A Role For The Air Corp

BendiBus · 28-04-2006 10:35AM

DublinWriter wrote:

Air Corps? Air Corpse more like. We depend on the RAF for primary air-to-air defence in our own airspace and an outsourced Canadian company for our air to sea rescue.

Implying we should be spending more on defence and in the same post claiming we're a banana republic. That's ironic considering that's exactly where banana republics spend all their money.

Slutmonkey57b wrote:

No - it means that Irish people are confusing paninis and money with cultural development. Irish people are materially better off but still culturally decrepid

Utter tosh. Irish people have more money now, more experience of the world through travel (and foreigners coming to Ireland) and have acquired some new tastes/interests and the finances to indulge in them. Nothing more, nothing less. Nothing to do with culture really.

Should we feel guilty about our new-found material wealth? Some posters here seem to have a serious problem with it.

New_Departure06 · 28-04-2006 10:44AM

Other small neutrals have modern and larger armies. When even third world countries have huge armies surely a modern, wealth country like Ireland can do better than World War II-style propeller-spinning technology?

I know realistically we could not halt an invader. But we should not be left totally exposed to the winds of potential future aggression. They didn't know what hit them in 1169 either.

I have been watching the 1966 1916 parade on the RTE site http://www.rte.ie/laweb/smil/t06/t06_19660410_cuimhneachain_tv.smil and I think a comparison of its size with the rather small (in comparison) march we have just had speaks for itself. It we could afford a large army back then, when we were an economic backwater, then surely we can do better than aan army of under 10,000 now (admittedly with 20,000 reserves)? I would like us to have something to show off to the world.

The lefties and the dogooders would no doubt object. I resent the attempts by the Left to colonise 1916 and to rebrand the Easter Proclamation as an exclusively socialist document. They try to write out the military aspect of it, and whined against having a military parade. Well to these people I say this: Of the 7 signaturies, only James Connolly was a Socialist. And considering Connolly took part in fighting in 1916, I doubt he would share your distaste to a military commemoration.

I am pro-neutrality but believe we should at least be able to put up some sort of fight against an invader. There is a terrible political tendency in this country to wait for the evil day to happen and then plan afterwards. The Dublin riots, the health-service crisis, and arguably Sellafield are examples of this. Can we just for once avoid that in this case?

psicic · 28-04-2006 11:31AM

If we had an arms industry, the case for bulking up the Air Corp / other organs of military would be much more attractive, as each Euro spent would be an investment in jobs and the economy in general.

Do we have industry that directly benefits in such a way? Do we want one, given all the moral dilemmas that brings up?

It seems to me that it's A-typical of TPLACs to have large armies without native arms industries.

Without such an industry(and please tell me if we have one), I believe some investment in the Air Corp is needed but there isn't enough of a clear and present danger to prompt a Soviet-style spending spree on armaments that some people seem to want. We shouldn't be aiming for a fleet of Apache attack helicopters (I've always preferred the Hind - now a fleet of them would be impressive and cheap in a 'cool if they still fly' type of way:p ), though one or two semi-modern attack craft would be nice.

Morale in the services is continuing its nosedive, so investment in people, not planes, should be paramount. And the formation of a properly equipped Coast Guard and Naval Service would have to take priority as the incursion into Irish waters has significant economic impact (e.g. fisheries), significant impact on the national image (e.g. drug smuggling) and significant effect on lives (e.g. search and rescue - which would probably be administered by the Air Corps).

There's no point in having a large army/airforce for the sake of having a large army/airforce. It would be like building up an army to deter terrorist attacks with the terrorists then choosing their 'strike targets' based on who has the largest army.

Vorsprung · 28-04-2006 11:48AM

psicic wrote:

Do we have industry that directly benefits in such a way? Do we want one, given all the moral dilemmas that brings up?

Timoney up in Meath (?) design armoured vehicles, including the Bushmaster which is being used/bought by the Australian army.

Binomate · 28-04-2006 11:58AM

All this talk about "if Ireland was invaded". When was the last time a european country was invaded by someone? Things have moved on quite a lot since since the early 1940's. Infact, when was the last time Ireland was invaded? In the 1500's I believe. Yes, Ireland might need some kind of a stronger resistance force if we were invaded, but nobody is going to invade our country. There's no bloody chance of it. Is there anyone actually stupid enough to try and Invade Ireland for what ever reason, with British Airbases about 100 miles away from Dublin, America across the Atlantic and Nato all over Europe?

Then to the talk of terrorist attacks and hijacked aircraft. Why would anyone want to hijack an Irish plane? Even if it was hijacked to target London, the hijackers would still need to bypass the RAF.

There is absolutly no defensive need for an upgrade in our Air Corp. When I did my work experience there, they had sufficient equipment to full fill their current roles. The Air Corps is grand the way it is.

Then this talk of a redundant arms industry to create jobs. Why bother creating jobs in an Arms industry when you can create or devolpe an existing industry that is of more use to us, like our health system etc?

ArphaRima · 28-04-2006 12:14PM

The after hours forum has been hijacked by an Air Corps NCO who wants to be a commisioned officer/pilot, flying state of the art EXPENSIVE american hardware that he saw in a movie for his own personal satisfaction.

Close the thread please.

Binomate · 28-04-2006 12:17PM

I know a guy who actually thought Ireland should invest in an Aircraft Carrier. Serriously.

New_Departure06 · 28-04-2006 12:20PM

Binomate, there are lots of small and sometimes neutral countries in the EU with impressive armies for their size. Austria for example. Surely as a rich country we should be able to show off that wealth to the world including in military terms? Saw a programme a few years ago about how we don't even have a large enough navy to intercept very much of the drug shipments into the country. Neutrality shouldn't mean impotence.

If we ever get a United Ireland won't we need a bigger army in case of trouble from some of the former Unionists?

Binomate · 28-04-2006 12:33PM

New_Departure06 wrote:

Binomate, there are lots of small and sometimes neutral countries in the EU with impressive armies for their size. Austria for example. Surely as a rich country we should be able to show off that wealth to the world including in military terms? Saw a programme a few years ago about how we don't even have a large enough navy to intercept very much of the drug shipments into the country. Neutrality shouldn't mean impotence.

If we ever get a United Ireland won't we need a bigger army in case of trouble from some of the former Unionists?

Yes, but this is real life and not some pissing contest.

psicic · 28-04-2006 12:53PM

Binomate wrote:

Then this talk of a redundant arms industry to create jobs. Why bother creating jobs in an Arms industry when you can create or devolpe an existing industry that is of more use to us, like our health system etc?

My point was unless there's an economic reason to increase investment in the Air Corps, there's little point in doing it as there is very little military reason. I wasn't suggesting we create an industry, I was asking if we had a significant one - which I don't think we do - in which case an investment in military hardware would have economic benefits.

It doesn't, we don't, so the reality is there won't be significant investment because the infrastructure of the country is really appalling and worth a whole lot more votes then pandering to military-otaku.

IrishAirCorps · 28-04-2006 12:53PM

Sauron wrote:

when I think of the Aircorps, I can't help but imagine a hangar in the middle of nowhere with one solitary plane sitting inside with cobwebs growing on it... and one very bored looking pilot, just bouncing a ball against the wall...

makes me smile QUOTE]

again joe public proves themselves to be stupid as **** when it comes to these matters, men in the IAC have died so other may live such as the dauphin crash in tramore in waterford in 99 so **** you, they were somebody's son,father,brother,uncle, perhaps you should take a trip to Baldonnel to see what the actually do instead of being an armchair joe public.

IrishAirCorps · 28-04-2006 12:55PM

BTW we aint saying they should have this and that, just something credible. Portugal have f16's...for what? who is their threat? Denmark has them too for what? the fact of the matter is its better to have something when u might need it instead of having nothing when u do need it.

darkman2 · 28-04-2006 12:55PM

Binomate wrote:

All this talk about "if Ireland was invaded". When was the last time a european country was invaded by someone? Things have moved on quite a lot since since the early 1940's. Infact, when was the last time Ireland was invaded? In the 1500's I believe. Yes, Ireland might need some kind of a stronger resistance force if we were invaded, but nobody is going to invade our country. There's no bloody chance of it. Is there anyone actually stupid enough to try and Invade Ireland for what ever reason, with British Airbases about 100 miles away from Dublin, America across the Atlantic and Nato all over Europe?

Then to the talk of terrorist attacks and hijacked aircraft. Why would anyone want to hijack an Irish plane? Even if it was hijacked to target London, the hijackers would still need to bypass the RAF.

There is absolutly no defensive need for an upgrade in our Air Corp. When I did my work experience there, they had sufficient equipment to full fill their current roles. The Air Corps is grand the way it is.

Then this talk of a redundant arms industry to create jobs. Why bother creating jobs in an Arms industry when you can create or devolpe an existing industry that is of more use to us, like our health system etc?

ok well a) If your neutral (which were supposed to be) then you cant depend on anyone else for your protection. Thats the way it is. So many ppl keep saying the letters 'RAF'. f*cK the RAF, we need our own defence and cant be relying on anyone else. There was an interesting letter in the Irish times yesterday explaining the basis for having '5 or 6 fighter jets'. The arguments were well put forward and we need them. As simple as that. Now come on Bertie.

b) Fine geal say that they will attempt to 'overhaul' the aircorps and bring in the resources necessary should they get into power anyway. So enevitably we will have a modern air element which we need if any notion of neutrality has a leg to stand on. Cant be neutral without defence.

Binomate · 28-04-2006 12:56PM

IrishAirCorps wrote:

Sauron wrote:

when I think of the Aircorps, I can't help but imagine a hangar in the middle of nowhere with one solitary plane sitting inside with cobwebs growing on it... and one very bored looking pilot, just bouncing a ball against the wall...

makes me smile QUOTE]

again joe public proves themselves to be stupid as **** when it comes to these matters, men in the IAC have died so other may live such as the dauphin crash in tramore in waterford in 99 so **** you, they were somebody's son,father,brother,uncle, perhaps you should take a trip to Baldonnel to see what the actually do instead of being an armchair joe public.

Yes, because Sauron speaks for absolutly everyone who isn't either in the Air Corps or an military aircraft fanatic.

Psici - Sorry, I must have misread your post or percieved it wrong or something.

New_Departure06 · 28-04-2006 12:58PM

b) Fine geal say that they will attempt to 'overhaul' the aircorps and bring in the resources necessary should they get into power anyway. So enevitably we will have a modern air element which we need if any notion of neutrality has a leg to stand on. Cant be neutral without defence.

Where do they say this? I doubt Labour will agree to that, what with the Left's fixation against "militarism".

IrishAirCorps · 28-04-2006 12:59PM

well said Darkman.

Binomate · 28-04-2006 01:09PM

darkman2 wrote:

ok well a) If your neutral (which were supposed to be) then you cant depend on anyone else for your protection. Thats the way it is. So many ppl keep saying the letters 'RAF'. f*cK the RAF, we need our own defence and cant be relying on anyone else. There was an interesting letter in the Irish times yesterday explaining the basis for having '5 or 6 fighter jets'. The arguments were well put forward and we need them. As simple as that. Now come on Bertie.

Ireland are not 100% neutral. Why do you think we imprisoned German pilots during World War 2 who crash landed in Ireland, but gave RAF pilots a safe passage back to Britian? We have to need our own protection to have our own protection, otherwise the protection is redundant. Why exactly is it that we can't rely on the RAF for the protection you are claiming we need? They're better equipped than the Irish Air Corp will ever be and they're right beside us. Infact, in the highly improbable situation where Ireland is invaded, I'd rather have the RAF fighting our battle for us, with a history of sucess and experience, rather than the Irish Air Corp who would be full of untrained and unexperienced in combat pilots.

New_Departure06 · 28-04-2006 01:19PM

Binomate wrote:

Ireland are not 100% neutral. Why do you think we imprisoned German pilots during World War 2 who crash landed in Ireland, but gave RAF pilots a safe passage back to Britian? We have to need our own protection to have our own protection, otherwise the protection is redundant. Why exactly is it that we can't rely on the RAF for the protection you are claiming we need? They're better equipped than the Irish Air Corp will ever be and they're right beside us. Infact, in the highly improbable situation where Ireland is invaded, I'd rather have the RAF fighting our battle for us, with a history of sucess and experience, rather than the Irish Air Corp who would be full of untrained and unexperienced in combat pilots.

And where would "protection" lead?

darkman2 · 28-04-2006 01:36PM

Binomate wrote:

Ireland are not 100% neutral. Why do you think we imprisoned German pilots during World War 2 who crash landed in Ireland, but gave RAF pilots a safe passage back to Britian? We have to need our own protection to have our own protection, otherwise the protection is redundant. Why exactly is it that we can't rely on the RAF for the protection you are claiming we need? They're better equipped than the Irish Air Corp will ever be and they're right beside us. Infact, in the highly improbable situation where Ireland is invaded, I'd rather have the RAF fighting our battle for us, with a history of sucess and experience, rather than the Irish Air Corp who would be full of untrained and unexperienced in combat pilots.

If you want the protection of the British then go and live there. They have absolutely no responsibility protecting us as a sovereign state...and they dont btw. We have our own defence forces, which while not bad at anything they do just require more investment. Thats all. Then we have a military that, whilst small, we can be proud of and know that we have security and that gives ppl piece of mind.

Just on another point, its not about Irish planes being hijacked. Its about any flight over the Atlantic that could potentially be put in hijack situation and flown over Irish airspace which does pose a threat to us. We have seen terrorism in volving a bomb explosion on board an aircraft over our airspace before.

darkman2 · 28-04-2006 01:38PM

Binomate wrote:

Ireland are not 100% neutral. Why do you think we imprisoned German pilots during World War 2 who crash landed in Ireland, but gave RAF pilots a safe passage back to Britian? We have to need our own protection to have our own protection, otherwise the protection is redundant. Why exactly is it that we can't rely on the RAF for the protection you are claiming we need? They're better equipped than the Irish Air Corp will ever be and they're right beside us. Infact, in the highly improbable situation where Ireland is invaded, I'd rather have the RAF fighting our battle for us, with a history of sucess and experience, rather than the Irish Air Corp who would be full of untrained and unexperienced in combat pilots.

Oh and also please dont speak about the air corps like that. We have, and I know, excceptionally capable pilots so try not to insult the nation by suggesting the good ppl that fly in the aer corps are complete imbeciles. Thank you.

Rockdolphin · 28-04-2006 02:01PM

psicic wrote:

If we had an arms industry, the case for bulking up the Air Corp / other organs of military would be much more attractive, as each Euro spent would be an investment in jobs and the economy in general.

Do we have industry that directly benefits in such a way? Do we want one, given all the moral dilemmas that brings up?

Yes we have a bit more of a substantive arms industry than what many might realise. Though we don't manufacture any fighter jets, many factories in Ireland supply parts to this industry, for instance the blades for American F 15's are made in Ireland. We supply many IT products to the military, software and hardware. The code and programes guiding those cruise missles onto Bagdad could easily have originated in one of our shinny new technoligy parks as anywhere else and have you notice all the dell laptops so favoured by Uncle Sam?

Many people protesting at Shannon about American troops quiet happily return to work on a Monday to earn their living supplying them. Again highlighting our utter hypocricy on neutrality. Oh and those thinking we are not in the sights of anti western terrorists need to think again. A lorry packed with explosives in goods inwards at Dell for instance would have implications far reaching beyond these shores when it went off. Hate to ruin everyone's moka and pannini's, but Bertie in Wonderland is not the real world.

But Lighten up, it's the holiday weekend, discover what it was like to be Irish, get pissed and enoy yourself, the celtic tiger won't up and run away. It will still be here when you get back to work next week.

New_Departure06 · 28-04-2006 02:29PM

I understand we actually have a ban on foreign arms companies setting up here. Lift it.

Pherekydes · 28-04-2006 03:36PM

Binomate wrote:

... Irish Air Corp...full of untrained and unexperienced [sic]in combat pilots.

Untrained. Haha. Do you think the guys who fly ministers all over the world and rescue people off the sides of mountains are untrained?

"Stage 2 - This 14 month Stage at Casement Aerodrome consists of basic and advanced flying training. Here Cadets undertake the complete course of instruction necessary to successfully become a military pilot Officer."

http://www.military.ie/careers/cadet_aircorps.htm

ArphaRima · 28-04-2006 04:31PM

unexperienced in combat

I have no doubt in the pilot's abilities for general flying. However what he says is correct. The Irish Air Corps -to my knowledge- have NEVER engaged in aerial combat(nor do they sincerely have the capability). True?!

Manic Moran · 28-04-2006 05:10PM

Anyone else get the TPLAC reference?
(Nice one, Humphrey)

Ireland does have at least one full-scale arms manufacturer: Timoney. They focus on wheeled armoured vehicles, and build the newest Taiwanese wheeled armoured personnel carrier, and are partners in the current Australian wheeled APC programme. The suspension technology is used in a lot of off-road trucks as well.

The problem is that they're not particularly good. The last time the Irish Army bought Timoneys, they were sent to the storage yards pretty quickly. When looking for the new APC contract which MOWAG won, the Timoney entry didn't even make it to the last eight competitors, and that's with the home turf advantage.

I'm not sure that Irish aviatiors have been trained in air-to-air gunnery since the Vampire days. I guess they could be though. Just in case the aforementioned WWII bipane showed up, the Pilatus could catch one of those easily enough. Aside from the visible turny thing up front, it's quite a modern aircraft.

NTM

BendiBus · 28-04-2006 05:11PM

Manic Moran wrote:

Anyone else get the TPLAC reference?
(Nice one, Humphrey)

Yes

IrishAirCorps · 30-04-2006 07:35PM

Rockdolphin wrote:

But Lighten up, it's the holiday weekend, discover what it was like to be Irish, get pissed and enoy yourself, the celtic tiger won't up and run away. It will still be here when you get back to work next week.

Oh yes go act the fool drunk n pissed, thats so much to be proud of.........Not.

IrishAirCorps · 30-04-2006 07:38PM

fluffer wrote:

I have no doubt in the pilot's abilities for general flying. However what he says is correct. The Irish Air Corps -to my knowledge- have NEVER engaged in aerial combat(nor do they sincerely have the capability). True?!

they do put PC9 up against PC9 AFAIK and the Fouga's did alot of 1 on 1 dog fights etc and mixed against other AC like the Marchetti's etc also remember the USAF F15E's from LN that tried to intercept a CASA but the CASA kept jamming their Radar so the F15E's could not lock on, true story, ive seen the vid from onboard the CASA in question.

Slutmonkey57b · 30-04-2006 11:44PM

IrishAirCorps wrote:

they do put PC9 up against PC9 AFAIK and the Fouga's did alot of 1 on 1 dog fights etc and mixed against other AC like the Marchetti's etc also remember the USAF F15E's from LN that tried to intercept a CASA but the CASA kept jamming their Radar so the F15E's could not lock on, true story, ive seen the vid from onboard the CASA in question.

Wow. I'm convinced. Clearly a force of "5 or 6" jet fighters would be more than capable of defending the country against an invasion (by the Mysterons, since none of our European neighbours are going to do it), or against acts of terrorism (as a country with a very large net EXPORT of terrorism, we probably deserve it). Please buy said jet fighters, along with their support equipment, expensive ordinance, feul, large ground crews, and massive outsourced maintenance contract, and sign it off to "T. Taxpayer, Ireland", who clearly has no need for things like schools, hospitals, roads....

Seriously. Tell me:
Who is going to invade us that we need to defend ourselves from;
How the size of the force we are actually able to afford would be effective against the much larger force that would be invading us;
How a larger military would protect us from terrorism - please note if you're an Irishman you should know at this point that military resources don't put off terrorists so don't bother answering this one. Being the largest military force in human history by a very very very long way hasn't helped America in that regard.

Manic Moran · 01-05-2006 12:10AM

IrishAirCorps wrote:

also remember the USAF F15E's from LN that tried to intercept a CASA but the CASA kept jamming their Radar so the F15E's could not lock on, true story, ive seen the vid from onboard the CASA in question.

Why would ground attack aircraft be trying to intercept a Casa?

NTM

A Role For The Air Corp

Comments