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

Replacment for Cessna 172

Options
2456718

Comments

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


    Stovepipe wrote: »
    ...It reinforced the need for organic helicopter assets and their utility in a country with no metalled roads....

    is there any mood music within, or coming out of, the AC with regards to its deployability?

    obviously the AC can only go abroad when ministers say so, but are the IAC actively trying to improve their deployability in the hope that the DoD will decide to use them?


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,979 ✭✭✭Stovepipe


    Hi there,
    For years, the culture was against either (forced) cooperation with outside agencies (the gardai) or the "real" Army. There was a genuine disdain for all things "real" Army, even within Heli Flight, who were most in contact with the Army units. The Naval co-op turned into a ball of wax and the less-than-covert dislike of the Army was really pissing off high office in Parkgate Street. Initially, cooperation with the gardai was riven with often quite bitter inter-organisation rivalry until the Gardai made very loud noises upstairs and won the day. It took quite a while for things to settle down and mature. The Air Corps were forced to stop being such immature children and to drastically improve their levels of cooperation with the Army, which is why, these days, an Army unit commander can request the use of helicopter or fixed-wing assets and be quite confident of getting it. Now, in saying that, the will to go off-base might not yet be there, as the Don doesn't even deploy in Ireland for longer than a day or two. Mentally, a lot of the Donners are willing to go overseas and have done so, but as infantry, so the personal will is there. It's just getting the system mentality up to going overseas is the problem.

    regards
    Stovepipe


  • Registered Users Posts: 871 ✭✭✭savagecabbages


    Stovepipe wrote: »
    Hi there,
    For years, the culture was against either (forced) cooperation with outside agencies (the gardai) or the "real" Army. There was a genuine disdain for all things "real" Army, even within Heli Flight, who were most in contact with the Army units. The Naval co-op turned into a ball of wax and the less-than-covert dislike of the Army was really pissing off high office in Parkgate Street. Initially, cooperation with the gardai was riven with often quite bitter inter-organisation rivalry until the Gardai made very loud noises upstairs and won the day. It took quite a while for things to settle down and mature. The Air Corps were forced to stop being such immature children and to drastically improve their levels of cooperation with the Army, which is why, these days, an Army unit commander can request the use of helicopter or fixed-wing assets and be quite confident of getting it. Now, in saying that, the will to go off-base might not yet be there, as the Don doesn't even deploy in Ireland for longer than a day or two. Mentally, a lot of the Donners are willing to go overseas and have done so, but as infantry, so the personal will is there. It's just getting the system mentality up to going overseas is the problem.

    regards
    Stovepipe

    Out of curiosity, what did they want?


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,979 ✭✭✭Stovepipe


    Over time, the Gardai and Army wanted more helicopter time and more fixed-wing surveillance time and more parachuting time and so on and they had been assured all this but when it came to actually providing aircraft, there were some very embarrassing moments when the promised aircraft didn't turn up. The Gardai and Army were getting very pissed off with continuous promises and no delivery. There was one famous incident where a senior Officer from a Curragh unit rang Heli Flight demanding to know where the much-promised helis were (this is back in Alouette days), so there began a sequence of him being handed from Billy to Jack around the phone-lines of Heli Flight. Eventually, the phone rang and rang until one of the Airmen Techs answered it, along the lines of "What? Who? No! **** Off!", thinking it was a local wind-up, and put the phone down. Naturally, senior Army types do not like that kind of thing and he went pear-shaped and started a ****storm which flowed uphill and then down hill, ending up with the Airman being wheeled in for a bollocking. Pointy words were said at senior level and this improved dramatically thereafter.

    regards
    Stovepipe


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,195 ✭✭✭goldie fish


    OS119 wrote: »
    is there any mood music within, or coming out of, the AC with regards to its deployability?

    obviously the AC can only go abroad when ministers say so, but are the IAC actively trying to improve their deployability in the hope that the DoD will decide to use them?

    GOC AC has said in a recent interview that he would like to see the AC having the capability to deploy overseas, in addition he would like the AC to be able to bring the Overseas aid that the Irish State provides, overseas. At present the state has no assets to do so.

    Of course it all depends on funding.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,979 ✭✭✭Stovepipe


    Moving aircraft overseas is simple enough, given that the DF can move Piranhas and AMLs, then a folded 139 should be no problem. A nice compact 135 is even easier. If the Don wants to get into the business of actually carrying overseas aid, to, say, Uganda (a very big recipient of Irish aid, afaik), then he should set up a freight airline and a trucking company because that's what it takes in the real world, as well he knows.
    Right now, the DF can scarcely move itself off the island, as it has no ships or freight aircraft of it's own that can do the job, so making the leap to shipping baby food to East Africa is a bit of a reach.

    regards
    Stovepipe


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,195 ✭✭✭goldie fish


    Stovepipe wrote: »
    Moving aircraft overseas is simple enough, given that the DF can move Piranhas and AMLs, then a folded 139 should be no problem. A nice compact 135 is even easier. If the Don wants to get into the business of actually carrying overseas aid, to, say, Uganda (a very big recipient of Irish aid, afaik), then he should set up a freight airline and a trucking company because that's what it takes in the real world, as well he knows.
    Right now, the DF can scarcely move itself off the island, as it has no ships or freight aircraft of it's own that can do the job, so making the leap to shipping baby food to East Africa is a bit of a reach.

    regards
    Stovepipe

    Navy have planned for the freight route already. I think GoC AC is just trying to catch up in case they steal the run on him. You can stick a lot more overseas aid on the deck of an extra large Patrol Vessel than you can in the hold of an average military transport.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,640 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    i was looking at a Cessna on a cash escort today and taught surely they must be near there sell by date? or can they keep flying for ever as long as there well maintained?


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,355 ✭✭✭gallag


    Stop being so miserable and splash out on a few f-35's, yes I know they dont really seem to work yet but they look cool!


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,500 ✭✭✭tac foley


    Re: parachuting and smaller aircraft. According to a good friend of mine, ex-Air Corps, there is a requirement to be able to escape from ANY single or two-seat fixed-wing service aircraft by jettisoning the canopy, and using a parachute.

    The Marchetti, backbone of the Air Corps for many years, could only be flown in the air recce role above a certain height, where the chances of being able to escape the aircraft in one piece and use the parachute were better than even. This is due to the fact that the recce pod then in service had an unfortunate habit of catching fire, and, being almost invisible to the pilot, he was going to need all the help that he could get to survive.

    tac


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 179 ✭✭NewSigGuy


    tac foley wrote: »
    Re: parachuting and smaller aircraft. According to a good friend of mine, ex-Air Corps, there is a requirement to be able to escape from ANY single or two-seat fixed-wing service aircraft by jettisoning the canopy, and using a parachute.

    The Marchetti, backbone of the Air Corps for many years, could only be flown in the air recce role above a certain height, where the chances of being able to escape the aircraft in one piece and use the parachute were better than even. This is due to the fact that the recce pod then in service had an unfortunate habit of catching fire, and, being almost invisible to the pilot, he was going to need all the help that he could get to survive.

    tac

    Hi,

    Never heard of any of that with regard to the Vinten pod, the altitude flown was based on the focal length of the camera.

    With regard to the Para requirement from single two seaters, again another piece of info I never heard before and doesn't seam to stand up with high wing aircraft like the C-172..

    Interesting thoughts about a possible Cessna replacement, for me I think a Cessna 206 fits the bill, very similar type just more capable.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    GOC AC has said in a recent interview that he would like to see the AC having the capability to deploy overseas, in addition he would like the AC to be able to bring the Overseas aid that the Irish State provides, overseas. At present the state has no assets to do so.

    Of course it all depends on funding.

    I think it's understandable that the country's senior air commander would want to enhance the AC's airlift capacity, but I think you'd have to question whether it's a necessity - to be able to send aid in meaningful quantities beyond Europe wouldn't you be talking about procuring at least two four engine turbo prop aircraft?

    Nice to have, but I'm not sure they're essential?

    I accept they're essential for a range of other missions, but are the DF expecting to develop a rapid deployment role that would require such aircraft?

    As for replacing the venerable 172, what about the PC-6 Porter?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,195 ✭✭✭goldie fish


    I think it would be enough to have an aircraft capable of getting a platoon of soldiers out of the country in one flight at least..... We don't have that at present.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    I would've thought if we're ever sending a platoon or company somewhere in a hurry it will be as part of the Nordic Battle Group and we'd have access to the necessary aircraft through that structure.

    I think it would be great if the AC got a couple of A400Ms or secondhand C130s, but I don't it could be justified.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,640 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    For getting troops out of the country would we be not better of doing what we do now stick with charter planes. Instead of having a large transport plane parked up most of the time as we dont deploy overseas every week. An any funds that would be used in a larger aircraft be used instead on more helicopters and a cessna replacement, basically only buy aircraft we will use every day/week?


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 2,688 Mod ✭✭✭✭Morpheus


    Any new aircraft (if we could afford them) i would have thought would best be of the C130 size and primarily slaved to maritime patrol squadron with contingency for troop transport.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,640 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    I know a lot of people hear will prob shoot me for saying this but i think buying the likes of a c130 is a complete waste of money. If its marmtime patrol we need to expand theres cheaper options. The budget is only going to get tighter so we need to be cute with the funds in buying the most amount of aircraft that will do the most amount of work on a daily basis . Just a question on the side how often is a major parchute excercise held?


  • Registered Users Posts: 514 ✭✭✭Savage93


    I think it would be enough to have an aircraft capable of getting a platoon of soldiers out of the country in one flight at least..... We don't have that at present.

    Oh yes we do , it's called Aer Lingus:):):):):)


  • Registered Users Posts: 590 ✭✭✭Leonidas BL


    Seen a rumor on another forum about this being the replacement for the 172. Any updates on it?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamond_DA42

    [MOD]Stupidly large image deleted[/MOD]


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 257 ✭✭dandyelevan


    Savage93 wrote: »
    Oh yes we do , it's called Aer Lingus:):):):):)

    Can't depend on Aer Lingus.
    They left us 'sittin on the tarmac' at least once after refusing to fly us to Beirut, it being too dangerous for them.
    Got a civilian carrier from Norway to bring us instead.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,109 ✭✭✭Psychlops




  • Registered Users Posts: 2,712 ✭✭✭roundymac


    Can't depend on Aer Lingus.
    They left us 'sittin on the tarmac' at least once after refusing to fly us to Beirut, it being too dangerous for them.
    Got a civilian carrier from Norway to bring us instead.
    These flights would have been UN flights organised and paid for by the same. If I were the EI CEO I would have refused to fly there as well. Did you ask Ryanair to fly you there?


  • Registered Users Posts: 590 ✭✭✭Leonidas BL


    Psychlops wrote: »

    I doubt it seeing as you were in 2017 when you posted that.
    Hopefully this year...


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,109 ✭✭✭Psychlops


    I doubt it seeing as you were in 2017 when you posted that.
    Hopefully this year...

    No problem, in the link provided it says the Article is "Published on January 3rd, 2017 | by Jim Lee".:)


  • Registered Users Posts: 590 ✭✭✭Leonidas BL


    Any updates on this yet?


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,888 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Any updates on this yet?

    The RFI is out, looks like it's set up for the PC12 airframe.


  • Registered Users Posts: 398 ✭✭DanMurphy


    Savage93 wrote: »
    Oh yes we do , it's called Aer Lingus:):):):):)

    (As a Lebanon veteran) On a few occasions, and at the last minute, Aer Lingus refused to fly us to Beitut / or home from Beirut, back in the 80s and 90s.
    Thank God for Norwegian Airlines who flew us there and back when Aer Lingus deemed it 'too dangerous' to fly into Beirut.
    Therefore, I wouldn't depend on Aer Lingus to fly troops to any troubled spot.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,640 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    With the PC12s coming over the next two years what way will it work with parking up the cessnas will they go in one go or will they be Going one at a time as the pc 12’s arrive?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,888 ✭✭✭sparky42


    I see Kehoe and Mellet were over looking at the Pilatus factory and the GD factory doing the MOWAG upgrade:
    https://twitter.com/DF_COS


Advertisement