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
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

RAF jets protecting Ireland

2»

Comments

  • #52
    Tenger
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 9,930 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tenger


    Larbre34 wrote: »
    ......
    ......
    ......
    I'd even go so far as to venture that if Ireland agreed to shore up our rather large gap in European air space defence that we'd get a very lucrative deal on just about all the hardware and expertise from EU colleagues.

    Which gap is that? The one facing west towards the North Atlantic, which is the path from which the Americans might come!

    Because the GIUK gap (Of the Cold War fame) is pretty much covered by the USAF and the RAF.
    RAF bases in Scotland get warning and can intercept any RuAF assets far earlier than we could.

    And to our South the French and the Spanish have the South-Western approach covered.


    If our "International partners" are worried about our lack of airspace defence we could follow the Iceland example. And have EU Allies make several short deployments a year.
    Base 6-8 interceptors in Shannon for 4-6 weeks at a time.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icelandic_Air_Policing


  • #53
    riffmongous
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,812 Mod ✭✭✭✭riffmongous


    bk wrote: »
    Lol snap :) I couldn’t agree more.

    Haha, snap indeed :D


  • #54
    Larbre34
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,357 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Tenger wrote: »
    If our "International partners" are worried about our lack of airspace defence we could follow the Iceland example. And have EU Allies make several short deployments a year.
    Base 6-8 interceptors in Shannon for 4-6 weeks at a time.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icelandic_Air_Policing

    You're really being churlish to ignore the presence of Russian military aircraft operating with transponders off, off our coasts and in our area of air traffic responsibility in the Atlantic.

    However, I have no problem with the solution you describe. The difficulty arises where Iceland are in NATO and we are not. This would no doubt raise noisy objections from the left wing here in Ireland. Also, would it be any less constitutional than the DoFA arrangement with the UK?


  • #55
    Tenger
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 9,930 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tenger


    Larbre34 wrote: »
    You're really being churlish to ignore the presence of Russian military aircraft operating with transponders off, off our coasts and in our area of air traffic responsibility in the Atlantic.

    However, I have no problem with the solution you describe. The difficulty arises where Iceland are in NATO and we are not. This would no doubt raise noisy objections from the left wing here in Ireland. Also, would it be any less constitutional than the DoFA arrangement with the UK?

    No one is “ignoring the presence of RuAF aircraft”. The RAF intercept and shadow these aircraft once detected on their approach from the GIUK gap.

    As I’ve stated twice already, so far our lack of defense infrastructure hasn’t impacted the decision of our international partners yet.

    Iceland is indeed in NATO and its NATO partners deploy to KEF. I was using that as an example.
    But my post stated that we could use this model and have our “EU allies” deploy.


  • #56
    ted1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,652 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    Who are we protecting our skies from?

    What’s the threat?

    Should we be attacked, woukd they not do what the US did to Iraq and Libya etc, just take out the runway rendering jets useless


  • #57
    Blut2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,074 ✭✭✭Blut2


    Its also pretty telling that even on an aviation enthusiasts forum, where the support for and interest in fighter jets would be much much higher than in the general Irish population, opinions are still 70/30 against the idea according to the poll.

    That would suggest amongst the general public its probably closer to 10% support, which means everything else aside the whole thing is a complete political non-runner.


  • #58
    bk
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,986 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    ted1 wrote: »
    Who are we protecting our skies from?

    What’s the threat?

    Should we be attacked, woukd they not do what the US did to Iraq and Libya etc, just take out the runway rendering jets useless

    Yes, it is nonsense.

    The threat that people go on about are the Russians, but the only scenario that the Russians would actually enter our sovereign airspace is if World War 3 has broken out and they are heading to the UK to nuke them.

    Once nukes are flying, a dozen jets will make feck all difference and we are all basically fecked anyway.

    And even in a war scenario, the reality most nukes are ICBM's launched out of subs and the Bears would launch there cruise missiles from closer to Russia, not fly all the way to the UK, they are big and slow and would be sitting ducks.

    Russians flying of our west coast is just posturing by Putin for local propaganda.


  • #59
    Psychlops
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,143 ✭✭✭Psychlops


    Great listen today:


    https://www.newstalk.com/podcasts/highlights-from-the-pat-kenny-show/do-have-we-the-capacity-to-police-our-own-skies


  • #60
    sdanseo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,234 ✭✭✭sdanseo


    CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »
    8 jets wouldn't keep a 2 jet qrf in service.

    Either we spend for a serious airforce or we don't. Tokenism is pointless.

    Why on earth not?

    CHC/IRCG have 5 recue helicopters with 4 on permanent response readiness almost 100% of the time.

    I know they're not fighter jets, but even factoring in 50% downtime there's still 2 on standby or available for training use.

    In any case, we have 200nm of open ocean to police in almost every direction and we can't recruit for any of the Defence Forces. WHile it would be nice to see us acquire jets, improving DF pay and conditions and brining them to at least their approved strength would in the short term be a much better use of the money.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    Tenger
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 9,930 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tenger


    sdanseo wrote: »
    Why on earth not?

    CHC/IRCG have 5 recue helicopters with 4 on permanent response readiness almost 100% of the time.

    I know they're not fighter jets, but even factoring in 50% downtime there's still 2 on standby or available for training use.
    .....

    4 jets required in the US for training. (assuming we have F-18s and USAF instructors, Gripen's may require similar setup based in Sweden)
    2 jets on QRF, 2 on longer standby.
    2-4 in use on any given day for currency/training. (the "longer standby" could be part of this group)
    Another 4-8 in various level of prep/overhaul.
    Thats minimum of 14 aircraft to have 4-6 ready.

    we would also need to have 2 distinct airbases. (maybe Shannon could become a split civilian/military airfield) This duplicates infrastructure and staffing costs.


  • #62
    ted1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,652 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    Tenger wrote: »
    4 jets required in the US for training. (assuming we have F-18s and USAF instructors, Gripen's may require similar setup based in Sweden)
    .

    Not euro fighters ??


  • #63
    guy2231
    Site Banned Posts: 339 ✭✭guy2231


    Psychlops wrote: »
    Great listen today:


    https://www.newstalk.com/podcasts/highlights-from-the-pat-kenny-show/do-have-we-the-capacity-to-police-our-own-skies

    We don't even have the capacity to police our own island, for over 70 years we laid claim to all of Ireland in our constitution then eventually had to change it.


  • #64
    Blut2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,074 ✭✭✭Blut2


    guy2231 wrote: »
    We don't even have the capacity to police our own island, for over 70 years we laid claim to all of Ireland in our constitution then eventually had to change it.

    We don't even have the capacity to police the center of Dublin, if all the rioting/assault videos coming out every single weekend these days are any indication.

    I'd personally far rather the hundreds of millions of euro potentially spent on fighter jets yearly be spent on putting more gardai on the streets, as far as 'policing' the island goes. A lot more day-to-day benefit for the population.


  • #65
    Tenger
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 9,930 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tenger


    ted1 wrote: »
    Not euro fighters ??

    Older Eurofighters might be an option, if acquired 2nd hand. The earlier variants were air superiority rather than multi role.
    But the Gripen certainly is marketed as a more affordable aircraft. The F-18 is a newer design than the F-16 an is in use with many air forces around the World, which has lowered its purchase and upkeep cost.

    The Eurofighter is expected to compete against top of the line aircraft like F-15s and even F-35s in certain situation. (EG when stealth wasn’t included in the excercise)


    Article in IT today:
    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/the-gaping-gap-in-ireland-s-airspace-defence-1.4597124

    Lists a cost of E166m annually for 40 Gripens. “Full capability”
    E8m per year is the current cost for the 8 PC9s.
    Option 1 is 8 M346s at E18m per year.
    Option 2 of 8x FA-50s is E20 m per year.

    40 aircraft seems a lot but I’m sure it’s based on military requirements.
    Quote in the article states that last year the chief of the IAC estimated a need for 16 fast jets with 3 crews each for a 24/7 response capability.

    Further down it also mentions that the State received proposals from 3 defense firms for purchase of 1-3 air defense radar.
    Personally I think getting that radars should be a priority over the actual aircraft. At least then we can monitor our airspace. Any incursions recorded could then be used as a pretext to acquire (or not) fast jet capability.


  • #66
    Henry Ford III
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 17,757 Mod ✭✭✭✭Henry Ford III


    We're a neutral country. We've never needed jets to this point. Why do we need them now?


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    sparrowcar
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,867 ✭✭✭sparrowcar


    Henry Ford III wrote: »
    We're a neutral country. We've never needed jets to this point. Why do we need them now?

    Reading back through the thread will give you an insight into the pros/cons and for/against arguments.


  • #68
    knucklehead6
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,840 ✭✭✭knucklehead6


    Tenger wrote: »

    Your overly dramatic picture is the work of a wierd mind. You should have a read of the 1990s Clancy-esque novel "Dark Rose"
    (possibly the worst book I have ever read)

    HOW DARE YOU!!!

    Mike Lunnon Wood is a BRILLIANT author, and that book is sheer genius in its presentation, subject matter and literature. Future generations will look at it in the same way as todays scholars look at Shakespeare, Yeats, Wordsworth, Dylan Thomas, The Beatles, The Shawshank Redemption.

    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055220056
    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055232811


  • #69
    Blut2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,074 ✭✭✭Blut2


    I've got some slightly bad news for you if you think our hospitals, gardai, schools and roads are provided free of charge to the state currently.

    They're all rather expensive to run, unfortunately.

    Using the very conservative estimates in this thread of €100mn a year to run an Irish fighter jet program, the choice becomes having those fighter jets or employing roughly 1000 extra gardai and 500 extra nurses and 500 extra teachers for the country. Which do you think would be more useful?


  • #70
    Stihl waters
    Registered Users Posts: 715 ✭✭✭Stihl waters


    sparrowcar wrote: »
    Reading back through the thread will give you an insight into the pros/cons and for/against arguments.

    Not really, if anyone can point out why on earth we'd need jets I'd love to hear it, no one has given any indication as to what countries potentially we would have to rebuff if the shìt hit the fan, if any invading force tried to have their way with us I think Europe, America or the brits would have something to say about it, the thought of spending billions on white elephants parked up in baldonnel for years until they're scrapped is not something that appeals to joe taxpayer, the bigger picture is that we've never been safer, even if things went to hell in the morning how many jets would we need to hold back the Russians or brits or the yanks, we'd be looking to someone else to bail us out


  • #71
    Psychlops
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,143 ✭✭✭Psychlops


    Here is an idea of what it takes.




  • Advertisement
Advertisement