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

Fighter jets for the Air Corps?

Options
1…3031333536…198

Comments

  • Options
    #962
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Ultimanemo wrote: »
    .... The F-16 and Gripen aren't designed to be air superiority fighters.
    If you want to defend your airspace you need air superiority fighters and they are expensive
    Turkey has 245 F-16 "Wiki" and the Russians are humiliating them in Syria with few Su-35s.....
    .
    The General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon is a single-engine supersonic multirole fighter aircraft originally developed by General Dynamics for the United States Air Force (USAF). Designed as an air superiority day fighter, it evolved into a successful all-weather multirole aircraft.
    ..Boyd's E-M theory – a small, low-drag, low-weight, pure fighter with no bomb racks; their work would lead to the YF-16 and YF-17

    They originally performed very well as superiority fighter look what the Israelis did with it.

    The problem is the F16 a very old design, now a multi-role fighter and compromised, now meeting one of the best, most up to date 4th generation designs likely flown by some of Russia's best pilots.

    Regardless what Ireland buys it won't be able to defend its airspace, as any aggressor who be in a position to get here, would be so large an opponent that it would simply saturate our defences.

    Not that this thread has any basis in normal reality.


  • Options
    #963
    punchdrunk
    Registered Users Posts: 3,355 ✭✭✭punchdrunk


    Agreed! What’s needed, (and far more plausible a threat) are strong anti terror defences against either domestic or foreign terrorist groups.

    What does that look like?
    Enlarged ARW, co-located with the air corps for quicker deployment nationwide
    Dedicated choppers and crew to deploy them rapidly
    PC-12 used for more intensive army co-op, so ISTAR and parachute deployment training
    More drones for surveillance

    Enlargement of both the directorate of military intelligence and the Garda NSU
    more ERU and ASU units

    A fraction of the cost of jets and far greater need for all of the above!


  • Options
    #964
    sparky42
    Registered Users Posts: 3,895 ✭✭✭sparky42


    tuxy wrote: »
    They are expecting some economic boom in Ireland of proportions never seen before!


    Actually just spending more than nothing on defence, 20 years ago we spent 1.2% of a much smaller GDP on defence and nobody complained, if we even spent 1% it would more than enough to build up capabilities of the DF.


    Instead we'll do nothing.


  • Options
    #965
    tuxy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,983 ✭✭✭✭tuxy


    sparky42 wrote: »
    Actually just spending more than nothing on defence, 20 years ago we spent 1.2% of a much smaller GDP on defence and nobody complained, if we even spent 1% it would more than enough to build up capabilities of the DF.


    Instead we'll do nothing.

    Fully agree but I don't think jets would be the best use of extra funding to the defence forces when what we have is already underfunded.


  • Options
    #966
    Ultimanemo
    Registered Users Posts: 890 ✭✭✭Ultimanemo


    beauf wrote: »
    They originally performed very well as superiority fighter look what the Israelis did with it.

    The problem is the F16 a very old design, now a multi-role fighter and compromised, now meeting one of the best, most up to date 4th generation designs likely flown by some of Russia's best pilots.

    Regardless what Ireland buys it won't be able to defend its airspace, as any aggressor who be in a position to get here, would be so large an opponent that it would simply saturate our defences.

    Not that this thread has any basis in normal reality.
    May be the original design was but the production version wasn't, that is why it can't "carrier land" and that is why it is cheap
    The Americans designed it for affordable mass production for themselves and their allies like the F-5 freedom fighter
    The Israelis were using it against Mig 21 23, Su 22 and similar


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #967
    Ultimanemo
    Registered Users Posts: 890 ✭✭✭Ultimanemo


    beauf wrote: »
    Regardless what Ireland buys it won't be able to defend its airspace, as any aggressor who be in a position to get here, would be so large an opponent that it would simply saturate our defences..
    That is true, but that applies to most Europe save the big boys.


  • Options
    #968
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Leonidas BL wrote: »
    I always thought the Scorpion jet from Textron would be a good starter jet. One of its missions is maritime patrol so it would have actual uses as opposed to the L39 which dosent give us anything extra over the PC-9 really! Do ya not think Jonny?

    https://scorpion.txtav.com/en/logbook/scorpionjet-logbook-entry?id=74E600B776BC40C7A4C483CD7CA37981

    Fair bit more expensive though


  • Options
    #969
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Ultimanemo wrote: »
    May be the original design was but the production version wasn't, that is why it can't "carrier land" and that is why it is cheap
    The Americans designed it for affordable mass production for themselves and their allies like the F-5 freedom fighter
    The Israelis were using it against Mig 21 23, Su 22 and similar

    The fact remains it was designed as such. All production did was made it heavier and added hard points. It has Reclined 9g seat and fly by wire. It may be used as bomb truck but when delivered there was nothing that could touch it as a fighter except the F15. Mig29 came later.

    The F5 is also designed as air superiority fighter. Just a low cost one.

    I have no idea what your point about carrier is. It could have been navalised but lost the competition.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vought_Model_1600


  • Options
    #970
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Ultimanemo wrote: »
    That is true, but that applies to most Europe save the big boys.

    Not really since most of Europe is in NATO and have commonalty of weapon systems so they can fight as a combined larger force.

    Also the philosophy in europe had also been to have a more advanced force able to make on a larger more numerical opponent.


  • Options
    #971
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    tuxy wrote: »
    Fully agree but I don't think jets would be the best use of extra funding to the defence forces when what we have is already underfunded.

    This thread has always struggled with that. The Fighter jets that some are suggesting are a disproportionate spend on a fringe case and neglects the other needs of the defence forces.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #972
    Leonidas BL
    Registered Users Posts: 590 ✭✭✭Leonidas BL


    Niner leprauchan wrote: »
    Fair bit more expensive though

    You're getting more though!!


  • Options
    #973
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Scorpion doesn't look right to me. Superficial maybe.


  • Options
    #974
    roadmaster
    Registered Users Posts: 3,661 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    I seen on FR24 earlier IRl 280 did a low flyby of RAF valley on the way back from London. They must have seen the jets and said surelads let have a look for the craic as it will be the closest we I'll get to jets!!!


  • Options
    #975
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Leonidas BL wrote: »
    You're getting more though!!

    Much more though?

    Your over twice the pc9 price with the scorpion plus the extra running costs. At 12 million the l39ng runs reasonable close to the pc9 price. Enough that you can replace 12 PC9s with 9 L39s (plus additional running costs which are as low as you will reasonable get no matter what option)


  • Options
    #976
    Leonidas BL
    Registered Users Posts: 590 ✭✭✭Leonidas BL


    Niner leprauchan wrote: »
    Much more though?

    Your over twice the pc9 price with the scorpion plus the extra running costs. At 12 million the l39ng runs reasonable close to the pc9 price. Enough that you can replace 12 PC9s with 9 L39s (plus additional running costs which are as low as you will reasonable get no matter what option)

    Yes, the Scorpion has actual uses other than just training pilots, And the Scorpions cost per hour was described as being not much higher than the AT-6.


  • Options
    #977
    cameramonkey
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,220 ✭✭✭cameramonkey


    roadmaster wrote: »
    I seen on FR24 earlier IRl 280 did a low flyby of RAF valley on the way back from London. They must have seen the jets and said surelads let have a look for the craic as it will be the closest we I'll get to jets!!!


    How low did it go?


  • Options
    #978
    jonnybigwallet
    Registered Users Posts: 1,079 ✭✭✭jonnybigwallet


    Well the advantage of both the Scorpion and the L39NG is that they provide an upgrade path to more advanced jets in terms of pilot training. Also the Scorpion has the advantage of having two engines. Both are fairly easy to maintain and would enable the corps to improve its engineering capability. Perhaps what is needed is a mixed fleet of (say) 12 Scorpion or L39NG for ground attack and ISTAR and maritime patrol, and 8 of them very fast Korean Eagle jets to scare away Jonny Russian if he comes a visitin.


  • Options
    #979
    jonnybigwallet
    Registered Users Posts: 1,079 ✭✭✭jonnybigwallet


    Any chance of posting a video of the Pilatus overflight of RAF Valley? Would be good for the craic!


  • Options
    #980
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Leonidas BL wrote: »
    Yes, the Scorpion has actual uses other than just training pilots, And the Scorpions cost per hour was described as being not much higher than the AT-6.

    As does the l39ng. Only slightly slower and carries enough for the role it's been asked to fill.

    Don't take this as a no no to the scorpion, I just don't see it being viable at 20 million per machine.


  • Options
    #981
    cameramonkey
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,220 ✭✭✭cameramonkey


    jonnybigwallet wrote: »
    Any chance of posting a video of the Pilatus overflight of RAF Valley? Would be good for the craic!




    https://www.pprune.org/spectators-balcony-spotters-corner/631358-irl280.html


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #982
    punchdrunk
    Registered Users Posts: 3,355 ✭✭✭punchdrunk


    Subsonic jets= waste of money!

    Pointless as interceptors


  • Options
    #983
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    punchdrunk wrote: »
    Subsonic jets= waste of money!

    Pointless as interceptors

    Depends what your intercepting but if they are useless then what the hell is a pc9? A trainer that the pilots never graduate beyond!


  • Options
    #984
    punchdrunk
    Registered Users Posts: 3,355 ✭✭✭punchdrunk


    Niner leprauchan wrote: »
    Depends what your intercepting but if they are useless then what the hell is a pc9? A trainer that the pilots never graduate beyond!

    I don’t think the PC-9s were a good buy, but why replace them with something that can do less than 150 knots more than it?


  • Options
    #985
    tuxy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,983 ✭✭✭✭tuxy


    punchdrunk wrote: »
    I don’t think the PC-9s were a good buy, but why replace them with something that can do less than 150 knots more than it?

    What kind of missions does the PC-9 currently undertake? Perhaps more speed is not needed.


  • Options
    #986
    punchdrunk
    Registered Users Posts: 3,355 ✭✭✭punchdrunk


    tuxy wrote: »
    What kind of missions does the PC-9 currently undertake? Perhaps more speed is not needed.

    They’re initial trainers, used to rate pilots.


  • Options
    #987
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    punchdrunk wrote: »
    They’re initial trainers, used to rate pilots.

    They are ONLY trainers. That's the point you are missing. They can not really do anything else unless we are given a few days notice of a planned terrorist invasion. Even then it's unguided rocket pods.

    The stuff being suggested are faster but also offer actual weapons that do not need days to install and calibrate while being modern (modern enough anyway).

    There's simple no argument outside of finances against upgrading from the pc9 to the scorpion it l39ng. Even if your not sold on them, they are better than what we have.


  • Options
    #988
    jonnybigwallet
    Registered Users Posts: 1,079 ✭✭✭jonnybigwallet


    The Korean FA50 has a mach 1.5 top speed and can operate to 44000 feet, and is the more advanced version of the TA50. It is a multirole plane and could do air interception and they are not all that expensive. About 22million US dollars a pop.
    Very widely used by many nations and the Spanish are looking to buy 60 of them. A mixed fleet of (say) 8 FA50's and 8 L39NG's comes in at about 250 million USD. Cost would be spread over 4 to 5 years so hardly a big deal. The plane itself is a development of the F16 and Lockheed are partners in the programme. What's not to like about that?


  • Options
    #989
    punchdrunk
    Registered Users Posts: 3,355 ✭✭✭punchdrunk


    Niner leprauchan wrote: »
    They are ONLY trainers. That's the point you are missing. They can not really do anything else unless we are given a few days notice of a planned terrorist invasion. Even then it's unguided rocket pods.

    The stuff being suggested are faster but also offer actual weapons that do not need days to install and calibrate while being modern (modern enough anyway).

    There's simple no argument outside of finances against upgrading from the pc9 to the scorpion it l39ng. Even if your not sold on them, they are better than what we have.

    How did I miss the point when I said I wouldn’t have bought the PC-9s in the first place?

    The L39ng and Scorpion are not frontline interceptor aircraft, they’re glorified subsonic trainers and would be yet another half measure for a minister to stand up in the Dail and check a box “yes we have jets and don’t they look shiny”
    total waste of money as their marginal increase in spec add nothing in the real world.


  • Options
    #990
    punchdrunk
    Registered Users Posts: 3,355 ✭✭✭punchdrunk


    jonnybigwallet wrote: »
    The Korean FA50 has a mach 1.5 top speed and can operate to 44000 feet, and is the more advanced version of the TA50. It is a multirole plane and could do air interception and they are not all that expensive. About 22million US dollars a pop.
    Very widely used by many nations and the Spanish are looking to buy 60 of them. A mixed fleet of (say) 8 FA50's and 8 L39NG's comes in at about 250 million USD. Cost would be spread over 4 to 5 years so hardly a big deal. The plane itself is a development of the F16 and Lockheed are partners in the programme. What's not to like about that?

    You do realise that after wages and pensions our budget for EVERYTHING is less than 500mil per year? that’s barracks maintenance, fuel, food, right down to stationary!! Dream on lads!

    It took a pandemic for us to spend an extra €4mil on a plane and that was only because the government has so laughably underfunded the military that a situation arose when there was a strong likelihood of a being caught out and a public PR disaster!

    By the way were are we keeping your “fantasy football” jets? Because there’s no hangar space for them in Bal!

    where’s the jet engine workshops? Where’s the stores?

    where’s the ordinance going to be kept? Where are the protected loading bays to fit it?

    Where are the jet engine testing bays?

    Where’s the simulators and training?

    Nevermind who’ll fly them (how many engineer, pilot and air traffic control posts are vacant again??)
    Quadruple your budget and you’re getting close


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #991
    jonnybigwallet
    Registered Users Posts: 1,079 ✭✭✭jonnybigwallet


    That's exactly what has to happen. All the facilities and infrastructure and staffing levels need upgrading and a new base established at Galway Airport.


Advertisement