Ireland - lack of air and naval defence.

ancientmariner

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119263009#Comment_119263009

The PDF was designed to be where it is by the CS to balance the Books once Pay rates, allowances, and ration Structures were change by the Remuneration and conditions i.e. reduce Establishment by 5000 all ranks. They also got rid of much real estate.

I listened to Patrick Sanders C.I.G.S. maiden speech this morning and it's theme is to MOBILISE and STRENGTHEN alongside their Allies in NATO /EU area with less dependence on US support the latter looking to defence in the Pacific area. He is starting NOW and sees budgetary figures in the order of 41Bn Sterling.

A remarkable thing about his speech is that he appears to be also directing the Defence Civil Servants to meet immediate mobilisation factors. The immediate job is restocking and replacing munitions and equipment given away to Ukraine. He also wants to use a best in theatre list of effective equipment and stock up from those weapon systems. We are starting with a clean sheet whereby the Navy and Air Corps need to be restarted and tactically re-based as required. We first must get a clear indication of Armed levels to be achieved and do so on a short scale of less than 3 years. We must work with other Forces to ensure in an EU sense we fit into an Order of Battle.

A brief list should include CDA GM system range 300nm, Fighter Aircraft, MPA's, embedded SHORADS for the Army, Upgrading ATGM systems, Surveillance Systems, Drone weapon delivery systems, UP Arming Naval vessels and acquiring suitable multi role vessels for AS, AD, and ASW duties. Aspire to use of conventional AIP submarines, the ultimate offensive weapon, and develop a minelaying and clearance capability. Harness Irish Industry to assist in weapon manufacture under licence or home produced.

jonnybigwallet

That pretty much hits the nail on the head, alongside upgrading of port and airfield infrastructure, decent pay and conditions accross the board, and decent accomodation and messing facilities to make the job attractive.

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119263321#Comment_119263321

And it’s fantasy fleet time again.

ancientmariner

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119263371#Comment_119263371

Not really. If our place in Europe means anything and we are willing to be part of a common future, including dealing with conflict, then we must play our part in a precise way. It could be that in an escalating phase that others may equip us to a required standard. We cannot remain outside when common enterprise is a hall mark of the EU.

Markcheese

Up to now , I would have said nah , boys toys , no real need ...

But , between Russian aggression, our economies depenance on connection to the Europe,UK and the US,

And also the prospect of a huge offshore energy sector , which in an era of energy crisis will need protecting , but I'd be targeting our spending ,

And then we've to decide about our neutrality- just because we're safe on the western edge of Europe do we tell our European neighbours and partners that they're on their own ?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055762629/ireland-lack-of-air-and-naval-defence

The OP is a classic of its kind. It starts with a perfectly factual statement and a widely accepted truism of IR and military capacity. So far so good.

The statement about Britain will upset many here but it is true if lacking in the nuance so beloved of some.

It then proceeds to identify France as a possible ally. Again, no issues there as it is both EU, historically connected to Ireland’s struggle for independence and a naval power.

Finally we get to the last part. The OP has shown knowledge of IR and current thinking on alliances and possible partners. And then talks about “stationing” an aircraft carrier in the Shannon Estuary. If I was to ask for a post to attack and undermine any reasonable and responsible discussion of Ireland’s defense fiasco it would look remarkably like that.

So the question is Cui bono? NGOs anxious to protect their access to the funds siphoned from defence? Check. Left wingers determined to keep Ireland in a state of naive moralistic idiocy for ideological reasons? Check. Russia looking to keep NATOs western flank stretched to limit resource transfer elsewhere? Check. Irish politicians determined to keep public funds flowing to all sorts of local projects for the best of reasons, re-election? Check. Brexiteers looking to keep Ireland in a state of pliable dependency as a tool to weaken the EU? Check. Some lad looking for a laugh and it’s ingrained in most Irish to laugh at the concept of being able to defend themselves? Check.

When you look at the list of those who gain from a belittlement of our Defence needs and our sovereignty and independence you understand how undermined we as a people are and how difficult the task of paying properly for a credible Defence will be.

ancientmariner

The Defence/Offence scene at sea is being carried out by no one country on solo missions. The Nato alliance have just complete Operation" Dynamic Mongoose" off the western Seaboard hunting 3 enemy submarines provided for the purpose, 2 conventional Subs and one Nuclear sub. They used half a dozen surface Frigates, with Helicopters and more than a dozen MPA flights. The RN Type 23 Frigates with updates can work seamlessly with the Poseidon MPA and obviously the other participants also. If we are to fit in to common enterprise then we must progress to fitting into actual Naval Tasks and try to be relevant to the Defence of Europe.

An ARW Type exercise was carried out off the coast of Devon where Commando units were Helicasted from a number of Sea Stallions with their attack craft to carry out a simulated attack ashore.

All countries are busy training and getting ready we are busy over the years unpicking skills, re-equipping by expedience, side-lining skills that are technically difficult or socially demanding. We may be facing more loss of property and training areas and a reduction in choices and flexibility. The only clear way forward is a clear Defence Plan to fit into European defence tasks now that Uk is no longer an EU member,

The Summer Statement has set out the boundaries of budget spending. RTE saying about €2.7 billion left for new public spending after dealing with tax cuts and maintaining services. I’d guess a billion to go on cost of living crisis.

So €1.7 billion left. That has to be divided up between the competing Ministers. Martin is no friend of Defence and is obsessed with sending money to the “shared island” unit to spend in what is and will remain a foreign jurisdiction. Population increase means more TDs for Dublin and Cork so expect spending there too try to win govt seats.

What will Defence get? Pay issues sorted. Replacement of ships about to be retired probably with inshore type vessels. One medium / long haul aircraft. It’s Option 1 with ferocious denials it is because you know lads, there are bigger priorities. I’ll cut down to two fig rolls a day from three if I’m wrong.

Just saw online that they’ve signed off on a business plan for a metro link for Dublin. Initial estimate €9,000,000,000 to €12,000,000,000 (9b to 12b). Going by childrens hospital … 27b to 36b. Who knows.

Gary kk

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119290724#Comment_119290724

Think it's meant to be over the next 12 years or so

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119290928#Comment_119290928

It is and likely to be longer tbh, but don’t let that get in the way of a rant. We know the broad figures now for the next budget, we know the talk has been about LoA2(+?) and we know it’s not going to be done in a single year.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119290928#Comment_119290928

So….a billion a year. Yep, option 1.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119290986#Comment_119290986

You need to look at the figures. There is not enough there for anything beyond patching up option 1 issues. It will be dressed up as a multi year development but then you will have all the other priorities kick in and watch it wither.

I could be wrong ofc. I just don’t see the numbers for anything else.

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119291085#Comment_119291085

LoA2 is an extra €500 million a year, that is easily achievable and sustainable in the budget, it could be done even in one year, there’s been some mixed comments about going to €2 billion, which might fit the comments about parts of LoA3 but that’s fuzzy. LoA1 has been dismissed by everyone as a non runner, and politically LoA2 has clearly been the landing ground. Now of course that depends on the next government sustaining the Option but there’s nothing we can do about that right now.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119291113#Comment_119291113

Option 2 costed at €500 m?

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119291187#Comment_119291187

Yep, an additional 50% increase on current spend, there's no real economic block to increasing it that much.

Checked the Report again. Estimate of option 2 is 1.5 bn. The 500m estimate is taking the current budget and subtracting it from this. The problem is there is so much remediation to be done on top of current grossly inadequate budget that €500m will very quickly shrink doing that.

Watch how spend already done on “coastguard” vessels (by taking funds from Defence) is counted as “coastal Defence”.

Political twisting about announcing funds several times and money already spent will make it sound more than it is.

If I see a spend of around €800m extra next year that would be a start.

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119291258#Comment_119291258

What "Coastguard Vessels"? There's the couple of new Revenue boats but that's not coming from the defence budget, the MRV is already factored into the Capital budget already. And no there's not going to be €800 million next year, or any lump sum, that has already been said multiple times.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119291283#Comment_119291283

I didn’t see any announcement of €500m. Who said the amount already?

Edit: Coastguard vessels funded from 20m taken from Defence budget, media report Iirc.

The coastguard vessels are the revenue cutters: my error. The funding of these at circa 10m each was to be achieved through the extraordinary underspend on Defence returned to the exchequer.

The MRV you mention is not capable of patrolling the EEZ and there is one in the pipeline.

From what you are saying we are looking at remediation under option 1 and a lot of political spin around it. I hope I’m wrong.

Dohvolle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119291364#Comment_119291364

Buddy,

Go back and do some research. You are wayy off the maps here.

Coastguard is not revenue, revenue is not defence, coastguard is not defence.

Holy **** man, you're just spewing out any sort of nonsense!

And you are saying the MRV cannot do EEZ patrols? Why, oh tell me that a vessel DESIGNED for EEZ patrols from day one, but yet to be finalised, let alone built, cannot do EEZ patrols. What wisdom are you saving up that nobody else in the world has encountered?

Do you also have next weeks lotto numbers?

Dohvolle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119291329#Comment_119291329

Source or retract.

Dohvolle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119291187#Comment_119291187

Calling it "option 2" demonstrates a total misunderstanding of the CoDF report. Read it again. These are not options.

They are (the clue is in the title) level of ambitions. LOA 1 is maintaining the current status quo, which, the experts have said, is not providing the minimum level of Defence the DF has agreed to provide. LOA 2 is reaching a level where the bare minimum defence capability can be provided (Relying on other nations to assist us in the Air & Sea), and is a stepping stone to LOA3, which is a properly equipped Defence force to carry out all current roles and many roles it should have been doing, but did not have the equipment or staff to do. (pre Feb 2022 at least. Everything has changed since).

Reaching LOA2 will require not just equipment, but extra staff and changed work practices.

The Current situation, which anyone with a passing interest in defence would be well aware of unless they were living under a rock on the side of a mountain for the last 6 months, is we are waiting for the Minister for Defence to bring a memo to cabinet approving a multi year increase in Defence spending from the current level of just about €1bn, to €1.5bn. That was supposed to happen last Tuesday. Now it may happen today, or next week, we shall see.

ancientmariner

Spending at any time has to be relevant. Our history so far, particularly on the Naval scene has been acquisition of ships, some designed for Naval tasks, like corvettes and minesweepers, but all required to "patrol" and fulfil peace time policing duties. Other than P31, which seemed to open up modern capabilities, we continue to opt for patrolling and minimising intervention in Hot situations.

The Metro in Dublin is a wise spend for reasons other than transport. we may have a major shelter resource for thousands of people in time of danger. The Ukranians are blessed with so much underground facilities well hardened under factories.

Budgets once assigned should not be notional or deliberately deflected to non-defence spending. Getting back to relevance please don't buy ships or boats for optical or political reasons. Get out your JANE's and look at other Navies such as the Finns, Swedes, Norwegians, Danes, and Belgians. All new tonnage can float and patrol but it must have a Naval deterrent/intervention capability.

I will be hopefully present, this week, to see P31 decommissioned along with her HOSTAC capabilities and Primary/Secondary radar and IFF, and the loss of 80 or more personnel from the establishment including the skills expensively acquired on overseas courses.

Dohvolle

Many of us believed the P60 would be an improvement over the P50 in Naval terms. In reality, the additional capabilities promised on the initial graphics from the builder, never materialised. None were fitted with the Air Search radar all were fitted for, and the larger space aft which could potentially be used to store TEUs or launch small UAV, has only ever been used to store TEU. What we got was a P50 with slightly more efficient powerplant, and space for three TEU, instead of just one. A missed opportunity, given the other designs that were offered at the time, including what the Australian Navy will soon be operating as replacement for their Armidales.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119291875#Comment_119291875

Options is perfectly fine. I corrected error re coastguard/revenue. The point which you missed is that funds that belong to Defence were underspent and the underspend pays for vessels elsewhere.

The MRV one in number, one, did I say one? Is utterly inadequate to patrol EEZ.

I don’t see the numbers for a true capacity build up in 500m extra. I see remediation. I see spin. Let’s see first if the political parties responsible for gutting the Defence forces allocate 500m per year. A budget of 1.5 bn will quickly deliver far less than thought.

As I said, I hope I’m wrong .

Dohvolle

It has been (since 2008 at least) one with option for one more. Its a huge investment from a naval viewpoint,(and rising) if half way through build it is found to be a flawed design, we don't want to be tied to building a second. That's how options work. Get it right and you'll get the second for the same price as the first, at potentially huge savings. Everyone in NHQ wants 2 of type, minimum, since first concept long ago. But let's get one on the keel blocks first. As it stands what was first proposed bears little resemblance to what is now required. We have learnt from the experience of others, in particular NZ, who got it badly wrong with HMNZS Canterbury.

Markcheese

What sort of naval service do we need if we were to invest in grippens or f16s ?

Is it basically just beckets with a radar system and a small anti-aircraft system for self defence ... And a multi-role vessel (or 2 🤔),

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119293099#Comment_119293099

You seem to be missing the whole undersea aspect?

Dohvolle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119293099#Comment_119293099

We invest in both. It isn't a question of one or the other.

What we need is well documented over the years, by many more qualified than I. A 12 ship fleet is the ideal arrangement (requiring a 2000 pers Naval Service)

• 2 Multi Role Vessels
• 2 Counter IED vessels
• 6 OPV
• 2 IPV

The MRV has changed in its expected role many times since the idea first came about. Originally we were looking at having an OPV large enough to handle the increasingly large wave heights experience in the far north Atlantic, where we are expected to Patrol. If we had to have a 120m OPV, then what else could we fit in. At the time we were frequently bringing armoured vehicles and equipment overseas on the decks of OPVs. A larger vessel could carry more than 2 Jeeps lashed to the exposed deck aft. B&V had provided a proposal to the RNZN at that time which was based on the hull of the Meko 200 Frigate. That design was unsuccessful, and NZ experience has shown the idea of a frigate hull carrying vehicles was better than a ferry hull pressed into doing an OPV job. The idea of an MRV/EPV(Extended Patrol Vessel) has matured somewhat since, and the Army are keen to have a greater presence aboard, more akin to a light LPD, though not an actual LPD. Fact is our overseas profile is changing, and the days of shipping vehicles and equipment in a civvy vessel through what may be contested waters, is no longer a viable option in all cases.

As ships approach end of life, as is the case with certain OPV, replace them with multi role frigates with a mix of ASW and AA capability. The EPC has been mentioned, though there are no firm designs as yet. The existing OPV fleet is not expected to have the longevity of its predecessors, (40 years) and in that case, by the end of the 2030s we should have a clearer picture of what we wish to replace them with. More OPV or More EPCs. Make no mistake though, an OPV can ve a valuable asset in all circumstances. The RN routinely use theirs to escort Russian Warships through its waters, and doing so deprive the opportunity of the Russians to analyse the ECM output of their frontline warships. We need to start putting helidecks back on ships large enough to carry them though. Not doing so greatly limits future upgrading.

With regards to counter IED, that is an interesting proposal, given modern technology, and the move towards the use of USV in this role. Potentially we could follow the NZ path and purchase a former Dive support ship (or two), which has all the technology aboard to support this work, and that of clearance divers. There is a surplus of this type of vessel at present, and purchase costs have plummeted. Alternatively the UK plan to replace their MCM fleet soon, and it will be interesting to see if they will follow the NL/Bel design (built in France) or come up with their own design doing the same thing. In addition if France chose to Join the NL/Bel program it will significantly reduce unit cost for what appears to be a very capable type.

The IPV arriving in April next will provide a useful template to figure out how to operate ships away from Haulbowline, double crewed. If it works, it will make life in the NS a lot easier to manage. While they saw little use with the RNZN, it would be expected they would be in service for at least 20 years with us after commissioning. After that, who knows what 2043 will dictate will replace them. Assuming we still exist at all by then.