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

Interesting articles

1606163656668

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 300 ✭✭mupper2


    The Luxembourg deal wasn't just for the armour, they bought armoured/logistic trucks, heavy recovery trucks, 30 years of support, infrastructure in Luxembourg and Belgium because they'll be part of a joint Regt and other stuff.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,366 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Surely we will need the rear echelon hardware and support package as well though?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,426 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Thats a political question as much as anything though, isn't it?

    Luxembourg is in NATO. It operates jointly with its immediate neighbours, in a clear and definite policy. There is no debate. It does what it size allows and what it can't, it pays for, eg its paid partnership in the BELUX deal.

    The question of what support systems our land component will need, very much depends on whether the plan is to stand up a fully autonomous division for defence of the State, with air and sea cover, or whether we will work in partnerships, bi-laterally or multi-laterally.

    And as these headspinning days continue, the frame of that question constantly changes.

    I've been watching some live Townhalls and Panels from Munich, and when it comes to the contribution of the American panellists, it makes for very, very depressing viewing.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,366 ✭✭✭sparky42


    I very much doubt we would ever see a fully equipped division for the army, but even without that the point remains that whatever we end up buying is going to be more than just the vehicles, so is that figure just for the rare vehicles or the total package we are considering?

    We are going to be buying a support package, we will need complete new weapons stores, more base facilities etc…

    As to Munich yeah the US position spells nothing but issues for Europe, and we still dance on the pin, Martin coming out against any “European” Army, but Harris making these comments:


    The Tánaiste has said that a “significant increase” in spending on Ireland’s security infrastructure does not affect its policy on military neutrality.Simon Harris, who is Minister for Defence and Foreign Affairs, made the comments as he attended the Munich Security Conference.The Fine Gael leader said the Government will be reviewing its capital allocations and publishing a revised National Development Plan in July.

    image-eed6b6cebabe78-d134.gif

    His comments come after Taoiseach  Micheál Martin spoke about the need to increase Ireland’s defence spending.Ireland’s defence budget for 2024 is some €1.29bn.“I think there’s no doubt that all European countries, including Ireland, are going to need to spend more on defence and security, and that statement doesn’t in any way, shape or form, affect our long standing policy of military neutrality,” Mr Harris said on Saturday.“But I think people in Ireland, and indeed people right across Europe know that the threats are real, and know that Ireland isn’t immune from being better able to monitor what happens along our coastline, investing in the infrastructure like radar and solar.“Investing in the people in terms of our Defence Forces is really important.“We have a long and proud tradition as a country in terms of our UN peacekeeping mission as well.“So Ireland certainly doesn’t shirk any conversation in relation to defence and security. In fact, I think we’re very much obligated to engage in those conversations, but we can do that, as I say, in a way that is entirely respectful of our military neutrality.”Mr Harris said Ireland needs to particularly invest in its infrastructure and in the Defence Forces personnel.He added: “I believe in the term of this Government, we are going to need to see a significant increase in our spending on our own security infrastructure, which of course, includes our Defence Forces.“We will as a government, to be reviewing our capital allocations and publishing a revised National Development Plan in July. And of course, that’s the way for departments and ministers to take ideas and proposals forward.“But we already have, I suppose, increased defence spending from albeit a low base. We do need to do more, and I think particularly more in relation to investing in infrastructure and, indeed, crucially, investing in the people in our Defence Forces.”



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,166 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    As of October, there are reportedly just two servicemen and women for every 1,000 people in Britain — the first time this has happened.

    Wow, that's only about 2/3rds per capita as us

    I'm partial to your abracadabra,

    I'm raptured by the joy of it all.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,426 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Quite the word salad from Harris, as you'd expect. But really they need to stop linking capital expenditure in the defence sector to the NDP. I'm not saying the defence budget shouldn't receive due scrutiny in the Oireachtas, there are adequate fora for that, but it is NOT the same thing as roads and schools and broadband.

    We no longer have the luxury of time or drawn out debate.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 300 ✭✭mupper2


    Defence contracts can be real weird, Belgium ordered their vehicles a few years before Luxembourg, paid less and are getting 8 times more vehicles. Estonia is getting 230 LTAVs and 6X6 APCs for 200 million from Turkey, are Turkish costs cheaper, yeah not by that much though..

    We'll have to see what ours turns out like.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,366 ✭✭✭sparky42


    sorry about the formatting, anytime I quote here it always seems to end up a mess. I mean honestly if there is a willingness to go with G2G and cut down our horrible lag in procurement I can live with the awkwardness of having the NDP, I mean assuming that the radar, vehicle and some elements of the AC all get new equipment contracted this year that must make it the busiest procurement period ever for us.


    As an aside, anyone else notice the absolute zero noise in regards to the Navy? We have the AC getting new helicopters, the transport Casa and replacement programs for the 139s and PC9s to start this year, the army now getting “X” number of new vehicles whether it’s the French or not ordered this year, but nothing for the Navy, even though we have government finally talking about how exposed we are?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,426 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    The MRV announcement is imminent, I'm told.

    But you can understand the reticence when the day to day story of the NS in the media, is laid up ships and the lack of technical NCOs for engines and armaments.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 300 ✭✭mupper2


    i think because the Navy has been more acutely hit by manning issues, the focus is getting the MRV through and getting more ships out. There are a couple of years before we have to get worried about replacing anything.

    There are other bits of kit in the pipeline now.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,366 ✭✭✭sparky42


    I agree that the NS needs people more than anything else, but as some of the old hands have pointed out before, Eithne’s announcement and build helped recruitment then, and given timescales for any ship build we are talking years from order.

    The MRV procurement has become a bad joke at this stage.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,242 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    The MRV could look very different at thos stage compare to what it was going to me

    Remember when it started out as a LPV.

    As for the Armour units to be ordered who knows the office of army design might say we only need 5k army with fully Mechanized infantry. Mr Martin in the last couple of interviews seams to be leading with Navy & Air corps with no mention of the Army

    The mirror today saying up to 300 armour units as part of the deal and maybe H225ms. Would the government fork out for the H225M instead of the AW149?

    https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/government-spend-extra-2-billion-34687154?int_source=amp_continue_reading&int_medium=amp&int_campaign=continue_reading_button#amp-readmore-target



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,202 ✭✭✭jonnybigwallet


    That H225M is a pretty hefty piece of kit. Just had a butchers at the specification.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,202 ✭✭✭jonnybigwallet


    Ne'er a mention of replacing them auld PC9M's with something a bit chunkier!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,366 ✭✭✭sparky42


    An all French big buy might be very handy in terms of politics as well as supplies (and if any other contractor kicked off, the reality is France can provide everything we could ever buy), be funny as hell if we go for the son of Puma for the helicopter buy given the leased one back in the 80s, but they would be much more capable than the 149.

    Interesting that article suggesting a vehicle buy with “large calibre guns and cannon”, the 40mm can’t really be that so do they mean artillery, mortars, or something else?

    It seems the Penny has finally hit the ground so hard that it just can’t be ignored even by Irish politicians, with this from RTÉ today:

    https://www.rte.ie/news/analysis-and-comment/2025/0216/1496916-ukraine-whelan/



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,366 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Suggestions are that the replacement process for them has been signed off on to start this year, but what, how many, and when are still unknowns.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,242 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    Any chance another european country is also getting ready to put an offer in to equip us? Leonardno subimted there sales book to the commisson



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,366 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Oh I have no doubt that any of the big firms/nations would love to pick us up, particularly if it tied us into their supply chains long term. Hence the reports that the French name dropping us hasn't gone down well, but I guess its all a "wait and see" until either other talks break cover, or an order happens.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 267 ✭✭zone 1


    its probably still 10 years away and if built how do they crew it . one LPV, CPV in operation all you have to do is look basin its full and verolme dockyard nothing moving



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,202 ✭✭✭jonnybigwallet


    They should bin this idea and buy a couple of heavy weight corvettes.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,426 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    You're absolutely correct. But one of our failures among many is that failure to plan and operate in a counter-cyclical fashion. We need the ship anyway. In fact we need more that one.

    And it will take 5 years to make operational if it were ordered tomorrow. So you spend that time building recruitment and facilities in parallel, as the implementation plan requires.

    And besides, if Trump's regime succeeds in coercing back some or all of the 25 US Bio-Pharma/Med Tech facilities in Cork that employ 15,000 people, then that'll be the end of the recruitment crisis, won't it? That's before we even worry about Apple.

    You plan and operate strategically, you develop your capabilities according to your needs and not at the whims of international geopolitics, which we have done before.

    And you spend your money while you have it, as there will never be a cheaper moment to acquire anything than today.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,242 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    i wonder did the british admiral bring a BAE brochure with him to McKee the other day.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,366 ✭✭✭sparky42


    U.K. ship building is pretty much at full capacity with just their own orders. We would be crazy to buy from them.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,242 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    Irish MRV built in H&W Belfast!

    The Current H225M thats Airbus are selling is that the same as what they put forward for the Air Corps Tender back in 2002/2003?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,366 ✭✭✭sparky42


    not a chance, the RFA desperately needs H&W to get their new solid stores ships built, that yard won’t be free until after 2030.

    As for what they were offering, a quick google says they only became operational in 2005, would they have been offering nit before it entered full service?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,426 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Theres no value for this country to be buying from the UK.

    We should support the EU in the first instance and then those builders in the EEA, Switzerland and Norway. If the UK have a problem with that, they need to rethink their trading relationship with their estranged friends.

    In point of fact, the only time Ireland should ever procure anything outside of EU/EEA is if there is very specifically no European option available, and that would be very rare.

    While were at it, the engagement (if there is any) with Lockheed Martin on the radar should end immediately.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,242 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    i think that was an issue at the time from what i remember about it not been ready. The version we were been offered was the cougar which was an updated super puma. The H225 appears to be an updated Cougar at €28 Million a pop! One of the articles from the fiasco at the time below.

    https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/government-faces-legal-challenge-to-copter-contract/26239028.html

    https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/government-faces-legal-challenge-to-copter-contract/26239028.htm



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 435 ✭✭Grassy Knoll


    I wonder if we will move to the French equipment would we tack on the primary radar ( Thales) ? Does anyone know what the reliability, ease of maintenance etc of this equipment would be? No point buying trouble either. I would presume Mowag is in the mix also the Piranha v and Eagle ?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,426 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Who can say, you're talking about technical operational info that is classfied. But you would imagine that informal conversations have been had at European level about experience living with various systems.

    As for the APC/IFVs, you would imagine GDLS/Mowag are in the running along with the Rheinmetall Boxer modular chassis, but we've heard before the Boxer may be too bulky for Irish conditions, and the straws in the wind are only blowing one way at the moment, towards the KNDS Scorpion programme.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,366 ✭✭✭sparky42


    not sure it’s just bulk that’s the issue with boxer (though that’s something), it’s also the weight of the things.



Advertisement