Fighter jets for the Air Corps?

Manic Moran

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119937766#Comment_119937766

Not the worst idea, especially given the time zone issues. I shall make investigations.

Sgt. Bilko 09

The US are realising the the official images of the B-21 today

Larbre34

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119947754#Comment_119947754

I see the Irish exchequer just collected 5 billion yoyos in Corporation Tax just in the month of November.

Raise us an auld Purchase Order for 2 Raiders there Sarge.

banie01

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119890767#Comment_119890767

Further news on the Poland/Korea deal. It does likely that the KF-21 will be built in Poland. Interesting times ahead with a Euro based production line and maintenance facility. Just how many units can they sell to NATO members who might baulk at the cost of an F35?

Interesting times ahead.

https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1598747951915991046?t=bAOdL81BktY72UQP-Sw4OQ&s=19

Sgt. Bilko 09

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119949644#Comment_119949644

trade in a pc9 with 2 bln and they are yous….

jonnybigwallet

I see that korean firm KAI have developed a new light attack helicopter. Might come in handy for our DF. Potentially have a couple on the new MRV as well.

roadmaster

I see on Air Corps Facebook all but 1 of the newly qualified cadets did there basic flight training with the USAF.

Is this the way it is going to be done from now on? It seams between fixed wing and rotary it is heading that all training overseas?

Not nesscarily a bad thing as it gets training quicker and frees up ressources.

If we ever did get fighters this will probably be the way we will go

Larbre34

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119952384#Comment_119952384

Its not a feckin amphibious warfare ship, what in jaysis would we be doing with attack helicopters on it??

jonnybigwallet

Protecting the ship and adding capability.

Larbre34

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119953271#Comment_119953271

From the rigours of an amphibious landing presumably?

Attack helicopters don't protect ships, they cover troop landings and take out opposition armour, not something an Irish MRV will EVER do.

Landing and supply ships are protected by their own onboard defences, anti-submarine measures from aircraft and fighting ships and by formation operations.

This Multi-role Vessel, if and when we see it, will have the ability to deploy and support troops in theatre on UN missions with equipment and supply, to patrol our own EEZ out to Mid-Atlantic and work with the C-295s to track multiple contacts on and under the surface and also to go to humanitarian disaster situations in the Western hemisphere to supply aid, evacuate victims and operate a field hospital level facility to administer minor procedures and to stabilise people for onward transport.

What it is NOT going to be, is one of these....

Markcheese

I thought Ukraine had reinforced the vulnerability of attack helicopters ,

Doesn't mean helicopters are a bad idea on a ship , but relatively small drones are probably cheaper to buy , cheaper to operate, and obviously more expendable for certain roles ..

banie01

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119953499#Comment_119953499

Russia's use of helicopters inUkraine has reinforced only the vulnerability of Attack helicopters used piecemeal and with poor tactical integration and training. Russia have been a great example of "all the gear, no idea" IMO.

The Ukrainian use of helicopters has reinforced just how important an attack and battlefield support role helicopter can be. Ukrainian helicopter support kept Azov supplied in Mariupol while they were under siege. The Ukrainian helicopter strikes on Belgorod and other russian sites are all demonstrations of just how important a well trained and motivated helicopter pilot cadre is.

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119953499#Comment_119953499

Russian loses in Ukraine, whether you are talking troops, tanks/IFVs, helicopters/planes or ships reinforces the vulnerability of a military that has crap doctrine and institutional corruption at every level from CinC to the lowest private.

Psychlops

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119953499#Comment_119953499

Russian Attack Helicopters you mean.

Psychlops

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119953017#Comment_119953017

Until we have enough to train our own..

saabsaab

A Saab deal could include training in its package.

'a leasing agreement with the Swedish Government. There are currently several such agreements in place between Sweden and a number of client states.

It is critical to note that the leasing agreement with the Czech Republic includes training of pilots and techniciansin Sweden. The lease contract price over 10 years for 14 aircraft is very reasonable by comparison with the cost buying the aircraft outright which could involve an up front payment of €700 million plus training and support costs.

On 14 June 2004, it was announced that the Czech Republic was to lease 14 Gripen aircraft, modified to comply with NATO standards.[169] The agreement also included the training of Czech pilots and technicians in Sweden.'

continued...

'In September 2013, the Defence and Security Export Agency

announced that a follow-up agreement with the Czech Republic had been completed to

extend the lease by 14 years, until 2029; leased aircraft shall also undergo extensive

modernization, including the adoption of new datalinks.[173] The lease also has an option

of eventually acquiring the fighters outright.

While the Hungarian Air Force operates a total of 14 Gripen aircraft under lease,[172] in

2011, the country reportedly intended to purchase these aircraft outright.[186] However, in

January 2012, the Hungarian and Swedish governments agreed to extend the lease

period for a further ten years; according to Hungarian Defence Minister Csaba Hende,

the agreement represented considerable cost savings

An additional element of us buying from Sweden is that we are dealing within the EU and

the aircraft would be supplied by a fellow Neutral nation.

The implementation of the proposals in this submission will greatly enhance the capability

of the Air Corps in particular and the Defence Forces in general.'

Larbre34

The sales brochure from, um, Saab?

Old news. Nearly every defence maker sent in some sort of glossy to the Commission on Defence, for planes, or ships, or armour. Its what defence makers do.

jonnybigwallet

It's a good sales pitch nonetheless and given how stingy the DOD is with funding capital investment it could fly!

No pun intended.

BTW...that was a cracking looking MRV that Larbert posted the snap of.

Markcheese

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119954152#Comment_119954152

Obviously tactics count , but attack helicopters have always been vulnerable, and in a battlespace flooded with man- pads it's even more vuknerable ,

The Ukrainians even have a phone app for aircraft detection - you tap on the aircraft type you saw ,you indicate rough direction and send , ( assuming you have a phone/data connection) that info gets collated and pinged back to AA units , some of whom are just a guy in the trees with a man pad- if that gives the guy an extra second or 2 to get ready , and a vague direction to look that ups his chance of making a shot ,

roadmaster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119954155#Comment_119954155

For a organiastion as small as the air corps it maybe no harm outsourcing basic flight training to the likes of the USAF

Its a but ironic they are back training on cessnas but

Dohvolle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119958920#Comment_119958920

Oddly, we never used our Cessna 172 in the training role. They did everything else, except flight training.

roadmaster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119959637#Comment_119959637

Was it Marchetti then Fouga or if Rotary Marchetti then Gazzelle?

Beta Ray Bill

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119954650#Comment_119954650

I think the news is relevant now at the end of 2022 given what's happening in Ukraine.

France is basically prepping for war for the last few years with the focus being on modern effective equipment that can be replaced as its destroyed in a prolonged war.

The concern is that a lot of the expensive equipment will be be destroyed at the start of the conflict with no REAL way to replace it like for like in a short space of time because of all the bespoke equipment used.

I don't know what the values are for Dassault Rafale, but it's well known that SAAB during peace time can mange approx 20 JAS 39 airframes a year. Put that in context against a company like Lockheed Martin's (whose 10 times bigger than SAAB AB) ability to produce approx 60 F-35 airframes per year. There's purchasing parity and domestic scaling to be considered there too.

Its fairly clear at this point that if the US chose, it could roll out well over 200 JAS 39 type fighters per annum once the initial development phase was completed.

Also take into account the operating costs of each aircraft and the turn around time for refueling and reloading and in a prolonged wat the JAS 39 becomes a more favorable option.

I get US defense doctrine allows them to focus on bleeding edge tech such at the F-35 as they live on a continent where they are effectively immune from a land based invasion.

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119959845#Comment_119959845

Not really, this war has proved that not even the US can supply the amount of needed stock at the rate that it has been consumed in Ukraine, just look at the contractors saying it will take perhaps 4-5 years to replenish the MANPAD and ATGM stocks that have been used up and that is after increasing production as much as they can and bringing back retired workers. Add in systemic issues like the dated manufacturing sector in some areas (shell manufacturing for example still uses WW2 era investments in the US that they have been trying to fund replacements for years) and there are hard limits, along with the budget issues (ie the US has apart from replenishing stocks fund the strategic projects of the SSBN project, the B21 project and the next gen ICBM along with massive demands for tactical investments to rebuild the USN for example).

The production limits in pretty much all of the European military capacity is mainly due to trying to balance growth with sustainability, if the European nations are going to push up to 2+% then companies can plan to expand production rates.

Markcheese

I assume there are no stocks of s300 missiles left out there to be tapped ? ,

There really isn't a proven alternative , and they've certainly proven their worth in Ukraine ,

The Greeks have some ,but for obvious reasons aren't giving them up , the bulgarians seem cagey about weapons deliveries, (while quietly selling loads )

The Egyptians seem to have quite a bit , but would they sell - if they sell missiles it makes the rest of their systems useless - they won't get Russian assistance in future..

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119960341#Comment_119960341

Anyone who has them left are pretty much nations that don't want to risk being cut off from Russia, or at least not right now (as the value of Russian hardware has gone down a good bit, or relations have got worse like Russia stealing India's tanks) so yeah the stocks are limited. Though how much of the interceptions have been Ukrainian S300's and how many have been Western weapons? I mean Russia has mainly been using them as not very guided land attack missiles given their shortages.

In the meantime mixed reports that Ukraine has got a long range drone in operation and managed to hit two of the Russian Strategic bomber bases with potential hits on bombers before todays temper tantrum launch. If they have then Russian air defence is going to have to get a lot better.

Markcheese

The Ukrainians said they tested their long range drone ,

But there are reports from edels area that it was a massive explosion, so maybe not the new drone as that carries 75 waread

Now that they've made and tested it , can the Ukrainians mass produced it , to make an impact it's going to need to be used in very large numbers .

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119960604#Comment_119960604

There’s social media photos of at least one TU 22 damaged at Dyaghilevo but it looks like a relatively small warhead did the damage, not sure about the Edels one, looking at the photo perhaps feeling was happening at the time?

There maybe blood in this:

https://twitter.com/JimmySecUK/status/1599825962740633601

Psychlops

SLAVA UKRAINI!

Gwan the boys, hit The Kremlin next!

https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2022/dec/05/explosions-russia-airbases-far-from-ukraine-frontline-bombers?fbclid=IwAR3BkV3XCS07wVKC7fn3DEHrZiX_foy3llxA8192Qr0fHTg-GEkSdWRVQn8

Larbre34

This is from The Guardian.

Of all the targets the Ukrainians could have chosen, its as plain as the nose on your face that they chose these two, to demonstrate irrefutably, that Moscow itself is within weapons range.

Now, as much as my instinct is to applaud them for giving Jonny Russkie what for, we have to acknowledge that retaliations such as these, are the very thing that could trigger an escalated counter response of a catastrophic level.

I'll bet NATO aren't thrilled, because this is exactly the sort of thing they have fought to avoid, by not supplying heavy offensive weapons.

Yes, Ukraine are entitled to return, with interest, the war that Russia has thrust upon them, but there is no getting past the thousands of Russian nuclear weapons and their capacity to lay waste to millions of square kilometres.

If Putin thinks he is that cornered, that he needs his option of last resort, I don't see why he won't order a nuclear attack. Whether the chain of command has the balls to disobey him is another question.