too hard now.

Steyr

darragh-k wrote: »

, as they fly the coastguard heli,

No thats CHC.

Anyway the IAC are very necessary as are the Navy and Army.

FiSe

I would have to find it, but I think that IAC budget for 2009 went down around 40-50% on the previous year. But don't quote me on it, I would have to look for it...

So, no new cadet classes.

The Army / Air Corps expenses in Ireland are nothing in comparsion to other EU states.
And those do not put any strain on the budget. And never have, well, apart from the 'Emergency' when this neutral Ireland, was unable to do anything nor to guard nor to protect Irish neutral space...

vulcan57

ronnie3585 wrote: »

This is a neutral country that does not need a large regular army.

Take a look at Switzerland and Sweden, they are neutral and have quite extensive armed forces. To be a, so called, "neutral" country you have to be able to defend yourself. Once you have to rely on other countries to do that for you your neutrality goes out the window.

OS119

one of the requirements of Neutrality as a concept within international law is that the neutral state is not just a non-belligerant or non-aligned, but that the state is willing and able to enforce that neutrality - ie: it can and will physically stop belligerant forces crossing or using its territory to attack another belligerant.

being a place on the map where any tom, dick or harry can overfly, or indeed set up Forward Operating Bases, to lauch attacks on other states, doesn't count.

military weakness and non-involvement provide no status or protection under international law, they just mean you don't get involved and couldn't have any effect if you wanted to.

pclancy

Good idea considering how much they cost to run. What good are they going to do against any kind of fighter aircraft anyway? I understand Ireland must maintain a force to protect itself but the stuff the IAC have right now isnt capable of defending the Aran Islands never mind Ireland. I just dont see the tactical use or value to the country in the PC9Ms in any way except for teaching some lucky people advanced flying skills... There is a need for the CASAs and Garda choppers etc but I think its time to get rid of topgun, could they even intercept a rogue airliner or perform any kind of attack against ground or sea forces? Surely the days of machine bombs and rockets are over and they'd be shot down pretty quickly if any kind of hostilities did break out. Even though we have them we still have to rely on the RAF or NATO so I dont see the difference if they're mothballed or gotton rid of.

FiSe

It's the same old, same old. Better something than nothing. It's not expensive to run a handful of aircraft, wages take more money than fuel costs and maintenance of the IAC fleet.

Can you imagine, that we'd got rid of all the unimportant equipment like, helis - who's using those anyway, Pc-9s, Remaining Rockets, we can send mechanics and pilots to train over in the UK to fly CASAs, or we can hire civvie contractors to do it all for us including flying GASU a/c, would that be cheaper? I don't know...
But why stop here? We can get rid of the Naval Service too and hire some private Co. to keep an eye on the Irish territorial waters.
Army? A few hundreds of contractors will do...
And let's go on, why not to privatise all the hospitals, after all that service is even bigger shamble then armed forces and cost much more than any of those above mentioned.
Dail, government, all those state departments, county councils and god only knows what else, am saying, let's get rid of it, it cost far too much and this country can't afford to pay for it, let's bring contractors in.
Wouldn't that be a beautiful prosperous neutral Ireland? :rolleyes:

Steyr

http://www.worldairpics.com/forum/index.php?topic=1829.0

Just a heads up on this guys. AFAIK CH is a serving member of the IAC.

Quote:Claudel Hopson
The PC9's are not going into storage. Why should they?

There is a class of students ready to start their flying training in September/October. The PC9's are on the ramp everyday, weather permitting, and fly everyday, also weather permitting.

The maintenance and ramp crews are as busy as ever, especially now the good weather and long evenings are now here.

There are other missions being carried out with PC9's in the past few months which are normally in the domain of other units. Can't say anymore about this.

There is no sign of a display team on a regular basis. Our pilots are busy with training programs, sim attacks on Army and Navy, flying other aircraft. But when they do get together, they do put together a very good display.


Quote:Pink Panther

I suppose time will tell.Someting else doing the rounds, but not confirmed is the possibilityof two 139's going into storage.

Delta Kilo

How is there a class starting on them in September/October if they haven't taken in any Cadets since 2007? Am I missing something here?

Foggy43

I thought you had to get into the Curragh as an Army cadet and get selected from there. In the early 80's I remember quite a few failed the course in BFTS (some just couldn't handle the aerobatics) but could go back to the army again and continue their careers.

Maybe things have changed.

Delta Kilo

No I it a separate cadetship now-a-days. The Air Corps Cadets only do 8-9 months in the Curragh as opposed to the 15 months of the Army Cadets. then they go to Baldonnell for flight training. Guys that fail flight training (flunkeys I think they are called) are given other Ground positions within the Air Corps.

Maybe they did offer the positions to some of the Army Cadets.

diverdriver

The source is latest edition of Fly in Ireland magazine. It mentioned the possibility of the PC9s going into storage. It also mentioned the future of the Super King Air is in doubt too. You would have to assume that they have it on good authority.

I too find it hard to believe there is a new class of cadets starting in September. Considering there has been no recruitment since 2007. Where are these cadets coming from? I can't imagine the army would want to give up some of theirs.

There are other missions being carried out with PC9's in the past few months which are normally in the domain of other units. Can't say anymore about this.

That does not ring true at all. What other units? The Cessnas? The CASAs? The Garda? Ministerial transport? My BS meter is on full alert.

I've said it before. The PC9s are toys for the boys. Overkill for the training role and useless in any military category you care to mention. A waste taxpayers money, mine included.

In any case 'storage' needn't involve cocooning them in a hangar. That wouldn't make sense anyway. There would be no point in running up the hours on one or two aircraft. The best method would be to rotate the use of the aircraft around the fleet. Ryanair do that in the winter. They park up jets but still use them. Constantly rotating the fleet. Effectively it's just a case or reducing flight hours overall. It would be the same with the A139s.

Thus we would have the PC9s sitting on the ramp everyday as per CH's post. Sitting on the ramp isn't flying though.

Steyr

Another heads up apparently the sole Air Corps KingAir 200 "240" is grounded for good.

Quote GTTC:as regards 240, I have heard from within that it is grounded for good.What is afoot for it, in terms of disposal, I don't know.

http://www.worldairpics.com/forum/index.php?topic=1829.0

highlydebased

Sad if 240 is removed from service. Enjoyed seeing it around.

We have the most laughable Air Corp fleet in the world no doubt.

We must defend in ourselves with some Reims Rockets/C152's- Willie O' Dea can point his gun out the side window!

FiSe

...with a... 2 of them, I believe....