Ireland - lack of air and naval defence.

Sgt. Bilko 09 wrote: »

Brazil are the main customer of the of KC390 so presumably they will be the main advert of attention for launch. They have ordered a total of 26, 1 to be delivered in 2018 followed by 2 in 2019 then the rest in to be delivered by 2022.
For EU customers which mainly are Czech Republic and Portugal, however Portugal are to ask for a further two more.
Ireland hasn't confirmed the purchase but it's looking likely to that type of aircraft.

So a total of 3 would be in service around the time the CASA's need to be replaced. Yep it would be insanity for Ireland to try and get them (even assuming that we could buy some slots of the Brazilians to get them in 2019-2020). We have tried being launch/near launch customers before and it's brought us nothing but problems. Whatever the budget is, go for the NATO standard that has the largest customer base and stick with that. Anything else is beyond stupid.

I seen that during leaders questions two weeks ago that he wants the radar capability but he was challenged by opposition about having interceptor aircraft as it was put to him it's all good seeing something coming your way but not being able to do something about it is a another thing he commented that he is happy with the idea of having IAC reps look for the right aircraft as we cannot rely on the RAF he mention clauses with Brexit etc.

That's called the opposition being the opposition, none of them would vote for the budget increase for any FJ capability and everyone in the Daíl knows that. Kehoe has feck all interest in the DF and would never get the Cabinet to sign off on it.

Sgt. Bilko 09 wrote: »

I agree , Embrear are good a commercial airlines and have came up with the design to compete as AC130 Hercules which they said is there main competitor and are thriving to beat in the market.
I personally think Embrear have set the bar far too high with comparing it to an aircraft that is tried and tested.
If the IAC are looking for something cheap and as good as the KC390, I believe the AN178 has been tried and fitted to do similar taskes but it is Eastern European built which they never liked for some reason.

Why? Again you are suggesting a design that has zero operational success, it's less advanced than the KC390 with only 1 in testing. The replacement for the CASA's need to be MPA's and neither of the designs you've suggested are MPA's at all.

There's the C 27J Spartan or the CASA 295, those are the two runners, everything else is nuts to start looking (particularly the two you've suggested).

Heraldoffreeent wrote: »

And one is $28m and the other is $40, so its easy read which one we'll be getting.

As with the PC12,, this is pretty much well flagged, there'll be no KC390 here.

Pretty much, as you say it's been well flagged, as I said at best we might get a third if we were very lucky.

Leonidas BL wrote: »

A new PC9 arrived in today. This one has two atomic bombs strapped to the wings. Take that North Korea :P:p
snip

Hopefully the others will get fitted with the tanks as well, or perhaps look at other pods that could increase their usefulness.

Leonidas BL wrote: »

I doubt it. These were probably used to fly it from Switzerland. I bet they'll go back to Pilatus.

Wonder did the originals use them to fly over? Guess we won't know for a while.

ezra_ wrote: »

What do the drop tanks allow the planes to do - just spend more time flying?

Secretly they are just covers for AIM-9X air to air missiles. That way the lefty lunatics in this country wont start blabbering.

Leonidas BL wrote: »

So in the budget it was mentioned about buying new Light tactical armored vehicles. Does that mean they are replacing the RG-32's?

These would be very nice. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oshkosh_L-ATV

However I would imagine we'll get something considerably cheaper and operationally sub-standard.

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Those French VBL's are tiny and are going to be phased out by the French Army

The Eagle is impressive, though I can't see what makes them better than the RG32's we already have.

That they work? Our 32s have terrible reliability apparently.

Markcheese wrote: »

What stops them? Engine, electronics or suspension?
They're clocking up the hours at this stage...

I heard they are badly made balls of ****e

Markcheese wrote: »

What stops them? Engine, electronics or suspension?
They're clocking up the hours at this stage...

They seem to have all of the above, with them almost being one offs with differences between vehicles even.

When you look at a Country's Defence Forces you must take into account it's location. Then look at and quantify it's current threats, control needs, and relevant training and hardware. Then you must examine your stance and needs in a major confrontation involving your total Economic zone and make plans to improve weapon reach, lethality and deterrence.

For many years we have deconstructed elements of our PDF based on Civil needs and assumptions. We have shed key medical needs in the PDF as a whole onto a tortured Hospital System. We have bought equipment like a family car designed just to get by or equipped certain units with samples of equipment needed in quantity. We have forgotten reach in all dimensions in the Air, on land, and at sea in all dimensions.

We must be able to mount an Air defence and reach at least 20 miles both at sea and on land using combined Missile and Gunnery systems. Since the disbandment of the CDA and Automation of Lighthouses we have stopped being aware of the Maritime scene in both Defence and Local Knowledge. There is some activity between other State Agencies such as Maritime Institute and those Mapping seabed and Coastal Geography through INFOMAR. However they operate in a bubble and have the benefit of a better range of electronics than is supplied to our navy.

A continuation of ad hoc planning motivated by non military needs will have to be replaced by an expert re-build programme.

The first few days of RU/Ukraine war shows the advantage of a well prepared Defending Force. In theatre, must have, weapons centre on anti-tank and air defence weapons such as Javelin and Stinger. Those coupled with Arty and route denial seems to be delaying Ru movement and increasing re-supply problems. We should try and add a few hundred Stingers and Javelins to our inventories and get battlefield defence in order.

Another matter we must look at is dispersal of assets. One Naval base , Oil Base, Dock Yard, and armouries, all conjoined is a tactical nightmare. We certainly need other exclusive bases for re-positioning assets. The Air Corps used to have Gormanstown and other locations now they may be using a single airfield in the middle of commercial Dublin.

Good ideas there Ancient. And the quicker we get this kit on order the better if we don't want to be at the back of the queue given reports that other nations (esp. Germany) are ramping up their defence spending by a massive amount to meet the new and dangerous world order posed by a dysfunctional Russian administration

Can't the javelin switch to fire direct to hit helicopters

The key is the man portable operation and the ability of the firer to deal with an agile target. The RBS 70 is said to be a certain system with high level kill and laser unjammable guidance but a bit ponderous to handle. In a list of MANPADS the RBS is heaviest while the Stinger is light. An ideal solution is Stingers for slower AC's and an RBS type for Jets. The experts should choose from latest experience.

Perhaps one of the bigger collapses in our Defence strength was the dismantling of the CDA and it's function. When you look at offshore attackers pounding coastal assets with cruise missiles, it becomes obvious there must be a response from strategically placed mobile units.

Some nations have mobile missile units in standard sized 20ft containers with a launcher and up to 4 missiles available in each unit. They can be loaded on any vehicle that will take a 20ft container. They can be assembled in batty's of two to six units with a command unit hooked into a national C2 system. Such a system is the one based on the Swedish RBS15 and such a type would be preferable to a heavy mobile arty long barrelled unit and terrain requirements for larger vehicles.

The overwhelming majority of nations that have such systems are those whose waters are relatively small (or their naval capabilities are rather limited) and with a likely threat facing them. The existing CDA should have been dismantled long before it was, as to replacing it there is a hundred and one things that are more important for the DF than a land based anti ship capability.