Fighter jets for the Air Corps?

dublincc2

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120457930#Comment_120457930

The F-22 was supposed to replace the F-15 no?

It seems to me like the best candidates for our Air Force are:

F-15

F-16

Tornado

Typhoon

Rafale

Gripen

FA50

Out of these which would be the most likely?

As for the F-35 it seems they aren't the wunderwaffe they were presented as. Sixth-generation fighters may come online sooner than we think. Look at the GCAP for example.

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120458843#Comment_120458843

The F22 was meant to replace the F15C mainly, the Strike Eagle being different. Given the cuts to the 22s production that never happened and now new build F15s are being procured to augment the USAF as the Cs are aging out, while the USAF 6gen is reportedly already in flight testing.

F15s are out (too much airframe and costs), Tornado is a dead aircraft end of lifing (so basically shouldn’t be on any list, Germany is to the point of nearly handcrafting spares for their remaining airframes), Typhoon and Rafale are full up 4.5 gen airframes with a host of combat capability that we would never have need for, Gripen is likely the least costs for operating with the best package of capabilities, FA 50 is a wildcard.

honestly Irish posters debating the issues of the F35 or when 6gen fighters will enter IOC is Waltermitty, it’s irrelevant to us.

AerLingus747

bring back the Silver swallows... fearsome

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120459215#Comment_120459215

Fearsome trainers? Might as well stick with the PC9s then.

AerLingus747

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120459305#Comment_120459305

I think the Vampire trumps them both tbh

dublincc2

Let's say we go with the F-16, how many would we realistically need? 10?

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120459362#Comment_120459362

Why? You are talking about a very first gen jet aircraft used as a trainer, hell I would have stuck with just buying a shitload of surplus P51s.

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120459484#Comment_120459484

Again this has all been discussed before, whether you are talking about the paper from the former senior AC officer or the Commissions findings in terms of LoA2 and 3.

AerLingus747

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120459646#Comment_120459646

NATO were getting rid of loads of Spitfires a while back, we could have gotten those and locust attack anything coming our way... just once we were in front a low altitutdes

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120459657#Comment_120459657

What?

cnocbui

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120458838#Comment_120458838

Didn't read it, did you? No corrosion issues. There is about a 7 mile differenece in ferry range.

Larbre34

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120459709#Comment_120459709

Not sure what you think I should've read, but what I did read was the Congressional Budget Office report of February 2023 into the F/A-18 type and its service with the US Navy and US Marine Corps.

The CBO is a federal agency with similar remit to the Comptroller and Auditor General in this State. And their report states, inter alia:

Many factors contributed to differences in availability between the two generations of F-18s, highlighting “the greater levels of galvanic corrosion arising from the greater use of composite metals in Super Hornets.

Footnote: galvanic corrosion is damage induced when two dissimilar materials are coupled in a corrosive electrolyte. It occurs when two (or more) dissimilar metals are brought into electrical contact under water.

The future of availability rates for aging Super Hornets is up in the air (but) experiences of the oldest Hornets suggest that their availability is likely to continue to decline as the fleet ages.

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120460065#Comment_120460065

Fair is fair Larbre, while that may be very true for the USN/USMC Hornets/Superhornets they by their nature operate in a much more corrosive environment than the Australian ones, so there might very well be a difference in aging profiles, that being said going for original hornets might be asking for a world of issues anyway as that airframe starts to go out of service and the supply chains dry up.

cnocbui

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120460065#Comment_120460065

None of that is relevant. Read my original post, because I mentioned corrosion and why it's not an issue. Australia's F-18 were never operated on carriers and were never subject to salt spray. Since they were built with a naval environment in mind, it's fairly obvious they likely would suffer less corrosion than planes not built with extra corrosion protection of a similar age.

Based on US experience, Australia did undertake a centre-fuselage replacement program and actually wasted their time replacing several of them, but then they stopped and cancelled the program because no corrosion or cracks were found.

The Australian F-18 are still in excellent shape. Too good for Ireland, really.

Ramasun

Does Ireland even have the kind of radar systems needed to operate jet interceptors effectively?

There's probably a lot of infrastructure investment to do before even thinking about buying jets.

AerLingus747

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120460503#Comment_120460503

in short, no....

however, with some investment, it wouldn't be much of an issue to build some acoustic ears, which could feed into our very own Dowding system ahead of any potential ex-NATO spitfire purchase.

Although with how the children's hospital went, and the current cost of concrete, we may need to resort to manned pillboxes.

Ramasun

One of the few plus points of SF getting into power might be their aversion to RAF coverage of our airspace. They may invest out of spite.

AerLingus747

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120460529#Comment_120460529

SF may want to avert their eyes from existing delegated airspace arrangements, technically the UIR over Donegal is controlled by the UK mostly.

Dohvolle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120460503#Comment_120460503

You say this like you are the first person to come up with it.

Dohvolle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120460516#Comment_120460516

Now you are just trolling.

Dohvolle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120460490#Comment_120460490

Ignore the Aussie F/A-18 for a moment. Before she was Ousted from power last week, Sanna Marin, Former Finnish PM suggested Finland's F/A-18 fleet could go to Ukraine once the F35 start arriving.

It was immediately dismissed by anyone in the Finnish defence sector as not a practical option and quietly forgotten and dismissed as an election stunt. Why is that I wonder?

They are only used over land too, so no salt issues. Yet it was considered the type is unsuitable for an Air Force trying to get back on their feet.

As for the Aussie ones, I don't see them going anywhere for a while. Lets not forget While Australia may be replacing the type with the F35 in the Air Policing role, it also replaced the F-111 with the F/A-18 in the ground attack role. The Super Hornet is not gone from Aussie service just yet.

Ramasun

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120460722#Comment_120460722

Like most people I have no idea what the Irish Air Corps has or doesn't have. The guess would be it's very little, radar and things like that would be expensive so just guessing.

cnocbui

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120460740#Comment_120460740

Got a link, because the several ones I read all said Marin was overrulled by the millitary and her defence minister because Finland still needed the capability the jets offered, not because of some assessment they weren't suitable for Ukraine, though someone might have suggested such nonsense to soften the blow of a PMs offer being overruled and withdrawn.

Finnish president Sauli Niinisto claims that “nobody has discussed this question”. Antti Kaikkonen, the Minister of Defense, says that the F/A-18 Hornet multirole fighters supply to Ukraine will be “a complicated task in the coming years” because Finland needs them as well.

https://en.defence-ua.com/news/finland_wont_consider_the_fa_18_hornet_fighters_supply_to_ukraine_by_2028_2030-6025.html

The F-18's are actually ideal for Ukraine because they have strong undercarriages and FOD resistance they need because of their rough soviet era slabs with gaps airfields which would break F-16s and anything else except Gripens, which cost more than F-35s anyway.

Australia's F-18 have been in storage for a couple of years. They are what remains after some were sold to Canada. They can go as soon as a destination is found for them, barring a few that need some work to make airworthy as Australia have already received 60 of their 72 order of F-35s. Yes, the super hornets and near irreplaceable Growlers will continue in service for some time, particularly since the F-35 is an unreliabel POS.

In 2020 a US company that runs agressor squadrons bought the lot - as is with no detuning or bits removed, along with the complete inventory of spare parts and specialised maintainance equipment. A 2-squadron, highly capable airforce in a box deal. Said company predicated it's purchase on winning defence contracts to supply agressor services, which they later failed to secure, hence them becoming available again.

One reason those particular F-18s would be particularly useful for Ireland is because of their advanced AN/AAQ-28(V) Litening targeting pod which is ideal for maritime patrol and target intercept and surveilance.

newcavanman

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120460529#Comment_120460529

If they have their way it will be scrap the Casas for Bears and maybe a squadron of Flankers for Air Defence. Likely to be no problem paying for them as they will look to tax most of us workers out of existence

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120460845#Comment_120460845

Again just a brief read of the findings of the Commission or statements by the Ministers since then would answer your questions fairly easily.

Mav11

If true, Clancy should be sacked and the job given to somebody that might actually be able to do it!

https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/defence-forces-cant-use-missile-29669777

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120461377#Comment_120461377

Really? That’s your take? DF is denied funding for new equipment by DOD and Finance and it’s the COS that needs to be sacked? How exactly does that work and what in gods name do you think changes if you sack the COS for budget reasons?

He doesn’t set the budget, he barely gets to ask what the DF needs. Go yell at Minister and SGs.

Ramasun

There's probably never been a better time to get investment in the Air Corps.

Find a Sunday World journalist on a quiet day of gangland violence and suggest there are secret talks with Bayraktar for 100 drones etc.

SF or PBP would be outraged at the waste of money, then it gets a conversation going about what the Air Corps actually needs.

Mav11

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120461392#Comment_120461392

Because he has one job to do, is paid very well to do it and that is the defence of the State. Clearly between the debacles in the navy, air corps and now this, he is not doing a great job. The country is awash with money so it is equally clear that himself and/or McCrum have not been advocating strongly enough for funding. Both should go.

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120461502#Comment_120461502

So you don’t have a clue about the situation, good to know.