Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Replacment for Cessna 172

1679111217

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,408 ✭✭✭jonnybigwallet


    Ya could buy three Basler T67 planes for the same money and they are also useful for parachuting


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,166 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Reading the business post article it’s clear Berry has no clue about the costs of equipment if he actually thinks you can get a flyable C130 for 10 million...


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,712 ✭✭✭roundymac


    Most of these guys write stuff and don't give a damn if it is correct or not, once the Editor acceptsit for print is all that matters. Thats modern reporting for you.:mad:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,166 ✭✭✭sparky42


    roundymac wrote: »
    Most of these guys write stuff and don't give a damn if it is correct or not, once the Editor acceptsit for print is all that matters. Thats modern reporting for you.:mad:

    True enough, I see that breaking news at least replaced the image of the mirage with a commercial jet at least:rolleyes:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,408 ✭✭✭jonnybigwallet


    Ha Ha...the penny dropped!


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,478 ✭✭✭Sgt. Bilko 09


    I said this last week, they explored this option of getting a transport aircraft two years ago the tender was ready and DF HQ was told it was not necessary by Kehoe. But Paying omni and back in the 00s Iberia a stupid amount to ferry them over and back and the embarrassment of the most recent soldiers hitching a lift back to RAF lakenheath in other countries aircraft had now come to.a boil. There are troops due home Tuesday from Leb and the contingent in Mali are still there except those lucky officer who got accepted on the RAF aircraft.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,767 ✭✭✭California Dreamer


    In the grand scale of things I think the usual moaners maybe a bit more quieter when they see the work the PC-12's will do in the long run.

    There is something arrogant about using a GIV for an Air Ambulance then when you have a dedicated aircraft like the PC-12 that can convert to Air Ambulance role very quickly and is the most widely used aircraft by the Flying Doctors in Australia.

    I could be completely wrong and the moaners will moan regardless.

    I for one would like to see something 737/320 QC in operation.

    Silly question but if they got an aircraft could they contract Aer Lingus/Ryanair for maintenance?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,712 ✭✭✭roundymac


    I thought the guys in the Leb were transported by UN organised charter.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,788 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    In the grand scale of things I think the usual moaners maybe a bit more quieter when they see the work the PC-12's will do in the long run.

    There is something arrogant about using a GIV for an Air Ambulance then when you have a dedicated aircraft like the PC-12 that can convert to Air Ambulance role very quickly and is the most widely used aircraft by the Flying Doctors in Australia.

    I could be completely wrong and the moaners will moan regardless.

    I for one would like to see something 737/320 QC in operation.

    Silly question but if they got an aircraft could they contract Aer Lingus/Ryanair for maintenance?

    Id say they could do what ever they want to be honest. Isn't the GASU serviced by an outside company?

    If the Air Corps got a large transport aircraft such as 737 would they have to station in Shannon to get of the ground fully loaded or would they be able to get of the ground fully loaded in casement ?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,818 ✭✭✭donvito99


    roadmaster wrote: »
    Id say they could do what ever they want to be honest. Isn't the GASU serviced by an outside company?

    The Dept of Justice contract the Air Corps to maintain and fly their two helos.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,468 ✭✭✭Negative_G


    donvito99 wrote: »
    The Dept of Justice contract the Air Corps to maintain and fly their two helos.

    Civilians maintain the two helicopters. FW aircraft maintained by the Air Corps.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,472 ✭✭✭Heraldoffreeent


    roadmaster wrote: »
    Id say they could do what ever they want to be honest. Isn't the GASU serviced by an outside company?

    If the Air Corps got a large transport aircraft such as 737 would they have to station in Shannon to get of the ground fully loaded or would they be able to get of the ground fully loaded in casement ?

    737s can, and have, landed at the Bal before, in the event it needed a longer runway because of a max load, why would you use Shannon when you could rotate out of DUB?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,788 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    737s can, and have, landed at the Bal before, in the event it needed a longer runway because of a max load, why would you use Shannon when you could rotate out of DUB?


    Why not Shannon? not everything should have to be out of Dublin


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,478 ✭✭✭Sgt. Bilko 09


    New heli fleet needed also lol


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,818 ✭✭✭donvito99


    New heli fleet needed also lol

    Always thought that silver lettering was ugly and it doesn't help at all in this situation.

    Also, this is not the first time this has happened to this type...

    https://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0302/114650-cullenm/


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,166 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Lucky it didn’t hit anyone.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,807 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    For Christ's sake.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,166 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Larbre34 wrote: »
    For Christ's sake.

    Not the first time it’s happened.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,788 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    sparky42 wrote: »
    Not the first time it’s happened.


    What caused the 2009 incident?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,166 ✭✭✭sparky42




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,788 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    According to former air corps pilot on rte one this morning in the 09 incident they near enough just repainted the door and put back on!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,408 ✭✭✭jonnybigwallet


    Live and learn!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,478 ✭✭✭Sgt. Bilko 09


    Live and learn!

    Not if you’re on the receiving end of it...lol


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,653 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    donvito99 wrote: »
    If we don't count the CASAs as military cargo aircraft, is it true that we are the only EU country without such an aircraft? The likes of Slovenia, Latvia, Estonia etc haven't got anything en par with or more capable than a CASA. I wonder who fed them that line.

    I think it's a matter of primary role. If the Slovenians happened to have a need to go somewhere and pick up two tons of bulk cargo, they'll send the Turbolet right away. If the Irish have a need to go pick up two tons of cargo, they need to take a CASA out of maritime service, maybe do some converting (I'm not sure how much interior room is left with all the MP stations in the back), and then send it off. It's true that the Slovenians can't carry a 4-ton load no matter how much time you give them, and a CASA can, but what's more important on a routine basis? I note even Luxembourg has a single A400 (As opposed to all the big NATO aircraft given Luxembourg registration). The obvious solution is to add an extra 295 to the order, except take it in the cargo configuration, not maritime patrol. That way it's not a new type being added. But is there really a need for it? For long-haul UN stuff, may not be suitable.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,166 ✭✭✭sparky42


    I think it's a matter of primary role. If the Slovenians happened to have a need to go somewhere and pick up two tons of bulk cargo, they'll send the Turbolet right away. If the Irish have a need to go pick up two tons of cargo, they need to take a CASA out of maritime service, maybe do some converting (I'm not sure how much interior room is left with all the MP stations in the back), and then send it off. It's true that the Slovenians can't carry a 4-ton load no matter how much time you give them, and a CASA can, but what's more important on a routine basis? I note even Luxembourg has a single A400 (As opposed to all the big NATO aircraft given Luxembourg registration). The obvious solution is to add an extra 295 to the order, except take it in the cargo configuration, not maritime patrol. That way it's not a new type being added. But is there really a need for it? For long-haul UN stuff, may not be suitable.

    When you look at some of the tail photos when they are doing a medical flight there doesn’t seem to much space with the MP stations, as for the usefulness, it’s not even just the UN stuff, I mean remember having to use the government jet to evacuate Irish people from Malta after Libya.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,166 ✭✭✭sparky42




    No, no they aren't. Christ I'm actually impressed at how this has grown legs. The Equipment paper makes it clear as day that it's just something that's there because it's in the White Paper so they would be asked if it wasn't mentioned.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,788 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    sparky42 wrote: »
    No, no they aren't. Christ I'm actually impressed at how this has grown legs. The Equipment paper makes it clear as day that it's just something that's there because it's in the White Paper so they would be asked if it wasn't mentioned.

    You d never know it could become a new minister pet project. We could end up with Belgian or dutch f16s that are replaced. The only problem is we probably have the jets but no pilots or technicians or hangers or money for fuel


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,166 ✭✭✭sparky42


    roadmaster wrote: »
    You d never know it could become a new minister pet project. We could end up with Belgian or dutch f16s that are replaced. The only problem is we probably have the jets but no pilots or technicians or hangers or money for fuel


    And no radar systems and no training systems...
    In reality I'd bet the decision was "what's in the WP? Well lets just say we read it." That's about the level of interest in the DOD towards doing anything.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 26,424 Mod ✭✭✭✭Peregrine


    roadmaster wrote: »
    You d never know it could become a new minister pet project. We could end up with Belgian or dutch f16s that are replaced. The only problem is we probably have the jets but no pilots or technicians or hangers or money for fuel

    There was no additional major capital expenditure for defence discussed in the PfG negotiations. Even if it is a pet project for the new minister, there's no money for it.


Advertisement
Advertisement