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

Should Ireland have a better equipped Navy and Air Force?

Options
24567

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 3,246 ✭✭✭thomil


    OS119 wrote: »
    i've often seen this being stated, but i'm not convinced its true - what is the basis for this suggestion?

    The MPA version of the CASA CN-235 that Ireland uses has a state-of-the-art surface search radar that is mounted underneath the belly of the aircraft. According to the link below, the radar used is a Litton APS 504(V)5 system. It is designed from the ground up for scanning ocean surfaces, and its mounting underneath the fuselage means that it can only scan underneath the aircraft due to movement restrictions for the antenna.

    http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/airtech-cn-235-mpa/

    If the aircraft is high enough, it should be possible to use it as an air search radar. The software would have to be modified to interpret the different returns from airborne targets, but that should be easily resolvable by a software update. Indeed, it wouldn't surprise me if the computers and information management system ware already set up for this.

    As far as the topic itself is concerned, Ireland should definitely have a better equipped naval and air force. Not by much, but it should definitely be better and larger. The CASA CN-235 is a prime example. In my eyes, there should be a fleet of six of these aircraft permanently assigned to the Maritime Patrol role, especially since the RAF phase out their BAe Nimrods. It might also be a good choice to get two of that type especially outfitted as airlifters. The PC-9s can stay, but the Cessnas should be replaced by something more modern.
    Considering their present role, I'm quite partial to the Diamond Aircraft DA-42 Twin star in the surveillance version built for the UK. Their fleet should be about the same size. For good measure, you could order 2-4 DA 40 Star for pilots training. If it's good enough for the US Air Force Academy, it should be good enough for Ireland :p
    The helicopter force should be enlarged, more AW-139s being the obvious choice. The biggest thing that is needed is a fast jet capability. Not a large one, especially since Irish Airspace is being covered by the Royal Air Force, but a fleet of 9-12 single seat aircraft, and 3 more double seaters for transition training would still be prudent. As far as the type is concerned, something like the Korean Aerospace T-50 would be the optimum choice. Still, even the Aero L-159 ALCA would provide a massive capability increase to something that would be more suitable for Ireland.

    As far as the navy is concerned, a lot more work is needed. the new Beckett class OPVs are a step in the right direction, but there are to few of them. Considering the size of the EEA in the Atlantic, a fleet of about 12 oceangoing vessels seems prudent, especially if you want at least 4 ships on patrol at any given time. Both the Beckett class and its immediate predecessor, whose name escapes me are good ships, and should form the mainstay of any future fleet. A new class of helicopter carrying large patrol vessels, two to three ships strong, should also be introduced. I'm thinking of something along the lines of the Protector Class of the Royal New Zealand Navy. The necessary helicopters should be purchased as well, Agusta Westland A-109 being my favourite due to their commonality with the AW-139. A fleet of 3-6 helicopters should suffice. Unlike the last attempt, these should be operated directly by the navy, though I do admit that an Irish Fleet Air Arm sounds rather grandiose. Ideally, a support vessel in the shape of a fleet oiler should also be purchased, though that is definitely not a necessity.

    Something that definitely needs to be addressed is basing. With such an increase in numbers and capabilities, it may not be practicable anymore to concentrate all assets on just one base per service, Baldonnel and Haulbowline. Once again, I'll pick on the Air Corps first. Baldonnel should remain for the fast jets, the PC-9 and air transport assets, as well as remaining the central maintenance depot. The Airfield at Gormanston should be reactivated as the central helicopter base, as well as being the central site for basic flight training, and a base for the DA-42 Twin Stars. The CASA Patrol Aircraft should receive their own base. I'd like to see them get based at the former Galway Airport, but adding a military apron to any of the current civilian Airports may very well be a better choice.
    As for the navy, I'd like to see a second base being built at Killibegs, which would become the home port for a flotilla of 6 ships, mostly the smaller patrol vessels. The larger vessels, especially the helicopter capable ships, should remain based at Haulbowline. There, the old dry dock should be reactivated, while the area to the east of the main basin should become a heliport to house the helicopters that operate from the new ships. The former Irish Steel site should be redeveloped with state of the art work and repair shops, as well as the warehouses needed to support the helicopters and the new ships.
    The question of course is where do you get the money from, and wether the Irish people and their elected representatives are willing to step up to the plate with regards to providing the Permanent Defence Forces with the infrastructure and tools it needs in my eye.

    Good luck trying to figure me out. I haven't managed that myself yet!



  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 2,688 Mod ✭✭✭✭Morpheus


    Casa 235 ~€25m
    T-50 = ~€25m
    L159 = ~€17m
    PC9 - €6m

    Love to see it, but never gonna happen :(


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,073 ✭✭✭Xios


    I'd love to see a shift towards UAV's in the Aircorp and Naval Service. Drone tech has become quite the lucrative industry and is a very viable option for many of the roles undertaken by the forces. This could a cheaper way to expand the capabilities of the Defence forces whilst maintain its current personnel.


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


    Xios wrote: »
    I'd love to see a shift towards UAV's in the Aircorp and Naval Service. Drone tech has become quite the lucrative industry and is a very viable option for many of the roles undertaken by the forces. This could a cheaper way to expand the capabilities of the Defence forces whilst maintain its current personnel.

    They have done some bits, and at least they designed the new ships with some margin for drones, by the sounds of it from listening to one of the engineering team something like a ScanEagle system for future potential use.


  • Registered Users Posts: 514 ✭✭✭Savage93


    thomil wrote: »
    The MPA version of the CASA CN-235 that Ireland uses has a state-of-the-art surface search radar that is mounted underneath the belly of the aircraft. According to the link below, the radar used is a Litton APS 504(V)5 system. It is designed from the ground up for scanning ocean surfaces, and its mounting underneath the fuselage means that it can only scan underneath the aircraft due to movement restrictions for the antenna.

    http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/airtech-cn-235-mpa/

    If the aircraft is high enough, it should be possible to use it as an air search radar. The software would have to be modified to interpret the different returns from airborne targets, but that should be easily resolvable by a software update. Indeed, it wouldn't surprise me if the computers and information management system ware already set up for this.

    As far as the topic itself is concerned, Ireland should definitely have a better equipped naval and air force. Not by much, but it should definitely be better and larger. The CASA CN-235 is a prime example. In my eyes, there should be a fleet of six of these aircraft permanently assigned to the Maritime Patrol role, especially since the RAF phase out their BAe Nimrods. It might also be a good choice to get two of that type especially outfitted as airlifters. The PC-9s can stay, but the Cessnas should be replaced by something more modern.
    Considering their present role, I'm quite partial to the Diamond Aircraft DA-42 Twin star in the surveillance version built for the UK. Their fleet should be about the same size. For good measure, you could order 2-4 DA 40 Star for pilots training. If it's good enough for the US Air Force Academy, it should be good enough for Ireland :p
    The helicopter force should be enlarged, more AW-139s being the obvious choice. The biggest thing that is needed is a fast jet capability. Not a large one, especially since Irish Airspace is being covered by the Royal Air Force, but a fleet of 9-12 single seat aircraft, and 3 more double seaters for transition training would still be prudent. As far as the type is concerned, something like the Korean Aerospace T-50 would be the optimum choice. Still, even the Aero L-159 ALCA would provide a massive capability increase to something that would be more suitable for Ireland.

    As far as the navy is concerned, a lot more work is needed. the new Beckett class OPVs are a step in the right direction, but there are to few of them. Considering the size of the EEA in the Atlantic, a fleet of about 12 oceangoing vessels seems prudent, especially if you want at least 4 ships on patrol at any given time. Both the Beckett class and its immediate predecessor, whose name escapes me are good ships, and should form the mainstay of any future fleet. A new class of helicopter carrying large patrol vessels, two to three ships strong, should also be introduced. I'm thinking of something along the lines of the Protector Class of the Royal New Zealand Navy. The necessary helicopters should be purchased as well, Agusta Westland A-109 being my favourite due to their commonality with the AW-139. A fleet of 3-6 helicopters should suffice. Unlike the last attempt, these should be operated directly by the navy, though I do admit that an Irish Fleet Air Arm sounds rather grandiose. Ideally, a support vessel in the shape of a fleet oiler should also be purchased, though that is definitely not a necessity.

    Something that definitely needs to be addressed is basing. With such an increase in numbers and capabilities, it may not be practicable anymore to concentrate all assets on just one base per service, Baldonnel and Haulbowline. Once again, I'll pick on the Air Corps first. Baldonnel should remain for the fast jets, the PC-9 and air transport assets, as well as remaining the central maintenance depot. The Airfield at Gormanston should be reactivated as the central helicopter base, as well as being the central site for basic flight training, and a base for the DA-42 Twin Stars. The CASA Patrol Aircraft should receive their own base. I'd like to see them get based at the former Galway Airport, but adding a military apron to any of the current civilian Airports may very well be a better choice.
    As for the navy, I'd like to see a second base being built at Killibegs, which would become the home port for a flotilla of 6 ships, mostly the smaller patrol vessels. The larger vessels, especially the helicopter capable ships, should remain based at Haulbowline. There, the old dry dock should be reactivated, while the area to the east of the main basin should become a heliport to house the helicopters that operate from the new ships. The former Irish Steel site should be redeveloped with state of the art work and repair shops, as well as the warehouses needed to support the helicopters and the new ships.
    The question of course is where do you get the money from, and wether the Irish people and their elected representatives are willing to step up to the plate with regards to providing the Permanent Defence Forces with the infrastructure and tools it needs in my eye.

    If you have about 20 billion handy we could this, not in our lifetimes:(:(:(


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 20,937 ✭✭✭✭Ash.J.Williams


    I guess Britain needs to protect our airspace more than we need to


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,073 ✭✭✭Xios


    sparky42 wrote: »
    They have done some bits, and at least they designed the new ships with some margin for drones, by the sounds of it from listening to one of the engineering team something like a ScanEagle system for future potential use.

    That's very interesting, would you mind elaborating on that?


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


    Xios wrote: »
    That's very interesting, would you mind elaborating on that?

    I was at an Engineer Irelands talk from one of the supervising team, he said that at the moment the basic work was done for fitting capture netting and the extra Power and IT connections for a command container (1 of 3 which would leave enough for the launch and recovery).

    His comment was that due to the relatively fast changing pace of UAV's at the moment they are going to be holding off until they can get a better idea of the area.

    I'm guessing its along the lines of the ScanEagle as he made a note about that kind of recovery gear.


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


    Savage93 wrote: »
    If you have about 20 billion handy we could this, not in our lifetimes:(:(:(

    It's not just the cost, I don't see why you need to bring the old dock into operation while the Cobh Graving Dock is operational, nor why you should spend the money on setting up other bases, just for the case of setting up bases.

    Even if we went to NATO standard 2-3% we still couldn't fund anything like that within a generation.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,139 ✭✭✭Red Crow


    Ireland would have to radically overhaul it's military personnel to carry out such a massive transition. Our military is under-trained, under-equipped and under-funded.

    Also the military attracts little intelligence and unfortunately being in the military in Ireland isn't a very enticing job. A radical budget overhaul could seriously change that but that will never happen in Ireland


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    Red Crow wrote: »
    Ireland would have to radically overhaul it's military personnel to carry out such a massive transition. Our military is under-trained, under-equipped and under-funded.

    Also the military attracts little intelligence and unfortunately being in the military in Ireland isn't a very enticing job. A radical budget overhaul could seriously change that but that will never happen in Ireland

    Out of interest, is this just your personal opinion or do you have any objective basis for the statements above - particularly the bits about under-trained, under-equipped and the military attracting 'little intelligence.'

    I agree funding could be better, but the rest of your post seems to lack a rational foundation.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,396 ✭✭✭Frosty McSnowballs


    Red Crow wrote: »
    Ireland would have to radically overhaul it's military personnel to carry out such a massive transition. Our military is under-trained, under-equipped and under-funded.

    Also the military attracts little intelligence and unfortunately being in the military in Ireland isn't a very enticing job. A radical budget overhaul could seriously change that but that will never happen in Ireland

    Sorry, what?


  • Registered Users Posts: 26 Miceail22


    I'll elaborate for him (being ex PDF), rubbish chest rigs, body armour that's not balanced correctly. Rifles are long due an upgrade, just look at all the comparative work that has been done on the SA80. But to be realistic, and pragmatic in this economic climate why upgrade them when they aren't fired at anything outside of a figure 8 target on the range or a bit of drill!!In trained hands, maintained right they fire just fine though.

    Not enough funding/effort put into live fire training is another example, anyone who thinks an annual exercise thrown together is enough clearly doesn't grasp the modern relevance of it.

    As for training, fitness standards to get in are not robust enough. Too much time is spent bringing people up to competent standard. Having recruit training and 2-3 star training infantry based makes no sense. As not everyone will assume an ''infantry role'' after training.

    I've seen people pulled out of the field for ceremonial duties in barracks and even been on an exercise that was cancelled because they needed bodies for a brigade athletics championship.

    As for little intelligence? A good soldier doesn't need to be a rocket scientist he just needs the rare quality of common sense, which isn't that common. Plenty of enlisted have degrees, some are mickey mouse diplomas and certs in anything from event planning to sociology and politics. But some are quite high end like for instance a Cpl who instructed myself from the FAR who was a civil engineer but he was under utilised and clearly unfulfilled in his role. Plenty of qualified/ bright lads in signals, engineers and logistics too. There's no need for recruiting intelligence (qualifications wise) in the PDF as the really high spec technology isn't there. (And know Armoured Vehicle Recognition for the Javelin don't count :))

    Just to be clear,I don't hold the rank and file of the PDF accountable for this. Its the higher ups, the colonels and such who have long forgotten the fundamentals of soldiering, do not put nearly enough pressure on the government to allow the PDF to deploy on more robust overseas operations (Syria is a step in the right direction though) and have no interest in cultivating a well trained enlisted body of the military.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,396 ✭✭✭Frosty McSnowballs


    Miceail22 wrote: »
    I'll elaborate for him (being ex PDF), rubbish chest rigs, body armour that's not balanced correctly.

    The chest rig is ok. Obviously it is not "soldier proof" and the weak parts like the zip will obviously be the first to go. It just about holds up while crawling and I find it more comfortable than the PLCE for tactics. You get enough into it that you need but the inflexibility to replace busted buckles annoys the bollox off me. It's not great in the back of a MOWAG though. It's fine for the moment but I'm not convinced a modular system would be the way to go. I'm not even sure what would be a better replacement. They all have their flaws.

    The body armour is a load of bollox! I won't even go into why...that was an ill thought out buy. It just goes to show what research the civvys do before they buy. AFAIK, the DF wanted a different system but it came down to budget.....the DF's biggest enemy.
    Miceail22 wrote: »
    Rifles are long due an upgrade, just look at all the comparative work that has been done on the SA80. But to be realistic, and pragmatic in this economic climate why upgrade them when they aren't fired at anything outside of a figure 8 target on the range or a bit of drill!!In trained hands, maintained right they fire just fine though.

    I am happy with the current rifle, the sights are being upgraded at the moment. It does the job at home and overseas. I don't think we need a swap out.....sure we'd just have to change the arms drill then. :p. I don't think they would need to be replaced even if we were firing at non figure 8 targets....why would we?
    Miceail22 wrote: »
    Not enough funding/effort put into live fire training is another example, anyone who thinks an annual exercise thrown together is enough clearly doesn't grasp the modern relevance of it.

    Agreed, LFTT is being taken more seriously now but we need to do more! Large scale exercise's have gone by the wayside in the last few years. I'd be happy even if each unit put more of an effort in, but it comes down to money again at the end of the day.
    Miceail22 wrote: »
    As for training, fitness standards to get in are not robust enough. Too much time is spent bringing people up to competent standard.

    Entrance fitness standard is fine. You know as well as I do that entrance fitness and tactics fitness is a different kind of fitness. That needs to be built up over time.
    Miceail22 wrote: »
    Having recruit training and 2-3 star training infantry based makes no sense. As not everyone will assume an ''infantry role'' after training.

    I don't agree, everyone should first and foremost be able to perform infantry tactics. It doesn't matter where the end up going. To suggest otherwise is very puzzling tbh.
    Miceail22 wrote: »
    I've seen people pulled out of the field for ceremonial duties in barracks and even been on an exercise that was cancelled because they needed bodies for a brigade athletics championship.

    Can you PM when that happened? An exercise cancelled because people were needed for athletics? What were you doing.....section tactics? That sounds wrong. I'm not saying it didn't happen but what type of exercise was it?
    Miceail22 wrote: »
    Just to be clear,I don't hold the rank and file of the PDF accountable for this. Its the higher ups, the colonels and such who have long forgotten the fundamentals of soldiering, do not put nearly enough pressure on the government to allow the PDF to deploy on more robust overseas operations (Syria is a step in the right direction though) and have no interest in cultivating a well trained enlisted body of the military.

    We will never be used to our full potential. I'm surprised the gave us the green light to even observe in Syria. It's a reason why we are not taken seriously tbh. The people in charge are more focused on "IT's and ranges" than developing us further than what we are currently doing.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,710 Mod ✭✭✭✭riffmongous


    I still don't think there has been any proper justification in this thread so far as to why we need a better equipped Navy and Air Force.. is there any economic justification for starters? Can anyone put a number on the cost versus return of expanding the Navy maybe?


  • Registered Users Posts: 250 ✭✭An Cigire


    I think value to the economy = 132,000km2....


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,710 Mod ✭✭✭✭riffmongous


    An Cigire wrote: »
    I think value to the economy = 132,000km2....
    Meaning what exactly? That's not a value


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,118 ✭✭✭ABC101


    I'm open to correction... but my view on it is this...

    Regardless of what is the opinion of posters on here.. the "establishment" of senior civil servants has the ideology of running down the Defense Forces and using the money to bolster An Garda Siochana.

    Civil servants cannot understand the cost of the "tools of the trade" for the PDF, from Casa engines, Helicopters, ships that burn lots of Diesel oil (approx 60 tons a day etc) to other expensive costs etc etc.

    How many Garda Mondeos could all this stuff buy?

    Maybe Ireland should have a better PDF, but the ideology of the civil service is to get rid of it, they don't see any value or justification in the PDF.

    In addition I would also be very critical of the senior management of the PDF, the Chief of Staff and his boys are more interested in keeping the peace in foreign lands. Meanwhile areas of Ireland are lawless, the Gardai cannot cope with some housing estates. The only service the PDF give to this state is the "the bomb disposal team".

    Of course it's not politically correct to state the above... but I don't care anymore..... we don't "do solutions" in Ireland.


  • Registered Users Posts: 26 Miceail22


    PLCE all the way ha, better variants have more sturdier shoulder supports and stronger adjustable metal buckles. An extra pouch here or there. Happy days

    I will concede the Steyr is fit for it's current purpose. It is superior to the SA80 in several regards, the magazine change for instance is much better and reliable. Cocking handle on left hand side is a lot better for prone position too. But the Steyr doesn't have a rail system the SA80 does.But there is no need for accessories on the Steyr ie light, laser (although they are incorporating the latter these into sights now as a point of aim aid so who knows what the PDF will add)

    I'll just clarify this about training, some people on passing out go straight into the coy office, the officer/ncos/privates mess or some other non military specific job. No doubt everyone joining the army, should get a grounding in basic infantry tactics but with resources in the DF always in short supply. Some roles should be civilian only (freeing up trained ranks), with an appropriate confidentiality clause as needed, or specific intakes for lack of a better term ''combat support'' roles like an administrative corps if you will. I'll be a little biased here, infantry should be purely infantry.It shouldn't be viewed as the all inclusive unit who takes anyone and everyone to fill gaps.


    PM inbound


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,841 ✭✭✭CrabRevolution


    Xios wrote: »
    This is the area the Navy and Air Corp patrols (I think its accurate)
    Naval Map for ireland

    But in my opinion, our Air Corp and Naval Corp are underfunded to protect such a large area. But, in saying that, i think they've been doing a friggin brilliant job with limited resources.

    750 people in the Air corp and 1,500 in the Naval Service. More people work at Google in Ireland than there is in these two military branches.

    I've nothing to add to the Navy/Air Corps debate. But out of curiosity on that map, why does the Irish territory/juristiction extend maybe 2/3 times further west from the coast of Donegal than it does off the coast of Kerry? This is despite Kerry being further west than Donegal.

    There's no countries to our southwest to push the boundary back....unless Atlantis made a claim.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,118 ✭✭✭ABC101


    I believe it is due to the extent of Ireland's continental shelf.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    I've nothing to add to the Navy/Air Corps debate. But out of curiosity on that map, why does the Irish territory/juristiction extend maybe 2/3 times further west from the coast of Donegal than it does off the coast of Kerry? This is despite Kerry being further west than Donegal.

    There's no countries to our southwest to push the boundary back....unless Atlantis made a claim.

    What he said....
    ABC101 wrote: »
    I believe it is due to the extent of Ireland's continental shelf.

    I think we have a claim in with the UK, France and Spain with the UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf to extend the boundary further to the SW.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,332 ✭✭✭cruasder777


    Adrianno28 wrote: »
    The Navy is very small for a country and an island with a huge geographic area of sea to protect. It seems to be a few ships that they can roll out to make it look good when clearly a lot more in terms of numbers are needed.

    I know we are a Neutral country and all that but reading about our air defence terms like "air defence of the country was non-existent" and "Ireland only has six RBS-70 surface-to-air (SAM) missile launchers and a number of obsolete Bofors guns along with a 15-year-old Giraffe radar with a range of 40 kilometres to mount a low-level air defence" makes me a little concerned

    If a hijacked plane or some unforeseen intrusion were to come about what would happen? The British Air Force given a call? Also what happens when for example the US President or a World Leader comes here... do they provide their own defense.. or what happens.. embarrassing. I know that money is tight now but why was more not spend all along to keep us up to date? In the 21st century I think that a modern Air Force and Navy with decent technology and all it entails is the right way to go... thoughts??

    PS:
    This is not aimed at the Defence Force Personnel who do great work in Ireland and around the world but more at Defence Policy and a lack of a Government long term Defence view for Ireland.

    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/czechs-offer-ireland-cheap-n-cheerful-air-defence-26251048.html



    Because of its geographical position even if you increased spending 50x, Ireland could potentially still be invaded. Not that its going to happen any time soon. What would the point be ? No oil etc, so not a target.

    The only total deterrgent would be nuclear weapons.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,500 ✭✭✭tac foley


    'The only total deterrgent would be nuclear weapons.'

    ..and they'd really clean up the whole place................... :)

    tac


  • Registered Users Posts: 250 ✭✭An Cigire


    Meaning what exactly? That's not a value

    That is approximate size of our seas..

    That value to the state is endless..

    Seas that require an effective & strong navy to patrol and police.

    There is always the potential for future national resource finds off the west coast as well other important resources in such as fishing stocks.

    Smuggling of narcotics and arms is still a problem.. The country is a run with both as news reports constantly mention.

    We have 8 naval vessels currently trying to do all this work covering 132,000km2 with the support of two MARPAT aircraft.

    We should continue to improve & enlarge our navy with improved air corps support to complete there mission.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    An Cigire wrote: »
    That is approximate size of our seas..

    That value to the state is endless..

    Seas that require an effective & strong navy to patrol and police.

    There is always the potential for future national resource finds off the west coast as well other important resources in such as fishing stocks.

    Smuggling of narcotics and arms is still a problem.. The country is a run with both as news reports constantly mention.

    We have 8 naval vessels currently trying to do all this work covering 132,000km2 with the support of two MARPAT aircraft.

    We should continue to improve & enlarge our navy with improved air corps support to complete there mission.

    It's not like we're wholly alone or it's like the Wild West out there.

    The country is a participant in the EU's Maritime Analysis and Operations Centre - Narcotics (MAOC (N)) and through that gets access to some pretty good information and analysis.

    The Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) takes care of commercial fishing vessels >15m and allows almost real time tracking of their movements.

    The Naval Service and Air Corps could do some enhancements - maybe ships that can remain at sea for longer patrols and a couple of extra aircraft, and the personnel that go with them - but otherwise they're about right.

    A couple of these could maybe go on the shopping list if things pick up and there's a desire to beef up or maritime patrol capabilities

    Boeing Maritime Surveillance Aircraft Demonstrator Completes 1st Flight

    Anyway, before going off looking for shiny new toys we should figure out what it is we want the PDF to do (I think we're already fairly clear about it) and then decide what to add, enhance or expand. In short, we could, if wholesale change was contemplated, do worse than take a leaf of out the Brazilians book - in terms of aligning force with strategy......

    The Best Little Air Force You’re Barely Aware Of


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,214 ✭✭✭chopper6



    The only total deterrgent would be nuclear weapons.

    Yep...we could cream the eastern seabord with nulkes if we were invaded.:rolleyes:


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,710 Mod ✭✭✭✭riffmongous


    An Cigire wrote: »
    That is approximate size of our seas..

    That value to the state is endless..
    But economically it's not endless though, it will have a certain, probably poorly defined, value.
    Seas that require an effective & strong navy to patrol and police.

    There is always the potential for future national resource finds off the west coast as well other important resources in such as fishing stocks.

    Smuggling of narcotics and arms is still a problem.. The country is a run with both as news reports constantly mention.

    We have 8 naval vessels currently trying to do all this work covering 132,000km2 with the support of two MARPAT aircraft.

    We should continue to improve & enlarge our navy with improved air corps support to complete there mission.
    But what I am trying to get at is that in Ireland where the country in general doesn't have such an interest in military matters and especially at a time when the country is cutting a lot of other programs across the spectrum, a good way to justify expansion is a cost-benefit analysis. E.g., what is the cost to the country of having so much drugs and arms in the country? How much of a reduction will you get with a xxx million euro investment into the fleet? What are the other options for getting such a reduction and how much do they cost? And so on, it's much easier to justify things with numbers and that's generally how things would have to be budget justified in a lot of areas.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,968 ✭✭✭aindriu80


    Ireland should spend 1% of GDP on defence every year (210.3 billion USD (2012). Over 10 years we could get a few warships, jets and a few tanks. We would simply be meeting the norms for Europe.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    aindriu80 wrote: »
    Ireland should spend 1% of GDP on defence every year (210.3 billion USD (2012). Over 10 years we could get a few warships, jets and a few tanks. We would simply be meeting the norms for Europe.

    The obvious question - why?


Advertisement