DF Commission Report

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123376520#Comment_123376520

Given the likes of RTÉ don’t care about their numbers when they give them a platform to rant unchecked about how evil everything the West is, what makes you think it won’t matter at all? Not too mention how the SocDems seem to have decided “Tankie light” is the right platform as wel.

Example today his social media rant about the French frigate in Cork.

roadmaster

This Radar gets Better & Better it may even make a cup of Tea.

https://thedefensepost.com/2025/04/23/ireland-radar-stealth-aircraft/

Larbre34

We'd kinda settle for one that can just detect aircraft.

Fritzbox

All air-search radars can detect so-called stealth aircraft - it's just a question of range.

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123386306#Comment_123386306

well ideally more than just one radar of course.

Kermit.de.frog

What about the defence of the radar sites themselves? There would have to be some sort of ground based anti aircraft defence system at a minimum for each site surely? (if we are being serious about it)

thomil

I don't think that permanent SAM or AAA sites near the radars are warranted, or even advisable. Basically, any potential aggressor that might want to take out one of those radar sites will likely have no qualms about taking out any emplaced air defence systems as well.

Don't get me wrong, I do believe that Ireland should invest in short and medium range air defence systems, but I believe that mobile systems are ultimately the better choice, as they are simply harder to track down and take out than a fixed system. They're also more flexible and can be deployed as needed, rather than being tied down to those two or three sites.

The bigger point for me is how to secure the radar sites agains those "peeceful protesters" and militant pacifists that are sure to take offence at the mere presence of these systems.

Kermit.de.frog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123390331#Comment_123390331

Mobile would be fine. There has to be some sort of defence within a reasonable distance of each site. When the radars are functioning they become by far the most valuable targets in Ireland if there is a concerted attack on Europe regardless of our neutrality.

Yeah the usual suspects will no doubt like to act the bollix.

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123390264#Comment_123390264

How many of the European nations have active air defences positioned with their major radar complex’s? To me it’s a relatively moot point, if we assume that things have got to the point that someone is about to start lobbying missiles at our radars then the chances are all of Europe is having a bad day.

As suggested we’re far more likely to have PBP or their fellow traveller gobshites declaring that having detection abilities is “anti neutral” and “NATO warmongering” and cause issues either in construction or operations.

Kermit.de.frog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123390418#Comment_123390418

I don't agree with that or the premise of a "bad day". I would imagine (I don't know) there are defence systems near primary radar sites across Europe (whether they are 24/7 or mobile, dunno). If they are taken out easily then we end up blind (there may be mobile radar infrastructure too but given the sheer expense of fixed sites - they are the optimum tool).

I think there will be provision for ground based systems at these sites, maybe mobile as suggested. They are too important for there not to be in my opinion.

Larbre34

You're thinking about this too two-dimensionally.

Why is Ireland getting primary military search radar?

To be able to get a full picture of all aerial activity in our area of interest and responsibility, without the need to rely on active transponders and regular civilian air traffic control systems.

Why do all aircraft not use transponders?

Two reasons; either an aircraft with a systems failure that can't, or an aircraft under full command and control that won't.

Which aircraft would deliberately not?

Military surveillance or strategic warfare planes with malign intent, or a civilian aircraft that has been hijacked or otherwise compromised.

And are any of these aircraft a threat to the radar sites themselves?

No. All the possible contingent missions and motivations of these aircraft, in all above scenarios, are to affect, compromise, pressurise or intimidate something other than the radar itself.

If it were a case that somehow the country found itself involved in a Europe-wide open conflict, then these radar would be useless operationally anyway, because air warfare operations use proximate AWACS control, not ground based systems, because ground based systems are poor for that sort of chaotic environment.

Fixed ground-based radar are strategic, part of the intelligence picture in peace time, not part of tactical combat. If someone is arriving in combat aircraft to try to destroy them, then their usefulness has already passed and we're in a different phase altogether. In other words, when it comes to the point where these radar would need protecting, its pointless protecting them anyway.

The best example is probably the most important strategic radar location in all of Europe, the NATO ballistic missile early warning site at RAF Fylingdales in Yorkshire. Its motto is 'we are watching', not 'we are fighting', because as soon as it ever sees what it is watching for, its mission is over. It gives a four minute warning to NATO forces to do what they can to shelter and counter attack, and then is redundant. Whether the site itself is destroyed or not is academic to what is bound to follow. And when it is attacked, it will be by something indefensible, like a nuclear tipped cruise missile or a high altitude nuclear detonation which would fry it. What ground based missiles do you plan to deploy against that, even if you had a reason to?

You don't protect our new radar sites with missiles, you build the rest of the system around them that they are designed to be a part of, ie, mobile radar units at the tactical level, fighter interceptors, naval air warfare capabilities, combat information technology, intelligence sharing protocols etc etc

roadmaster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123390264#Comment_123390264

Thats why the State bought the H145M . The new Air Force is forming a Helicopter Attack squadron to protect the sites . These H145ms will stop any Swan or sheep farmer that attacks the sites.

Manic Moran

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123390418#Comment_123390418

I think it's more the point that it's layered.

European countries aren't likely to have SAMs co-located with their big air search radars, but they are quite likely to have somewhat smaller radars somewhere within coverage area, and of course, they also are likely to have aircraft capable of doing general area air defense against everything, not just a point target. The reality is that 'ready SAMs' are much more likely to be covering critical infrastructure like airfields in a steady state. They can afford to lose a big air search radar. Heck, a NATO AWACS bird could cover the gap.

The problem with the Irish scenario seems likely that if an Irish primary radar site goes down, due to air attack, sabotage or even just a maintenance problem, there's no secondary radar option. As it's planned, it truly is just an air policing, counter-smuggling, etc radar system to increase peacetime capabilities to something vaguely useful, not part of a realistic military defense network.

Larbre34

Which makes sense. There is no scenario envisaged in which Irish forces will operate off-island, as a fully autonomous combat battalion or brigade. Either in UN missions or with the EUBG, we would be part of a much larger multi-national formation.

Yes, it makes sense to better our field AA systems and radar, beyond Giraffe and such, but not a billion euros worth of theatre deployable radar net.

roadmaster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123393821#Comment_123393821

There is going to be 3 or 4 sites so even if 2 are down we will still have radar coverage which is still better than we have now

vswr

if Irish coverage goes offline, it will also be a tripwire for UK/France

mupper2

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123396558#Comment_123396558

I remember reading an article from a UK defence analyst a few years back where one of the points he made was an Irish radar system would be a very useful gap filler for the UK/NATO as there is a concern about cruise/hypersonic missiles being fired from close off the Irish West coast in a bit of a radar shadow..

All dependent on having an agreement to have our radar picture hooked into NATO's GBAD of course.

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123398538#Comment_123398538

You’ve just made all our Tankies cry at that suggestion, I hope you’re happy…

roadmaster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123399075#Comment_123399075

its not like we would ever supply vital information.

https://www.met.ie/blacksod-point-and-the-d-day-forecast

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123399374#Comment_123399374

Well now Foreign Affairs and defence are unhappy to be reminded of that.

roadmaster

Slowly Slowly getting there.

https://www.thejournal.ie/military-radar-programme-ireland-airspace-6690423-Apr2025/

vswr

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123399374#Comment_123399374

There are a lot more recent examples than that. Some in the grey area of neutrality, some a lot more formalised now Ireland is part of NATO cyber command.

Larbre34

https://www.rte.ie/news/2025/0429/1509969-military-radar-programme/

8 peer-to-peer expressions of interest received, whittled down to 4. Bilateral negotiations will now begin.

roadmaster

Strong suggestions that the below will be the Air & Marine radar control center but i understand its still all to play for.

https://www.military.ie/en/who-we-are/naval-service/specialist-units/fisheries-monitoring-centre/#:~:text=The%20FMC%20carries%20out%20monitoring,vessels%20operating%20in%20any%20jurisdiction.

Larbre34

What are the Navy going to do about the air domain?

In all likelihood several new multi-domain hubs, enabled by high speed digitisation, will be installed across the services with a coordination hierarchy led by the Air Corps (Force), as the primary role of this system is air defence, and indeed the fastest to respond will be air, by its nature. The Navy already has a modern operations centre and can adopt the input of the new radar system to improve their operational picture.

vswr

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123401710#Comment_123401710

Co-ordinate a trawler swarm

roadmaster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123401710#Comment_123401710

i understand the Navy are pitching to be the ones looking after the Air domain while the Army are saying they should be doing it as they have expierence using the RBS system and the Giraffe radar system.

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123403601#Comment_123403601

And the actual Air Corps are just sitting quietly? It’s not a surprise that there’s a pissing match as to who gets it I suppose.

vswr

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123403601#Comment_123403601

neither have trained ATCO's which is imperative for cross user/boarder functionality

Larbre34

The AC don't even have that many, so it will require many more to be trained on the system one way or the other.

I personally think it should be the Air Corps (Force) who take the lead. In most other jurisdictions you can point to it is an air force role.