nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Irish government jet

k artrald

Looks like the Irish governments largest jet the gulfstream GIV 251 will be no more.
Seems keeping the jet maintained is getting too expensive. Currently at a gulfstream facility in the United States, it appears the budget has finally ran out.
Officials from the department of finance are currently deciding whether the aircraft can be saved, sold as is or scrapped. I have it on good authority that a department official has traveled to the maintenance facility in America to decide the best course of action. More to follow

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

0lddog

Perhaps the local aircraft leasing fraternity would be able to offer the use of something gratis ?

Its not as if the Govt & Dep of Fin dont bend over backwards ( not to say forwards ) to make them happy.

Terrontress

So would one of the justifications for the private jet be a minister going out to Lebanon when troops are stationed there?

I'd imagine the majority of ministerial transit is to Brussels and there are plenty of flights, hotels, first class train travel.

logie101

The Government Jets are also used to transport the President of this Republic. The president who is elected directly into office by the people not like Ministers.

I for one wouldn't like the idea of the President, while on state business, queuing for commercial flights.

I would prefer for the government to sell the PC-9s (which are abit over the top for what they are used for) and buy a new Government Jet.

Tenger

logie101 wrote: »

The Government Jets are also used to transport the President of this Republic. The president who is elected directly into office by the people not like Ministers.

I for one wouldn't like the idea of the President, while on state business, queuing for commercial flights.

But he himself has travelling several times on commercial flights as he realises the negative PR that can develop around the use of the 'govt jet'.

The Govt needs to have access to some form of private transport as last minute changes happen, being reliant of the vagaries of the European aviation industry is not good in international politics.

Terrontress

logie101 wrote: »

The Government Jets are also used to transport the President of this Republic. The president who is elected directly into office by the people not like Ministers.

I for one wouldn't like the idea of the President, while on state business, queuing for commercial flights.

I would prefer for the government to sell the PC-9s (which are abit over the top for what they are used for) and buy a new Government Jet.

Certainly at Dublin there is a VIP facility with no need to queue through security.

Do his minders carry firearms when he travels? That could show things up.

christy c

logie101 wrote: »

The Government Jets are also used to transport the President of this Republic. The president who is elected directly into office by the people not like Ministers.

I for one wouldn't like the idea of the President, while on state business, queuing for commercial flights.

I would prefer for the government to sell the PC-9s (which are abit over the top for what they are used for) and buy a new Government Jet.

Google Michael D Higgins on Ryanair flight

logie101

christy c wrote: »

Google Michael D Higgins on Ryanair flight

Yes I know the President has flown Ryanair and indeed goes Aer Lingus while holidaying in Lanzarote.

But as I said while on state business representing Ireland Inc and maybe even helping to develop foreign direct investment I for one would prefer the President to travel in an Aer Corp executive jet.

syklops

Terrontress wrote: »

So would one of the justifications for the private jet be a minister going out to Lebanon when troops are stationed there?

I'd imagine the majority of ministerial transit is to Brussels and there are plenty of flights, hotels, first class train travel.

Its an unpopular opinion I know, but our ministers do travel a lot, and commercial flights take it out of you. Do we want our ministers travelling and then taking a day on either end of the journey to recover from the flight? With the relative luxury of a jet, they can work and rest efficiently. Absenteeism is high in the back benches, but back benchers rarely see the inside of the jet. The high level ministers work practically seven days a week in many cases.

Another unpopular opinion is there is a PR element to it. If you are trying to impress upon Silicon Valley that we are a high tech, modern nation with a high skilled workforce (knowledge economy), do we want the Minister for Jobs and Enterprise stepping off a commercial plane? While it is easy to say instead of the jet we could hire 1000 more gardai, but really the 40Million or so a jet costs is a drop in the ocean compared to our expenditure, plus we run the very real risk of not replacing the jet and saying we are "saving" the money, and having the money eaten up by other expenditure, resulting in no jet and nothing tangible to show for it.

folbotcar

Slightly bemused by some of the comments here on this thread. Clearly some of you haven't heard of private jet charter companies of which Netjets is only the most famous. No less a person than the Queen arrived in Ireland in a chartered jet.

There is no logical reason or need for the government to own a something the size of a GIV when they can call up a suitably sized jet in less than a few hours from most corporate jet operators.

Most of the arguments against this are specious. Operating into hostile areas for example. Since when has this happened ever? If there's a genuine threat then the GIV have no business being there. Commercial operators operated into Baghdad and Kandahar regularly. Definitely hostile!

The supposed high cost of short notice charters. Netjets offer 24 hours notice as standard. I'm quite sure others offer shorter times. After all their clientele are the rich, famous and powerful who are not used to hearing no. Any competition from the government will attract competitive tenders. A prestigious contract like that will be snapped up.

Another advantage is that aircraft can be tailored to the number of people needing to travel. Lots of people = big plane. Small numbers = a 'cramped' Learjet. (Well, cry me a river!). This will cut costs automatically. Remember too that training and currency will now be the responsibility of the operator. No need to be burning money keeping the crews current during a quiet periods.

As for the PR element of the minister stepping out of a jet marked with the tricolour and harp. Corporations care nothing for symbolism, hard cash is what counts.

Other arguments around confidentiality are moot, corporate operators offer exactly that as a matter of course.

There is nothing wrong with flying commercial when appropriate and the reality is that it's more common than many realise.

Flying commercial combined with the use of the Learjet (cramped or not) and hiring in when needed makes a great deal more sense than keeping something like a GIV on permanent standby?

The GIV was bought in the grand old days of Fianna Fail government excess. It's a relic of that period. There is no justification in replacing like with like.

The only risk as I see it is that the government does nothing at all and relies on ad hoc charters combined with commercial flights and the Learjet until that wears out. That wouldn't surprise me at all.

Irish Steve

tayto lover wrote: »

Tele-conferencing is the way to go.

Absolutely NO WAY.

Do you really want fundamental critical decisions being made when the people making the decision can't see the whites of the eyes of the others in the room?

We're not talking cosy little chats over what flavour of tea should be served at the next committee meeting, or what colour to paint the office corridors, the sorts of meetings that happen at 0 dark hundred in some obscure town in the middle of nowhere are decisions about fundamental things like the EU response to the MH17 shootdown in Ukraine, or decisions about how to deal with something like the Ebola virus, or how to implement and fund a massive aid programme to help a country rebuild after a massive natural disaster,

These sorts of things are the highest level of political pressure, and absolutely requires that the people making those decision are in the room, and can both see and sense the real opinions of the rest of the participants.

Do that by teleconferencing? No thanks, the potential for Ireland being even more screwed than we already are would be massive if we were relegated to having to be second tier participants in crisis talks.

We're not talking about a massive trans continental jet here, it's an executive jet that is designed to get people to places that they need to be at in a sensible timescale and in an acceptable physical and mental state that allows them to fully participate in the meeting.

In the same vein, would you really expect a minister to perform adequately in a high level meeting shortly after having spent 8 hours in an economy seat with 2 or 3 screaming kids climbing the back of his seat for the entire flight?

EchoIndia

Irish Steve wrote: »

In the same vein, would you really expect a minister to perform adequately in a high level meeting shortly after having spent 8 hours in an economy seat with 2 or 3 screaming kids climbing the back of his seat for the entire flight?

Judging by several of the contributions to this discussion, clearly the answer is "yes"! Thankfully, government by internet discussion board has not yet become a reality.

Bsal

Can they not have a 'lend' of Mr. O' Briens G650 or Mr. Goodmans Falcon 7X how many times have they gotten a freebie from the government :P:P :pac::pac::rolleyes:

Blue Punto

I think it would be a shame to let it go ,but who knows at the moment

251 by niallsaviation, on Flickr

debabyjesus

They should charter a wx avro. Or buy one off them altogether for about three fiddy! If its good enough for lizzy surely our lads could potter around in one!

Landing in fields all over the country opening shops rezoning land collecting tax or whatever it is governments do.

suasdaguna2

logie101 wrote: »

Yes I know the President has flown Ryanair and indeed goes Aer Lingus while holidaying in Lanzarote.

But as I said while on state business representing Ireland Inc and maybe even helping to develop foreign direct investment I for one would prefer the President to travel in an Aer Corp executive jet.

Well it didnt stop the pres using AL recently to Chicago where he was treated like royalty. The sooner we get off the stage the better thinking we are a nation able to swan around in a clapped out Gulfstream. Ire has more or less come through bankruptcy and should act accordingly.

Rawr

Would a possible option be to have an Aer Lingus airliner available for state use as a short-notice wet lease?

I can easily be wrong here, but I think some states opt to use their flag-carrier for government flights. A shiny green Aer Lingus jet kind of shouts out 'Irish-ness' and I feel would be an appropriate means of transporting the president etc...

L1011

suasdaguna2 wrote: »

The sooner we get off the stage the better thinking we are a nation able to swan around in a clapped out Gulfstream. Ire has more or less come through bankruptcy and should act accordingly.

With the exception of the US, the crapper the ministerial transport the wealthier the country seems to be the case. UK hasn't got any. Merkel had a wrecked A310 until a while ago...

Micky D usually has a full day before any actual 'work' on his trips abroad, something ministers don't have the benefit of.

SpaceTime

Whether it's practical or not, the problem is a public perception that it's an unnecessary perk for overpaid politicians.

There were too many incidences of the government jet bring abused by ministers for quasi personal use in the Tigre era.

[Deleted User]

No one batted an eyelid when the irish navy spent €150 million on three navy ships.

suasdaguna2

So we keep a Learjet type? Not comfy but point and squirt. It'll put off the jolley merchants but will get a minister on site if required . Surely the govt to can lower itself and be a net jets client?

Graham

Rawr wrote: »

Would a possible option be to have an Aer Lingus airliner available for state use as a short-notice wet lease?

Wouldn't such an arrangement have to go out to public tender under EU procurement rules? Would a short-notice wet lease arrangement save any money?

suasdaguna2 wrote: »

Surely the govt to can lower itself and be a net jets client?

Would a fractional ownership program such as net jets save any money given previous utilisation patterns? Would Net Jets be able to offer a plane on permanent standby? If they could wouldn't it defeat the purpose of fractional ownership? If they couldn't does international diplomacy go on hold subject to the EI/FR timetable?

Aren't NetJets mostly geared up for VIP transport, I doubt that would fit in with the 'must look cheap at any cost' outlook spouted by many?

ted1

Terrontress wrote: »

What sort of places do ministers go that scheduled airlines don't go but have a secured airfield to land a Gulfstream? Presumably any Irish military deployment has troop transport etc going there so a private jet isn't necessary

theres' plenty of places that scheduled flights don't go to from Ireland.

I'm talking direct. without wasting days travelling. get in, get out.

Idbatterim

the below looks cool and asking 4.5 million ish USD...

http://cars.ie.msn.com/news/honda-type-air-hondajet-takes-flight-1#image=20

arubex

ted1 wrote: »

The RAF have a huge fleet of planes available. The aer corps don't .

Two BAe 146s and five HS125s isn't really a huge fleet, considering 32 sqn handles Ministerial, Royal and senior Staff movements.

Civvies aren't carried in other RAF assets except in emergencies, just as with the IAC CN235s*.

Most of the time the UK Royals book business jets from the likes of London Executive Aviation. If it's good enough for them...

* actually a couple more CASAs should be able to handle the miniserial transport needs. They have a decent range which can reach anywhere in Europe. The Saudis use a bunch in their Royal Flight. Do the TDs need more luxury than a Saudi prince?

EchoIndia

arubex wrote: »

* actually a couple more CASAs should be able to handle the miniserial transport needs. They have a decent range which can reach anywhere in Europe. The Saudis use a bunch in their Royal Flight. Do the TDs need more luxury than a Saudi prince?

I think you need to research a bit further the air transport assets dedicated to Saudi royalty/government.

http://www.planespotters.net/Airline/Saudi-Arabian-Government
http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?airlinesearch==Saudi%20Arabian%20Airlines%20Special%20Flight%20Services&distinct_entry=true

The CASAs that you refer to may well be used to carry the luggage! They also have C-130s that are fully equipped with medical facilities and others as transport for vehicles etc.

SpaceTime

Basically people dislike politicians at the moment. They want to see them on Ryanair with no luggage booked and required to get to the airport by bicycle.

That's what happens when you crash the economy and hand all our money over to the banks.

If you suggested buying them a cargo plane and transporting them in the hold, there would be widespread support for buying it.

smurfjed

* actually a couple more CASAs should be able to handle the miniserial transport needs. They have a decent range which can reach anywhere in Europe. The Saudis use a bunch in their Royal Flight. Do the TDs need more luxury than a Saudi prince?

Where did you get this gem from?

http://www.planespotters.net/Airline...ian-Government

Is seriously out of date.

http://www.airliners.net/search/phot...nct_entry=true

I am biased, but i do love this scheme

Two new engines for the Gulfstream would of cost around €18 million.

Wow, strangely enough the aircraft is only worth about E6-7 million depending on the cycles, hours, avionics etc.

GIV serial number 1 is still used in charter service in the USA, it is an extremely reliable aircraft when treated correctly. The GIV could be serviced and modified for about E3m and it will then give many more years of service.

man98

I suggested more Casa 235s a few pages back. Most of the use of jets are to fly ministers or people getting transplants, a lot of which is no further that London. A CN-235 does 300 MPH, taking the same time to get in the air as a GIV I would say. Much better for the environment, little impact on speed and we still have the LJ45, I think.

Peregrine

man98 wrote: »

I suggested more Casa 235s a few pages back. Most of the use of jets are to fly ministers or people getting transplants, a lot of which is no further that London. A CN-235 does 300 MPH, taking the same time to get in the air as a GIV I would say. Much better for the environment, little impact on speed and we still have the LJ45, I think.

The IAC already use the 235, the Learjet and the 139s as appropriate for patient transfers.

Where does the G4 come into this?

SpaceTime

Could they just use a pay-as-you go business jet service for most of their flights though?