Fighter jets for the Air Corps?

newcavanman wrote: »

A good friend of min is ex RAF and now works for Bae. Hei is closely involved With Typhoon support for the RAF. He says the Tranche Ones are impossible to support and the RAF line crews will be celebrating their retirement. They are almost entirely incompatible with the rest of the fleet.
Frankly i dont ever see an Irish government having the balls or vision to buy fast jets. The only realistic possibility is that we end up with something akin to the Baltic Air Policing mission.. Of course as we won't join NATO, the only possible outcome is an EU mission
That at least might provide a bit of variety, if it was everto happen

The CoDF might at least start asking the question:
If we are unwilling or unable to protect our own skies, can we admit it and publicly ask someone else to do it?
The RAF only work for us when it's a follow on from one of their missions, coming through the GIUK gap and probably returning the same way. If the aircraft is an airliner either coming from the Canaries or the US that has lost comms, that's not their problem.

Steyr 556 wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpXaYHLtW4k

We should order Viggen.

you want to order a plane that entered service 50 years ago and was retired 16 years ago?

saabsaab wrote: »

It looks cool!

you're probably biased on that

saabsaab wrote: »

It looks cool!

It's a basic Canard Delta wing fighter, what's so special about it, and as mentioned why in the name of god would we buy decommissioned planes like that?

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

Said it before and will say it again, closest we are getting to a jet fighter is a trainer / close combat.

L159 is the best of the bunch in that regard for it's money

No we aren't and no it isn't.
The L159 is just about good enough to stop unwanted drones from flying over the greater dublin area, but not much further.

sparky42 wrote: »

Just a reminder, Finland's new fighter procurement is about to get final tenders, BAE submitted theirs for the Eurofighter today, that's Finland, a neutral nation...

A neutral nation yes, but with a long established and fairly high tech armed forces, an acrimonious and increasingly sabre rattling neighbour to the east and no actual delusions as to the difference between "neutrality" and actually being able to defend one's state.

The Finns also have quite a tricky history of until relatively recently balanced buying Russian and NATO compatible equipment with the aim of ensuring credible conventional deterrence of Russia.
The have a long standing territorial dispute with Russia over Karelia, that is not currently pursued because there are no Finns left in Karelia.

The Finn's also have a recent martial history, granted they are often forgotten as being part of the Axis but, they have a relatively recent and even though they lost the continuation war, a successful military history that shapes attitudes to defence spending.
They are on course for 2% of GDP or more spend on defence.
I don't think that level of spending would ever happen here barring in the aftermath of an attack or similar.

banie01 wrote: »

I do think if a capability review of the offers was weighted towards running costs and actual proven compatibility with Finnish needs, which are similar enough to Sweden's even down to their military cooperation and past Saab use (albeit quite historic now) that the Gripen E would win the bid.

Its hard to see past a US win here tho, even the German's are buying US if the current rumours are to be believed.
F18E/F are likely the choice there to add EAD suppression and keep nuclear capability post Tornado's final retirement.

To be fair the Germans are also buying new Typhoons as well, but as you say it’s to keep the nuclear capabilities. For Finland I expect the US is going to put huge pressure on them to buy American, be interesting to see if the go F18 E/F or 35.

sparky42 wrote: »

To be fair the Germans are also buying new Typhoons as well, but as you say it’s to keep the nuclear capabilities. For Finland I expect the US is going to put huge pressure on them to buy American, be interesting to see if the go F18 E/F or 35.

Agreed, its unfortunate for Eurofighter though that the Germans aren't seeking to develop a similar Nuke and suppresion of EAD role for the Eurofighter.
That said, I'd guess the EF's wing area makes sustained high speed, low level flight uncomfortable to say the least.
That part of the flight envelope is one that the tornado excelled at.

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

what leverage would the US have over Finland?

The Finns already fly the legacy F18 and as such there is a high degree of compatibility between their existing F18 specific ground maintenance equipment and training.
They could well spin in training cost savings and compatibility with already in place systems as well as the usual industrial offsets.

the transition for pilots from legacy F18 to F18e is also designed to be very straightforward so ground training and flight training costs are reduced for moving to the E versus an entirely new platform.
In addition to that, Boeing will likely bend over backwards to make any deal for F18s very attractive. They are haemorrhaging cash and need as many military contracts as possible IMO.

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

It offers far far more than what we have for not much extra.

Simply not true.

L159 is a trainer / light strike. PC-9 is a trainer / light strike. Both are so far off fast interceptor capability that it doesn't matter it they do 600 kph or 900 kph, to get across the Country and catch up to any aggressor or rogue aircraft, you need 2,000 kph+ and so there is simply zero logic to bringing on the L159 with all its additional technical demands, simply to stick on an annual report that we have some jets.

You're forgetting too, in the aftermath of 9/11 some of the L39/L59/L159 models were evaluated by the Air Corps at Baldonnell for interception purposes and found to be unsuitable. I remember them doing aerobatic flights over South Dublin at the time.

That post 9/11 period was the most likely in modern history for the Air Corps to have got Government approval to buy them, but, put yourself in their shoes. Had the Government bought 10 or 12 of the type and made a huge deal of them to an anxious public and had an emergency situation arisen where the 159s were unable to perform as the Government and the public expected, there would have been a scandal. There were (and still are) ancillary issues such as the lack of a primary radar system making interceptors effectively moot.

And so, the only upcoming combat aircraft acquisitions of use in the coming years would be the replacement of the PC-9s with something like a PC-21, and the purchase or lease of fast interceptor / air superiority fighters and a military radar and support structure to operate them.

jonnybigwallet wrote: »

Indeed. Another more viable option with decent interception capabitity at a good price is the KIA F series in one of its more advanced variants with a few of the training version in the squadron....

No.
Cost roughly the same as a Gripen to buy and run, but with the performance of a glorified trainer.

MAULBROOK wrote: »

We have 26 aircraft, 16 fixed wing. 4 are new and nearly all the rest are up for replacement.
Lets not forget the Helicopters are no spring chickens, 13/14 years old.
Their is not a hope in hell we are getting a small fleet of jets.

We are the westernmost outpost of the EU and between us and mainland EU there is a destabilized UK might be time for such a force.

saabsaab wrote: »

We are the westernmost outpost of the EU and between us and mainland EU there is a destabilized UK might be time for such a force.

Dont get me wrong I would be proud as punch to see new PC21 trainers and a respectable amount of Gripen's (for example) flying over our airspace.
We haven't even got a radar system to see what's coming.