Ireland - lack of air and naval defence.

Adrianno28

I took it upon myself to point out most of the above in a long and carefully constructed email to our great Leader... he replied ( well the office did) and told me he would forward it on to the Minister for Defense..... My basic points were ( and i didnt use such flamboyant words as these) :

1) When the Sh1t hits the fan we should be at least be able to defend ourselves as a country, a people and a territory for as long as it would take the USA, UK or Europe to come and help us.

2) The military we have do great work around the world etc. etc. and its a shame that here, they are under resourced and have in a lot of instances antiquated technology in comparison to countries or groups that could do us harm.

3) That NATO should at least be discussed by the citizens as an option.

4) I pointed out that it should not fall on our neighbours ( UK) to help us, or to inform us, or not inform us as happened with the Russian incident, of Planes flying in our airspace, literally anything could be flying over Dublin or Cork or Offaly and the RAF would know before us. Shameful and dangerous. I said as well , its plain embarrassing as a 1st world, 21st century European country.

5) That I find it offensive that another country views our air and sea space as their " area of interest" , they care more about it than we do.

6) I can see the Irish Air Corps Pilatus PC-9M planes flying over where I live on manoeuvres. Sadly the few planes we do have would not be of much use for defence in comparison to one fighter jet should it approach the country with the intention of doing us harm.

7) I put forward that an integrated Air and Sea Defence be created with modern technology, it would cost hundredths of millions but there's no point in having money sitting there if the country or some part of it gets attacked. ( I know that's a remote possibility but a possibility nonetheless)

I said also amongst other things that we do not know what will happen in the future, a natural catastrophe Europe wide, an asteroid from space, who knows, and we will be here with our pants down wondering where it all went wrong. When the sh1t hits the fan don't tell me it'll be diplomatic and orderly... countries will do what they have to do, if that means heading to Ireland, then that's what will happen.


I know some of this is a bit far fetched but as Allen West said 'We must never forget why we have, and why we need our military. Our armed forces exist solely to ensure our nation is safe, so that each and every one of us can sleep soundly at night, knowing we have 'guardians at the gate.

expectationlost

IrishTrajan wrote: »

It's not vague, it's in line with our neutrality policy.

he was being vague.

IrishTrajan wrote: »

Once again, we're not anti-Russia. Nobody wants us to go to war with them, we want to be able to defend our airspace FROM EVERYONE

from both Russia and the UK? because thats who I believe he was talking about,

The Irish Examiner asked Department of Defence if the British jets had entered Irish-controlled airspace at any time during their “shadowing” operation and if there was a deal to allow British military aircraft fly into our airspace whenever they liked.
http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/ministers-to-be-quizzed-on-uk-airspace-deal-312378.html
Fianna Fáil spokesman on defence, Sean O’Fearghail, said he was concerned that Irish neutrality was being compromised and he has prepared a number of questions for the Government which are to be aired in the Dáil early next week.

sparky42

IrishTrajan wrote: »

Replace the Naval Service with all Beckett-class ships, buy one or two of the Skjold-class corvettes from Norway (giving the Naval Service some serious bite).

The Becketts would cost €50m per ship, the Skjold-class corvettes would cost closer to €120 million per ship (one of them has the capability to destroy our entire naval service).

That'd cost us around €500 million, stretched out over several years. If we bought two ships a year, we could have a new fleet in 5 years.

Edit:

On the topic of hardware, maybe working with Britain to develop a new type of MBT once the Challenger comes close to the end of its life would be worth looking into. They have as much a similar climate to ours as possible. Perhaps Sweden would be another partner worth looking into, as we have troops under their command in Nordic Battlegroup.

I'd disagree with the Skjold class, they are designed for pretty unique situations of the Norwegian plans for defence and their coastline. A far more effective/capable ship for the Navy would be an Absalon class or something along those lines, hell just take the basic Danish navy configuration (2 Absalon's and 3 Iver Huitfeldt half sisters (or reverse it 3-2) and you increase our capabilities to both defend Ireland and take part in any naval operation we would ever think about). Denmark only spends about what we would have if we spent 2% so they aren't hugely expensive like the UK/US designs.

As for tanks, I'd prefer us to concentrate on fully mechanising (105mm, 120 mil mortar MOWAGs etc) the army. Honestly given the reduction of the tank force of Europe, what if anything replaces the Challenger is up in the air, they only have what 100 left in active service? Don't think they are even building their new mech vehicle in the UK this time.

IrishTrajan

sparky42 wrote: »

I'd disagree with the Skjold class, they are designed for pretty unique situations of the Norwegian plans for defence and their coastline. A far more effective/capable ship for the Navy would be an Absalon class or something along those lines, hell just take the basic Danish navy configuration (2 Absalon's and 3 Iver Huitfeldt half sisters (or reverse it 3-2) and you increase our capabilities to both defend Ireland and take part in any naval operation we would ever think about). Denmark only spends about what we would have if we spent 2% so they aren't hugely expensive like the UK/US designs.

As for tanks, I'd prefer us to concentrate on fully mechanising (105mm, 120 mil mortar MOWAGs etc) the army. Honestly given the reduction of the tank force of Europe, what if anything replaces the Challenger is up in the air, they only have what 100 left in active service? Don't think they are even building their new mech vehicle in the UK this time.

The Absalon's are almost twice the cost of the Skjold. The Skjolds are also capable of being used in open waters. I would also presume the Skjolds cost less in maintenance, being only 275-tonnes vs 4500 tonnes.

The Ivers, configured to fire Tomahawks, could give the Irish State an ability to allow for Irish support against ISIS. I'm sure the British and Americans would be only too happy to let us dock in Cyprus for resupply.

As to the mortar-MOWAGs, is that really feasible? Motorized indirect fire with lighter rounds, against a more heavily armoured vehicle that can provide direct fire.

sparky42

IrishTrajan wrote: »

The Absalon's are almost twice the cost of the Skjold. The Skjolds are also capable of being used in open waters. I would also presume the Skjolds cost less in maintenance, being only 275-tonnes vs 4500 tonnes.

The Ivers, configured to fire Tomahawks, could give the Irish State an ability to allow for Irish support against ISIS. I'm sure the British and Americans would be only too happy to let us dock in Cyprus for resupply.

As to the mortar-MOWAGs, is that really feasible? Motorized indirect fire with lighter rounds, against a more heavily armoured vehicle that can provide direct fire.

The Skjolds are at their heart FAC's (Fast Attack Craft), designed for ambush engagements (hide in a Fjord, behind an island and do as much damage to the Soviet invasion force before dying). They were designed for Norway's needs at the time, post Cold War Norway went for mini Burkes as their ships.

Compared to what we have they are an improvement, but are they the improvement that we want/need? Yes they can operate in open waters, can they operate in 20-30m wave heights? Can they maintain their speed without ruining themselves and their crew in such conditions? The USN has found that while the LCS has incredible sprint speeds, 1) the 57mm becomes inaccurate at high speed due to ship vibrations and 2) open water sprinting ruins the crew due to strain. Remember we are retiring 1K ton ships in part as they can't operate in West Coast conditions, is it worth investing in a 250 ton ship that may have reduced operational capability in heavy winter storm conditions?

The Absalon even in basic form allows us to not only have a much more capabilties both for Irish defence and out of Irish water operations. We'd have a measure of sea lift (something the rest of the battlegroup would like), capability to have up to Merlin class helicopters based off it, capability for "Mothership" type operations for UN missions etc.

It costs more but it would give us much more range of operations/capabilities than a FAC.

As for the land vehicles, we've committed to the MOWAG for this generation at least (not sure if it was the right choice but it's made), now we should seek to maximise that (we'll never have the money for "fleet with fleet" situations even at 2%), there are direct fire 105-120mm variants available for example. It's my view we should have some vehicle mounted indirect fire capability (which we currently don't). For MBT's unless you are talking about at least a couple of squadrons worth (ie 20-30 with spares), I don't think it's viable (and I'd go with Germany for tanks instead of the British if we were looking at that).

edomac

I'm sure Russia would give us a good deal on the S400 and the Yahont....
But if we could get them to trow in a few of MI-28n as well who needs tanks ..

dr.fuzzenstein

edomac wrote: »

I'm sure Russia would give us a good deal on the S400 and the Yahont....

Maybe now is not the best time to ask :-)

expectationlost

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Fianna Fail)

164. To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade the protocols or agreements that are in place to allow for the entry into Irish controlled air apace, or Irish sovereign air space of British military aircraft; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7471/15]

SO'F asks about British military aircraft the others ask about Russian miltary aircraft.

Brendan Griffin (Kerry South, Fine Gael)

165. To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade the Russian response to Irish concerns over the recent episode involving the flight of a Russian bomber off the west coast; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7525/15]
Brendan Smith (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)

167. To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade the discussions he has had with the Russian Ambassador, or the Russian Minister for Foreign Affairs, regarding the circumstances where two Russian military aircraft entered Irish-controlled airspace in January 2015; if his attention has been drawn to the fact that these aircraft were going to enter-Irish controlled airspace; the details he knew of this situation at the time; the details regarding the episode now; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7473/15]

https://www.kildarestreet.com/wrans/?id=2015-02-19a.455&s=russian+military+aircraft#g459.r

Charles Flanagan (Minister, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade I propose to take Questions Nos. 164, 165 and 167 together.
The Air Navigation (Foreign Military Aircraft) Order 1952 gives the Minister for Foreign Affairs primary responsibility for the regulation of activity by foreign military aircraft in Ireland and in Irish airspace. However, as the aircraft in question did not at any time enter Irish sovereign airspace there was no requirement to seek permission in accordance with the Order.
The aircraft were in an area for which the Irish Aviation Authority (IAA) has responsibility for the provision, operation and management of air navigation services for civil aviation. In the discharge of its operational mandate, pursuant to the Irish Aviation Authority Act, 1993, issues relating to entry into Irish controlled airspace are accordingly a matter for the IAA, which operates under the aegis of my colleague the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport. Given this mandate and the potential impact of this incident on civil aviation, the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport and the IAA monitored this incident closely.
The Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport has since relayed its concerns about the incident to the International Civil Aviation Organisation. It is emphasised that the IAA coordinated closely with its UK counterparts at all stages during the incident so as to avoid a risk to any civil aircraft during the incident. Although there was no such risk on this occasion, such non-notified and non-controlled flight activity is not acceptable.
The Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport consulted with me and with other members of the Government in relation to the incident and on the development of an agreed response.
As part of that agreed response, and at my instruction, a senior official from my Department met with the Russian Ambassador. The official conveyed the serious concerns of the Government about the unacceptable safety risk which could be posed by non-notified and non-controlled flight activity. The Ambassador undertook to bring the concerns expressed to the attention of his authorities in Moscow.

he didn't exactly answere SO'F question

sparky42

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Maybe now is not the best time to ask :-)

How would that go?:

"Hey Russia, can we buy some SAMs to threaten your Bear's with to stop you from flying through our airspace?"

edomac

The Americans fly through our air space every day, and god only knows what they are carrying, could be anything from kidnapped foreign nationals off the streets of Germany to their own nuclear weapons. I'm sure they won't tell us anyway, they won't even tell us what they are taking through Shannon.

expectationlost

edomac wrote: »

The Americans fly through our air space every day, and god only knows what they are carrying, could be anything from kidnapped foreign nationals off the streets of Germany to their own nuclear weapons. I'm sure they won't tell us anyway, they won't even tell us what they are taking through Shannon.

if they do that its with our permission so its a different issue.

Leonidas BL

edomac wrote: »

The Americans fly through our air space every day, and god only knows what they are carrying, could be anything from kidnapped foreign nationals off the streets of Germany to their own nuclear weapons. I'm sure they won't tell us anyway, they won't even tell us what they are taking through Shannon.

Americans love Ireland, Russians couldn't care less about it.

expectationlost

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Fianna Fail)

96. To ask the Minister for Defence to provide details on the weapons that two Russian military aircraft which entered Irish-controlled air space in January 2015 were carrying; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7470/15]

https://www.kildarestreet.com/wrans/?id=2015-02-19a.254&s=airspace#g256.r

Simon Coveney (Minister, Department of Agriculture, the Marine and Food; Cork South Central, Fine Gael)

I am aware that, on 28 January 2015, two Russian military aircraft were in an area for which the Irish Aviation Authority has air traffic control responsibility.
The Air Corps is not tasked or equipped to monitor military aircraft overflying Irish controlled airspace. This position is in accordance with the Air Corps' roles as set out in the White Paper on Defence (2000). Therefore, I am not in a position to provide further information in relation to these aircraft.

sparky42

expectationlost wrote: »

https://www.kildarestreet.com/wrans/?id=2015-02-19a.254&s=airspace#g256.r

What a waste of a question, how in any way would we know what the Bear's were carrying:rolleyes:.

expectationlost

sparky42 wrote: »

What a waste of a question, how in any way would we know what the Bear's were carrying:rolleyes:.

Tom Clonan says he knows.

Sean O’Riordan says they were in the Irish Examiner http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/russian-bomber-in-irish-air-space-had-nuclear-weapon-312161.html#.VNz_g9zJzgA.twitter

Norway Russia plane ID revealed nuclear weapons payload
http://theforeigner.no/pages/news/norway-russia-plane-id-revealed-nuclear-weapons-payload/

The Barents Obersver said the Norwegian military heard radio transmission which included a keyword that meant they had nuclear weapon on board
http://barentsobserver.com/en/security/2015/02/russias-defense-ministry-denies-nuke-onboard-tu-95-02-02

and the express said similar via RAF source
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/555454/Intercepted-Russian-bomber-was-carrying-a-nuclear-missile-over-the-Channel

although
google translate: flights over neutral waters by military aircraft carried out without weapons,Russia Defense Ministry told RIA Novosti
https://translate.google.ie/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fria.ru%2Fdefense_safety%2F20150202%2F1045470193.html&edit-text=&act=url

found this via Barents http://barentsobserver.com/en/security/2014/10/more-100-new-nukes-northern-waters-02-10
START Treaty Aggregate Numbers of Strategic Offensive Arms
Number of NUKES US and Russia have as of September 1, 2014
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/232561.pdf

sparky42

expectationlost wrote: »

Tom Clonan says he knows.

Was he at the Russian airbase before/after they flew or something? The Bears could be carrying a range of weapons or nothing at all, there's no way to know.

expectationlost

sparky42 wrote: »

Was he at the Russian airbase before/after they flew or something? The Bears could be carrying a range of weapons or nothing at all, there's no way to know.

he also says they were in Irish airspace https://twitter.com/TomClonan/status/565572460880601088

edomac

The bear Tu-95MS is not going to enter your airspace, and if it does it's by accident it don't need to,it can stand off.

Jawgap

Transcript from the Bears that dodged about last week.......these guys broadcast in the clear......

https://soundcloud.com/tomteej/russian-air-force-strategic-bomber-hf-voice-18-february-2015-1929-gmt

IrishTrajan

edomac wrote: »

The Americans fly through our air space every day, and god only knows what they are carrying, could be anything from kidnapped foreign nationals off the streets of Germany to their own nuclear weapons. I'm sure they won't tell us anyway, they won't even tell us what they are taking through Shannon.

The Americans tell us they're coming, and are there with our permission. If we revoked access, do you think they'd fly up to the edge of sovereign airspace, taunt us and then fly off? Incredibly unlikely.

Russia is being belligerent, America is being cordial.

edomac

Ya your right America would ask first
CNN reports that a U.S. plane was flying in international airspace to eavesdrop on the Russian military on July 18.
The U.S. Air Force spy plane avoided a run-in with the Russian military just one day after Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 was shot in eastern Ukraine.
CNN reports that the RC-125 Five Joint evaded the Russians by flying into Swedish airspace without Sweden’s permission.
The plane may have traveled into other countries' airspace as well and it's unclear as to whether the plane had permission to do so.

IrishTrajan

edomac wrote: »

Ya your right America would ask first
CNN reports that a U.S. plane was flying in international airspace to eavesdrop on the Russian military on July 18.
The U.S. Air Force spy plane avoided a run-in with the Russian military just one day after Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 was shot in eastern Ukraine.
CNN reports that the RC-125 Five Joint evaded the Russians by flying into Swedish airspace without Sweden’s permission.
The plane may have traveled into other countries' airspace as well and it's unclear as to whether the plane had permission to do so.

America asks us first. I have no problem with Russia spying on America, or America spying on Russia. It's also a false equivalency. America is spying on their geopolitical rival. Russia was blustering around us, a neutral State.

We're also not talking about Russia's or America's actions around Sweden, we're talking about Russia's actions around Ireland.


Oh, and pray tell, how many of those American reconnaissance flights carried ("allegedly") a nuclear warhead onboard?

edomac

International air space and "allegedly" being the keys here,they can fly on magic carpets while performing river dance if they want.
This is just more anti-Russia media hype.

Jawgap

IrishTrajan wrote: »

The Americans tell us they're coming, and are there with our permission. If we revoked access, do you think they'd fly up to the edge of sovereign airspace, taunt us and then fly off? Incredibly unlikely.

Russia is being belligerent, America is being cordial.

I'd say America asks when it suits America (as does the UK) - such as when they need to fly an obviously military plane overhead.

I'd say they regularly fly military cargoes in 'civilian' aircraft over us without asking. Plus I wouldn't doubt for a minute that if they decided it was an issue critical to their security that they wouldn't act without consultation.

IrishTrajan

edomac wrote: »

International air space and "allegedly" being the keys here,they can fly on magic carpets while performing river dance if they want.
This is just more anti-Russia media hype.

International airspace that is in heavy use with civilian planes, without even a formal head's up to civilian aviation authorities.

I agree, it's anti-Russia hype. You know why, though? Because Russia was being belligerent. If America did it to us, if the British did it, or the French, the media would still kick up a fuss about it.

It's not just about they doing it once, it's that they came back a couple weeks' later for the sole purpose of sticking their fingers up at us.

IrishTrajan

Jawgap wrote: »

I'd say America asks when it suits America (as does the UK) - such as when they need to fly an obviously military plane overhead.

I'd say they regularly fly military cargoes in 'civilian' aircraft over us without asking. Plus I wouldn't doubt for a minute that if they decided it was an issue critical to their security that they wouldn't act without consultation.

A similar false equivalency. It's not critical to Russia's security to strut around trying to show off their reach to us, so your analogy isn't entirely relevant here.

Edit: Just off-the-record, I agree with you. America does what is in America's best interests, regardless of public opinions. But they don't fly bombers around our borders as a symbolic middle-finger.

edomac

Just like the 80's we are on the target list again because of Shannon.
Would you consider this a breach of Ireland neutrality and our air space this is just one that we know of.
A C-130 specter gunship landed at Shannon with a weapons on board. We were told this was an administrative error and that it had no permit to land.
The policy is inconsistent. In 2003, Judge Kearns ruled in the case of Horgan v. Ireland in the High Court that it was illegal and a breach of international laws on neutrality for the Government to give approval for the movement of troops or munitions on their way to a war front.

Jawgap

edomac wrote: »

Just like the 80's we are on the target list again because of Shannon.
Would you consider this a breach of Ireland neutrality and our air space this is just one that we know of.
A C-130 specter gunship landed at Shannon with a weapons on board. We were told this was an administrative error and that it had no permit to land.
The policy is inconsistent. In 2003, Judge Kearns ruled in the case of Horgan v. Ireland in the High Court that it was illegal and a breach of international laws on neutrality for the Government to give approval for the movement of troops or munitions on their way to a war front.

We are not on the target list and even in the 1980s we were never on the target list - a fact confirmed by Soviet officers who visited the Curragh in late 1980s.

cruasder777

Jawgap wrote: »

We are not on the target list and even in the 1980s we were never on the target list - a fact confirmed by Soviet officers who visited the Curragh in late 1980s.

Shannon is the gateway between the US and Europe and of strategic and logistical importance in regards troops movements into Europe, its on the target list.

Irish declassified intel. documents confirm this. Bantry Bay is another target.


http://westcorktimes.com/home/archives/3909


Obviously Soviet officers visiting the Curragh would hardly state that.

Jawgap

cruasder777 wrote: »

Shannon is the gateway between the US and Europe and of strategic and logistical importance in regards troops movements into Europe, its on the target list.

Irish declassified intel. documents confirm this. Bantry Bay is another target.


http://westcorktimes.com/home/archives/3909


Obviously Soviet officers visiting the Curragh would hardly state that.

Dear God the West Cork Times! What next, the Skibbereen Eagle!


Desmond Travers is a retired Irish Army Colonel and former Commandant of the Military College - he has written extensively about this and talked to then serving Soviet military and diplomatic personnel as well as continuing his research into his retirement (when not working as Director of Institute for International Criminal Investigations or as a Member of United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict).

He has found that the Soviet 'world view' did not encompass in Ireland - they had nothing targeted at us because in their view there was nothing to target. NATO / the West tended to over-estimate Soviet intentions - for example the UK identified over 100 targets it reckoned the Soviets would attempt to hit in a nuclear exchange. They estimated that about 150 missiles were pointed at the country - when Cold War ended and researchers obtained access to archives they found that the USSR had 11 missiles pointed at the UK......