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

Options
1202123252663

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,083 ✭✭✭jonnybigwallet


    They can always get a team of agency personnel in to bolster up the numbers on the procurement and contract management team. Wouldn't cost the earth!



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,909 ✭✭✭sparky42


    So you think that DPER which is slow balling any solutions to the manpower issues for the last decade is suddenly going to open their wallets for Agency Staff in order for more expenditure?



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,947 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    From where?

    From the management consultancies? I've seen it before up close, they're all shite, clueless, wasters.

    DoD must be professionalised in procurement and the only quick and effective way to do that, is to assemble a team, taken from experience across the big spending Departments in the Civil Service (Health, Justice, OPW, Transport etc) as well as from the Office of Government Procurement and DPER itself.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,083 ✭✭✭jonnybigwallet


    You don't have to go to management consultancy firms. You can hire direct via professional technical recruiters. That way you save at least 50%. We don't need a whole army of people to handle half a dozen major purchase orders.



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,947 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Half a dozen?

    You're talking about hundreds, if not thousands of high value procurement exercises over the next decade.

    Everything from the bricks and mortar of new facilities, to all the individual equipment elements for an expanded Force, to stores of consumables for people and vehicles and aircraft and IT, not to mention the IT itself, to run everything from air defence systems to counter-cyber, to secure intelligence communications, to name but a few, but all worth hundreds of thousands, if not millions, in their own right. And thats before we even mention the fun stuff.

    An army of people is precisely whats needed and its fair to say that you don't even know, what you don't even know.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,083 ✭✭✭jonnybigwallet


    The stuff you're talking about is small potatoes. I've got 35 years of experience in project management in highly regulated industries. Nuclear / Oil and Gas / Railway Infrastructure. An order for "hundreds of thousands" or "millions" is a small order, in my universe. These can be handled easily by the existing teams and the sub contractors. We just need to recruit some extra high calibre people for the big stuff. I can assure you that I know damned well what I'm talking about, and it ain't pallets of bricks.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,370 ✭✭✭Dohvolle


    You were wrong about H&W losing the RN contract, pretty sure you are wrong about this also.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,083 ✭✭✭jonnybigwallet


    Was reported some time ago. I don't keep up with every aspect of H&W business and I'm not infallible. Unlike certain people here.



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,947 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Ah the auld mask has slipped Jonny Irishman, its all **** and giggles till the blow back lands on you.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,083 ✭✭✭jonnybigwallet


    I don't know what you're talking about. Sounds like a pile of auld shite to me. Trying to score cheap points as usual.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,690 ✭✭✭roadmaster




  • Registered Users Posts: 3,370 ✭✭✭Dohvolle


    Good ole Colemans Island.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,116 ✭✭✭Psychlops




  • Registered Users Posts: 23,947 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    The Germans said they wouldn't OK Leopard to be deployed without Abrams and it seems to have panned out that way.

    Honestly I'd worry about the effectiveness of Abrams in Ukrainian hands without the massive apparatus that supports it in US battlefield operations. I'm sure they're working on that, but you can't do in months what America and Australia and Saudi have taken years to work-up and integrate.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,690 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    From the rte archives. An interesting report on the selection to replace the then FN.

    https://www.rte.ie/archives/2017/0309/858464-weapons-testing-for-irish-army/



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,947 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    "The SA-80, chosen by Professionals" 😂😂

    Dodged a bullet there. Literally like, early SAs would jam on first shot!

    Interesting little archive piece all the same.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,909 ✭✭✭sparky42


    I’m not sure what would have caused more outrage at the time, buying the 80s or the Gail given everything?



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,370 ✭✭✭Dohvolle


    We dodged many Bullets in that regard.

    I remember it well, and in fairness to all involved, testing was thorough, and the fact the same weapon selected in 1987 is still in use today, is a tribute to the tests and trials that were done then.

    A neighbour was in Ordnance Corps back then as a recently qualified apprentice, (he recently retired), and was involved in the project.

    FN assumed we would go with the FNC, we didn't, we didn't it was a lumbering heavy piece of shite. As accurate as the FAL, but almost as heavy.

    SIG Sauer were offering the same rifle SG550 used by its entire conscript force, but retailed at £2000 each, in 1980s money.(You'd have bought a family car for About £8000 back then) It was fitted with a Bipod as standard, had similar sighting to the H&K33 (Rotating Diopter Drum-very easy to use) and used the same rotating bolt locking found on other assault rifles of the era. The Magazines could lock together on the rifle so you could have 60 rounds ready to fire. It did very well on trials, and was supplied by a fellow Neutral.

    The H&K 33 was possibly the best on trial, but its roller locking wasn't very user friendly. Needed lots of maintenance in challenging conditions to retain reliability. If the rollers got stuck then you were left with a 5.56mm SMG. Did not like non-standard ammo, same as the G3. The fact they dropped the system completely in their modern output speaks volumes there. AGS still use the type I believe. Fine for their purpose, not fine for being bounced around the back of an APC in some muddy mosquito infested swamp overseas.

    Galil ARM was a glorified AK, in 5.56mm. Had a Bipod, & built in bottle opener (so users wouldn't damage the ejection port by using it to open bottles) Failed the mud test, dramatically. Would eject casings into the next parish.

    The Beretta AR70/90 was on trial too. Didn't make it to final evaluation, for whatever reason. Wasn't as imaginative as the final candidates, perhaps.

    SA80 was a heavy piece of ****. (11Lb compared to the Lightweight Steyr at 7.9lb or the M16 at 8.8lb. The FAL it replaced was Only 9.4LB.) Everyone knew it, even the British. The RM continued using the M16 for some years until they were forced to take the SA80. There is nothing good can be said about this rifle. It was made by people with no experience in making rifles. The Optical sight affects situational awareness, as you had to close the disengaged eye to fire (not an issue with the Steyr). The cocking handle was on the wrong side, the magazine would fall off if you held the weapon too tight against your body or if you knocked off something. The Falkland Island defence force refused to adapt it until recently, instead using the Aug. It took 20 years before H&K redesigned it. Outside the UK, the only other users are those who got it as a donation of overseas aid from the UK.

    The M16A2 did pretty well in the trial, it looked like a proper rifle, and all the flaws and faults experienced in Vietnam had been sorted out by the A2. It didn't sit well politically though. Was well liked by the user trials. Maintained 90% accuracy to man sized targets out to 500m.

    FAMAS did well too, the FFL had it well tested at that point, but it was very French. An Ambidexterous bullpup, built in bipod as standard, but did not have sturdy magazines. (Apparently French practice was to supply troops with preloaded magazines, which they would discard after use) This was rectified on later versions, which accepted the standard NATO/M16 style magazine..

    The Steyr AUG, like the SA80, was a bullpup with an optical sight. However it was very user friendly, once you could get past so much of the mechanism being plastic. They Drove a laden Man 4x4 over it during tests and the only damage was the sling clip bent slightly. Otherwise it continued functioning accurately. The Bayonet was a gamechanger too, with its wire cutting tool. (In reality it never left stores because it was so bloody sharp). The optical sight was much easier to train inexperienced shooters on, and mounting night sights was a very simple process of replacing the receiver group. If you so desired, the rifle could be used as a Light machine gun, just by popping out the standard barrel, and replacing it with a heavy one, that included bipod legs, and fitting a larger 40 round magazine. (we never went down that road, in reality it was a false economy, and we hung on to the GPMG in the fire support role). Reportedly we traded a few million tonnes of Irish Intervention Butter to Austria as part of the deal. (Once upon a time, due to over production, we had a Butter Mountain, a Beef Mountain and a Wine lake. This was because the EEC(EU nowadays) paid farmers to produce these products, even when there was no market for them). I know nothing about that apart from the fact there was 2 old fashioned "Reefer" ships anchored in Cork harbour for years, storing surplus produced butter. They were both gone, never to be seen again after 1987.

    The AUG has served us very well, and will do for many years to come, after its recent upgrade. Long live the Butter Gun.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,690 ✭✭✭roadmaster




  • Registered Users Posts: 3,370 ✭✭✭Dohvolle


    PQs like this are the reason the DF is in the state it is. Plonker TDs demanding a barracks for every town, ignoring the strategic need. It doesn't even bring jobs, it just means everyone currently based in Galway or Dublin has to Commute or move to the arsehole of the country, just to please parish pump politics.

    Athlone's future is safe. They are building an Aircraft Hangar on the square. If he opened his eyes he'd know that.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,690 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    I noted in MMs reply he said several barracks where being looked at for the Army Hq. Tge gas thing is custume barracks is not even in his constituency

    On a side note a colleague from Mullingar told me that the local SF TD the bluffer was telling locals that the refugees are only tempoary as the army is moving back in next year!

    Strangley enoght it turns out the barracks was never transfered from the DOD to the LDA



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,545 ✭✭✭Topgear on Dave


    Mullingar only closed a decade ago. There's no rush!



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,370 ✭✭✭Dohvolle


    There are people serving in the DF today who weren't born when Kildare closed, yet they've barely broken ground on whatever plans they have for there.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,370 ✭✭✭Dohvolle




  • Registered Users Posts: 3,690 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    Its best to avoid the newspapers today as it is only doom and gloom about the defence forces



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,947 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    The very fact there is more widespread coverage in the print media is a good thing. Its better than complete apathy and ignorance as to what goes on in the DF.

    The Govt have committed to the CoDF recommendations and they have a job of work ahead to deliver LoA2, including structures for a sustainable RDF.

    I think Micheál Martin is up for that challenge, with the CoS, the Sec Gen and hopefully an ambitious and talented new Head of Transformation.

    Watch this space.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,370 ✭✭✭Dohvolle


    PQs last week did not offer much hope, unfortunately.

    Minister reads outdated reports prepared by civil servants boasting that they got 2/3 of the things done in 7 months that were to have been completed in 6 months.

    No promises to act quickly (Unless its a new Jet to get them to DC for Paddys Day).



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,690 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    I know it would be a big step back but to stablise the reserve should they maybe look at standing back up the FCA and its former units in regional towns to get numbers back up and then try the more structured intergrated reserve



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,370 ✭✭✭Dohvolle


    Only because of the consistent under-investment since the foundation of the state. How does a country with a fraction of the coastline, Belgium, manage to put 2 frigates to sea? Portugal too, has a similar atlantic profile, and manages to field both Submarines and frigates, even though its waters are in the Shadow of Spain and Nuclear super Power France. Why do they believe it is better not to let the neighbours look after their secrity?

    Even Denmark, With NATO Navies to the North, South, east and west, still manages to put 2 ASW, 2 AA and 3 Multi role frigates to sea.

    Could it be perhaps the only reason we will never be in a position to do so is the Minister and the Government lack the ambition to do so? We'll boast about men and women in Blue Berets to secure a seat on the UNSC, but neglect to mention they are poorly equipped, have weak mandates, and cannot deploy anywhere unless Russia and China says it's OK for us to do so.



Advertisement