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

Fighter jets for the Air Corps?

1179180182184185217

Comments

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


    Maybe we should update the title of this Thread to Air Policing Aircraft instead of fighter jets and it might take some of sillyness out of the comments.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 127 ✭✭RavenP


    @sparky42 ASAIK they were designed to take an air search radar, fitted for but not with. I think the assumption has to be that some basic CIWS or similar would be added at that stage. The noisy P60s are a problem, P31 didn't have that problem!



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


    I long ago attended a n engineers briefing on the 60s, there was never any intention of fitting any CWIS system, the level of ambition was fitting some sort of UAV capability. The 60s were designed, built and intended for a time when there was zero ambition within the DOD/Government for any credible defence capability, hell still at a time when the NS wasn’t intended to operate outside the EEZ on missions.


    The were the cheapest hull we could get (well cheaper than contemporary European OPVs), lacking any CMS, any operations room, limited space for upgrades. Trying to make them into some sort of kludged corvette isn’t going to do anything but piss away money for nothing. Let them be OPVs which we need as well, if we want corvettes order 3 EPCs, by the time they are built we might have worked up additional crewing capacity.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,805 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Its pretty pathetic really. P31 was built in Ireland and designed to a reasonably ambitious standard of sensory capability for its time, plus the aviation facility etc. And we only went backwards after that.

    To my mind, any ship we procure from now on should be a proven modular platform, with extensive FFBNW options at whatever level it is. They should be warship designs in the same way that the H145M is a dedicated military helicopter. And God knows there are all manner of Types in service that will perform any possible task the Irish Navy could want.

    I hope this is certainly going to be the case for the MRV, and I think we also need to be in on the ground floor of the Modular Multirole Patrol Corvette (former European Patrol Corvette project), which is to say, moving from observer status to participant status within the PESCO order, asap.

    Already the way this is shaping up, i.e. two variants, Combat and Long-Range Multi-mission, it presents as ideal to replace the P60s ultimately, or even to slot in above them before they reach the end of their surface life.



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


    [Mod]??

    Whatever about Tobe and Sparky's bickering, that's a substandard post and you know it[/Mod]



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


    [Mod]And that's a little overly aggressive to my mind… There was some bleedover, but it's not unreasonable to presume that maritime and air security are heavily interlinked.[/Mod]



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


    At its heart it’s down to the combination of lack of interest/support from both politicians and departments and of course the public. Eithne had flaws without question but should have been the baseline capabilities for all future ships rather than the 50/60 series.

    Agree with you in regards to the EPC, but think in reality that they will first be available for the P50 replacement since that will be kicking off when they are in production at the end of the decade.



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


    I don’t have an issue with the bleed over between maritime and air security, I do have an issue with randomly throwing in/connecting Irish support for UNRWA and Palestinians with the thread though as the poster did? I don’t get the relevancy but maybe that’s me? Would have thought there are other dedicated threads for that?



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


    Fair, I missed that line, though PMing me might have been a better move.



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




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 275 ✭✭somenergy


    Sorry that Russian aircraft carrier is the second laughing stock of the russian navy the moskva is more of a threat and it's sunk

    I take some of your other points

    Their seems to be no urgency from the government to even have a concept of a plan.

    Ireland protection should be an AI model using palantir defence solutions in its construction



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


    Again, we are literally only 3 years since the Commission on defence report, you know the one that laid out the levels of ambition, the costings, the broad capabilities that each level would deliver… Saying there's "no concept of a plan" is just wrong, how quickly its being implemented, or questions on whether it needs to be enlarged given how much has changed since then are valid questions. Ignoring it isn't.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,087 ✭✭✭Markcheese


    Having seen what's happened to the russian black sea fleet. , and with our historical lack of anything like frigates anyway, is this the time to stick with OPVs for the naval service . ( Doesn't mean a multirole vessel- or 2 can't be effective,)

    But to actually invest in aircraft instead, wether they're called air policing or fighters,

    Slava ukraini 🇺🇦



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 275 ✭✭somenergy


    We no longer live in a world where something should take years to access

    Analytical AI software does it in weeks especially when it comes to Palantir.

    Our risks are applied and what is needed comes out with costs

    As a side note we have 1 CS for every 26 soldiers



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


    The court case continues:

    https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-41574394.html



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


    An interesting piece of the article below is it says we almost Zero Air Defence. I think they should rephrase to we have no Air Defence unless they think PC9s are partial air defence.

    https://www.irishtimes.com/crime-law/courts/2025/02/14/state-may-rely-on-executive-privilege-to-prevent-disclosure-of-secret-uk-air-defence-agreement



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


    A deterrant to a Cessna 172 with cocaine on board.…Thats about it.



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


    After hearing the Vance speech, I think its more a case of when rather than if, Ireland has to invest properly in air and sea defence much to the irk of the free house brigade!!!!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,364 ✭✭✭source


    We do still have RBS70s. So while it's almost non existent, it does exist.



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




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


    Questionable, the unredacted briefing suggested the department was considering sending one to Ukraine, suggesting at least some capacity.



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




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


    RBS.70 doesn't require a radar to be useful. It just improves capability.

    Given the reasonable level of success with conventional MANPADS, I can't see a reason RBS.70 under local control not being at least somewhat useful, if the rocket motors are still good.



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


    so as pointed out on the other thread, yes the radars are in service again and it’s 3 we are meant to be giving to Ukraine.


    In other news, and more relevant to this topic, I see reports/rumours that the US is to block the sale of GE engines to Columbia, hence killing off the chances of them buying Gripens. Just something to consider in the LoA3 option of procuring fighters, maybe not buying critical and expensive equipment from the states?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,805 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Oh God yeah, **** them. Nothing will cause more upset in the Republican Party than a contraction in international defence sales by Lockheed, GD, Boeing, Raytheon and the hundreds of others.

    But when it comes to Gripen, is it not the case that the Volvo/GKN powerplant is completely independent of the GE 404 for many years now. Even though its built between GB and Sweden, would the US government still have a veto on its proliferation? I mean there must be a million derivatives of that unit in service all over the World.



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


    Not sure, as I said it's been commented online, but when you consider how long the UK was able to frustrate Argentina from buying new jets, I wouldn't be hugely surprised if the US has some degree of control over its hardware even if it is made in Europe.

    I mean its still a "long term" issue for us, but something we should be thinking about.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,098 ✭✭✭blindsider


    image.png

    Irish Times this morning



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 577 ✭✭✭Grassy Knoll


    I read the article as a refresh of the costings. To actually move to LoA 3 is another ball game. The article points out LoA 2 is seen by the military as an essentially staging post before going beyond that due to the currently limited absorption capacity in the military - navy a current example.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,289 ✭✭✭Archduke Franz Ferdinand


    surely helicopters would be a more useful option, they could be used in search and rescue and for monitoring our waters also. I mean who are we supposed to be “fighting “ with these fighter jets.



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


    To double the Fleet and with the plan to have double crewing that would be a navy of 4k personal. That would be some transformation.

    As for Jets there is Grippens knocking around and a deal could be done with our nordic friends for training and spare parts.

    Air Station Shannon or Finner?



Advertisement
Advertisement