Massive Mil Jet in Baldonnel

Ald · 26-09-2009 5:24pm #1

What was it that just went over the house into Baldonnel?

Impressive. Tried takin a pic but outa battery:mad:

phonypony · 26-09-2009 5:29pm

Ald wrote: »

What was it that just went over the house into Baldonnel?

Impressive. Tried takin a pic but outa battery:mad:

Looks like it was a C-17 Globemaster. Callsign was Reach 496. Nice!

fullerand · 26-09-2009 5:36pm

Saw that flying over Ballyboden at about 6.15... looked deadly! Are they only used by USAF?!

CCCP^ · 26-09-2009 5:38pm

fullerand wrote: »

Saw that flying over Ballyboden at about 6.15... looked deadly! Are they only used by USAF?!

Yeah, afaik the USAF use those. So much for our neutrality.

AfterDusk · 26-09-2009 5:41pm

The RAF use them as well

FiSe · 26-09-2009 5:43pm

There was one visiting CZ last weekend for NATO Days. Could be the same one?

EchoIndia · 26-09-2009 5:46pm

CCCP^ wrote: »

Yeah, afaik the USAF use those. So much for our neutrality.

C-17s are also operated by Australia, Canada, the UK, Qatar and NATO. BTW what has neutrality got to do with the aircraft visiting Ireland? Are you suggesting the the Government is covertly involving us in military activities contrary to the law?

baza1976 · 26-09-2009 5:52pm

EchoIndia wrote: »

C-17s are also operated by Australia, Canada, the UK, Qatar and NATO. BTW what has neutrality got to do with the aircraft visiting Ireland? Are you suggesting the the Government is covertly involving us in military activities contrary to the law?[/QUOTE]

Not sure if you are been sarcastic or not

One word for that "Shannon"

paddydriver · 26-09-2009 6:05pm

Jayzus lads... ye are quick off the mark! I was wondering what it was too as the flight path is right over my house. Knew someone on boards.ie would know what it was. I nearly fell off the garden chair - thought it was an A380 for a second!

Was still in clouds and could not get a good look but it looked big.

phonypony · 26-09-2009 6:07pm

Quick stop, took off about 19.00, heading east...

Killinator · 26-09-2009 6:08pm

Those C-17's are always in and out of Shannon

centre half · 26-09-2009 6:19pm

Any body got pics?

Manic Moran · 26-09-2009 6:24pm

CCCP^ wrote: »

Yeah, afaik the USAF use those. So much for our neutrality.

Neutral = not taking sides.

As long as Ireland applies its rules and regulations as regards airspace and landing rights equally to all who apply regardless of national origin, and as far as I know it does, neutrality is not violated.

And if someone thinks a C-17 is massive, they should see a C-5 or AN-124

NTM

Steyr · 26-09-2009 6:40pm

Hi guys just in from work im told it was a USAF C-17 Callsign "Reach496", and she headed off to RAF Mildenhall.

CaptainSkidmark · 26-09-2009 7:29pm

Manic Moran wrote: »

Neutral = not taking sides.

As long as Ireland applies its rules and regulations as regards airspace and landing rights equally to all who apply regardless of national origin, and as far as I know it does, neutrality is not violated.

And if someone thinks a C-17 is massive, they should see a C-5 or AN-124

NTM

Mate, if you knew half the stuff the irish army get involved in you would be questioning irelands neutrality, trust me

helimachoptor · 26-09-2009 7:32pm

CaptainSkidmark wrote: »

Mate, if you knew half the stuff the irish army get involved in you would be questioning irelands neutrality, trust me

Please elaborate!!

N7777G · 26-09-2009 10:41pm

CCCP^ wrote: »

Yeah, afaik the USAF use those. So much for our neutrality.

Just how exactly does a foreign military aircraft landing at an Irish Airport or overflying Irish airspace compromise our neutrality as you imply in your comment?

In recent weeks aircraft from the air forces of Sweden, Austria, Germany, USA and Russia (to mention just a few) have landed at various Irish Airports and the world hasn't come to an end.

Perhaps we should ban all aircraft from ever flying into or over Ireland.

Sweet divine!

mikedublin · 27-09-2009 7:44am

I was really intrigued to know what it was, as I just glimpsed it through the clouds as it came over (sandyford area) but I could see it was a really massive plane.

Maybe its a test run for the invasion in case we vote No next week LOL.

phonypony · 27-09-2009 9:09am

'Two Guantanamo detainees sent to Ireland'
http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0927/guantanamo.html

It would be odd if it was announced this soon afterwards, but is it possible such flights are used for this? I didn't hear all the comms while it was on the ground, but I don't think it was here for fuel.

Steyr · 27-09-2009 11:39am

Piccies:http://www.flickr.com/photos/eigjb/3956678845/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/eigjb/3957456956/

Serial 01-0189, operated by the 437 Air Wing, Charleston AFB, South Carolina.

Not mine.

View Profile · 27-09-2009 12:16pm

Manic Moran

And if someone thinks a C-17 is massive, they should see a C-5 or AN-124

Used to see C-5's heading into Rota all the time while training in Jerez.

The engines have a lovely whine.:)

Pretty impressive when your bumbling along in a Warrior and a Galaxy cruises by.

centre half · 27-09-2009 6:24pm

So, no photos? Should this maybe be in the UFO section?

highlydebased · 27-09-2009 6:42pm

centre half wrote: »

So, no photos? Should this maybe be in the UFO section?

As already posted 3 posts up...

Piccies:http://www.flickr.com/photos/eigjb/3956678845/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/eigjb/3957456956/

jasonb · 27-09-2009 9:45pm

phonypony wrote: »

'Two Guantanamo detainees sent to Ireland'
http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0927/guantanamo.html

It would be odd if it was announced this soon afterwards, but is it possible such flights are used for this? I didn't hear all the comms while it was on the ground, but I don't think it was here for fuel.

Well, if it's true, it's a large plane to transport 2 people! Talk about taking the piss out of expenses!

J.

Holsten · 27-09-2009 9:48pm

Cool photos, anyone know if they are from within the fence or not?

EchoIndia · 27-09-2009 9:56pm

jasonb wrote: »

Well, if it's true, it's a large plane to transport 2 people! Talk about taking the piss out of expenses!

J.

The aircraft routed MUGM-EIME-EGUN and was on the ground here for well under an hour, so this was in the nature of an en-route stop to drop off these pax before continuing to destination.

Tenger · 28-09-2009 12:40am

Holsten wrote: »

Cool photos, anyone know if they are from within the fence or not?

This photographer has great shots. I think he must have access to Baldonnel as he knows when to be present.

Fecking C-17 woke up my sleeping baby (me moving to the window didn't hlp either!!!) as it sailed 1000ft above my home......fabulous noise though!!!!!!!!!!!

Dacian · 28-09-2009 1:09am

jasonb wrote: »

Well, if it's true, it's a large plane to transport 2 people! Talk about taking the piss out of expenses!

Well we didn't pay for the jet and as stated above it was an enroute stop so probably cheaper than hiring a private G-IV.

Speaking of private jets and expense.....Brain Cowen flew home last wednesday in the govt jet form the UN conference in NY. (A friend was enroute to the states and was aware of the govt jet heading in the opposite direction at 40K feet)Wouldn't it be a lot cheaper to fly Aer Lingus/Delta/US/American home in business class?

JamesFinnegan · 28-09-2009 1:29am

jasonb wrote: »

Well, if it's true, it's a large plane to transport 2 people! Talk about taking the piss out of expenses!

J.

Actually, it's the new government jet. The health minister is off to the West of Ireland to open an off licence.

jasonb · 28-09-2009 8:25am

EchoIndia wrote: »

The aircraft routed MUGM-EIME-EGUN and was on the ground here for well under an hour, so this was in the nature of an en-route stop to drop off these pax before continuing to destination.

Dacian wrote: »

Well we didn't pay for the jet and as stated above it was an enroute stop so probably cheaper than hiring a private G-IV.

Clearly I need to work on making my sarcasm more obvious, sorry!

J.

Steyr · 28-09-2009 11:04am

Holsten wrote: »

Cool photos, anyone know if they are from within the fence or not?

Taken by "Snapper" from Worldairpics, from outside the fence i believe, if it was from inside he would have been closer.

EchoIndia · 28-09-2009 5:47pm

Steyr wrote: »

if it was from inside he would have been closer.

And might have been "lifted" too, I suspect!

EchoIndia · 28-09-2009 5:56pm

Dacian wrote: »

Well we didn't pay for the jet and as stated above it was an enroute stop so probably cheaper than hiring a private G-IV.

Speaking of private jets and expense.....Brain Cowen flew home last wednesday in the govt jet form the UN conference in NY. (A friend was enroute to the states and was aware of the govt jet heading in the opposite direction at 40K feet)Wouldn't it be a lot cheaper to fly Aer Lingus/Delta/US/American home in business class?

Assuming that he was not travelling solo, you would really be comparing the cost involved with flying maybe 8-10 people from New York to Ireland by commercial airline. I'm not saying commercial flights wouldn't be cheaper, but that is the more appropriate comparator. The time of day is also a factor. Having their own aircraft enables a senior politician and their team to travel when it suits them rather than the airlines - and to do preparatory work etc. on the way. And for those who get het up about the use of a G4 by the Irish Government, have a look at some of the transports used by other States in connection with last week's UN gathering, as seen by this photographer: http://www.flickr.com/photos/aviophotog/

BrianD · 28-09-2009 11:20pm

CCCP^ wrote: »

Yeah, afaik the USAF use those. So much for our neutrality.

Would an American plane landing in Baldonnel not be the same as any of the foreign naval vessels that arrive into Dublin port on a regular basis? Therefore no breach of neutrality.

Could this particular aircraft be on UN duties? I recall seeing pictures of USAF transports being used to ferry Irish troops years ago.

Run_to_da_hills · 28-09-2009 11:43pm

CCCP^ wrote: »

Yeah, afaik the USAF use those. So much for our neutrality.

Large military transport aircraft will soon come in handy for deploying [URL="Eurogendemair http://www.wiseupjournal.com/?p=1124"]EGF[/URL] battalions in times of strife and civil unrest in Ireland. :eek:

Jip · 29-09-2009 9:21am

Who let you out of the conspiracy theories forum ?

Dacian · 29-09-2009 9:32am

EchoIndia wrote: »

................ I'm not saying commercial flights wouldn't be cheaper, but that is the more appropriate comparator...............

I do agree with the need for the govt jet, but I feel that in this times of economic problems when the govt is looking to cut back on services thery should be able to justify the use of such. Could Brian have waited 2-3 hours for the early Aer Lingus flight back to Dublin or was he needed home immediately? I assume he would have had a group of people so yes if 10 on the jet was cheaper than 10 in business class then the jet is the best choice. But who were these 10?
I do think that Brian and other ministers should be in Business class on an airline,they require the privacy to work or rest as needed. (Same as CEOs/Senior managers travelling) But I know from friends that assistants/advisors to Irish ministers have a habit of trying to get an upgrade on Aer Lingus services based on their 'advisor' status. Perhaps the party of 10 on the jet would have cost less if it was 4 in business and 6 in economy?

I know that he used BA vis Heathrow recently as he had to get to Boston early for Ted Kennedys funeral.

FiSe · 29-09-2009 11:48am

Secretary, his wife, his wife secretary, the good auld friend, the good auld friend secretary, translator, translator's secretary, someone, who can actually do something and butler... 10 people and there's a room for, at least, another 10.
Sorry just couldn't resist :rolleyes:

N7777G · 29-09-2009 6:55pm

Holsten wrote: »

Cool photos, anyone know if they are from within the fence or not?

They were taken from outside the base and the airfield boundary fence is clearly visible in both photos.

Delancey · 02-10-2009 10:00pm

Great photo of the C-17 . What is the general position re. taking photos of military aircraft on the ground at military bases ? I had always thought it was not welcome at best ( even in neutral Ireland ) and at worst likely to land you in serious bother with the powers that be ?
Or has the end of the Cold War changed all that ?
My brother was in Turkey a couple of years ago on business near an air base and was warned by his contact there to never take a photo of anything remotely military if he valued his freedom !

highlydebased · 02-10-2009 10:19pm

delancey42 wrote: »

Great photo of the C-17 . What is the general position re. taking photos of military aircraft on the ground at military bases ? I had always thought it was not welcome at best ( even in neutral Ireland ) and at worst likely to land you in serious bother with the powers that be ?
Or has the end of the Cold War changed all that ?
My brother was in Turkey a couple of years ago on business near an air base and was warned by his contact there to never take a photo of anything remotely military if he valued his freedom !

Eastern countries is dodgy- The political and security system is a bit different here to there....I doubt you'd have much hassle at Balldonnel at all. I can ask around...

EchoIndia · 02-10-2009 10:37pm

There used to be - and may still be - a prohibition on photographing military installations, so if you were intentionally photographing specific military facilities that could raise concerns. However as regards photographing aircraft, if you are outside the base there is probably not much likelihood of anyone making an issue of it. There are lots of photos on the Internet taken on-base at Baldonnel in any event - some by military personnel and the majority by civilian visitors. The position in other countries varies a lot. In the UK and the Netherlands the military are familiar enough with spotting and photography but in countries like Greece or Italy the authorities can be very touchy about interest being shown in military facilities and equipment.

diverdriver · 03-10-2009 5:25pm

There still is a prohibition on photographing Irish military installations. Not that it's enforced much. But if you're hanging over the fence in Bal and a passing patrol tells you to eff off, you'd better do it.

As for the comment about neutrality and visiting USAF/NATO C17s. Have a look at this. http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog:27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post:d2ab34a8-0be8-4926-bb21-359b5cd4d5c1

For those of you who don't want to read it. 15 countries are sharing 3 C17s. The countries include, shock horror:eek: two neutral countries, that is real neutral countries not our comedy version. Sweden and Finland. 'So much for neutrality.':P To be fair though, Sweden is described as a 'NATO partner.' Maybe we should join?

In relation to the Government jet debate, frankly in this day and age you cannot expect our government ministers to only travel by scheduled airlines. This is the 21st century after all. (Even if it is Fianna Failure). However, keeping two government jets on the go is a total waste of taxpayers money. It would be a lot more economically to simply rent a jet as and when needed. The likes of Netjets and others similar will provide anyone with a bizjet anytime it's needed with the added bonus that you can tailor the size of the aircraft. So if only two people are on board, you get a smaller aircraft and if you need to evacuate the entire cabinet from the country ,(when the people start rioting in the streets), you can hire in a BBJ or similar. It would be far less expensive than buying and operating them.

The same goes for the use of helicopters, hiring would be a lot cheaper and certainly more accountable.

Massive Mil Jet in Baldonnel

Comments