Fighter jets for the Air Corps?

Lorddrakul · 17-12-2020 6:08pm

jonnybigwallet wrote: »

https://youtu.be/TLHGY-VNh58

The primary role of any fast jets here would be interceptor/interdictor.

As such, these kind of advanced trainers would be no use at all in a scramble situation to intercept a Bear-H - it wouldn't even be able to catch it at top speed.

The idea has already been floated here that Ireland could send pilots abroad to train. For example, if we had F-16s we could send them to Holland, to Sweden for Gripens, or France for Rafales (I wish!).

It would not be economical to have training aircraft here for what would essentially be a single squadron.

V8 Interceptor · 18-12-2020 12:42am

jonnybigwallet wrote: »

https://youtu.be/TLHGY-VNh58

That's impressive Johnny. Do you think we should invest in some of these?

Larbre34 · 18-12-2020 1:02am

V8 Interceptor wrote: »

That's impressive Johnny. Do you think we should invest in some of these?

Please don't.

Sgt. Bilko 09 · 18-12-2020 1:35am

Larbre34 wrote: »

Please don't.

I think he did man lol.

jonnybigwallet · 19-12-2020 11:57am

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.britishpathe.com/video/eire-menaced-by-germany&ved=2ahUKEwi6sIX58NntAhWKTBUIHTJuDQ8QwqsBMAB6BAgBEAM&usg=AOvVaw1Z9IH3UoSK6G8-XVxoccVA

Markcheese · 20-12-2020 10:38am

jonnybigwallet wrote: »

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.britishpathe.com/video/eire-menaced-by-germany&ved=2ahUKEwi6sIX58NntAhWKTBUIHTJuDQ8QwqsBMAB6BAgBEAM&usg=AOvVaw1Z9IH3UoSK6G8-XVxoccVA

Thanks for that , I was looking for that clip on you tube a couple of weeks ago ,and couldn't find it ..

jonnybigwallet · 16-02-2021 1:26pm

https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/vietnam-orders-l-39ng-jets-from-czech-republic

PC 9 replacement due 2025. 8 of these would fit the bill quite nicely as a lead in aircraft pending arrival of Gripens or whatever. Need to get order in soon to get delivery 2025

sparky42 · 16-02-2021 2:16pm

jonnybigwallet wrote: »

https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/vietnam-orders-l-39ng-jets-from-czech-republic

PC 9 replacement due 2025. 8 of these would fit the bill quite nicely as a lead in aircraft pending arrival of Gripens or whatever. Need to get order in soon to get delivery 2025

There is feck all chance that the PC9's are replaced in 2025, 2035 might be more likely.

roadmaster · 16-02-2021 2:20pm

sparky42 wrote: »

There is feck all chance that the PC9's are replaced in 2025, 2035 might be more likely.

They might spray-paint them instead

sparky42 · 16-02-2021 2:23pm

roadmaster wrote: »

They might spray-paint them instead

Have they even bought the fuel tanks for all of them?

16-02-2021 2:24pm

jonnybigwallet wrote: »

https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/vietnam-orders-l-39ng-jets-from-czech-republic

PC 9 replacement due 2025. 8 of these would fit the bill quite nicely as a lead in aircraft pending arrival of Gripens or whatever. Need to get order in soon to get delivery 2025

At 8.2 Million each? 64 Million for 8 of them. I think theres a better chance of the Loch Ness monster moving to Kerry than that happening.

Markcheese · 16-02-2021 2:26pm

jonnybigwallet wrote: »

https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/vietnam-orders-l-39ng-jets-from-czech-republic

PC 9 replacement due 2025. 8 of these would fit the bill quite nicely as a lead in aircraft pending arrival of Gripens or whatever. Need to get order in soon to get delivery 2025

You really do have a thing for L39 s ..

If they're replacing the pc9s s , it's probably not a bad option , especially if there's a plan to eventually move to jets ..
But considering the Dod s love for Pilatus , they' d probably head to pc21s , ( if only for the lower operating costs ) . Lot of ifs though

jonnybigwallet · 16-02-2021 3:44pm

New aircraft has been substantially re engineered. L59 was on bidders list before when it was beaten by Pilatus. New aircraft is able to tick all rhe bixes now. The company has been building planes for 100 years. No queztions about competance. The were building aurcraft for the Luftwaffe in WW2. When the present commission gives its report you can bet your life they will recommend a substantial investment in the AC, WHICH IS A BLEEDIN JOKE IN ITS PRESENT FORM.

sparky42 · 16-02-2021 5:51pm

jonnybigwallet wrote: »

New aircraft has been substantially re engineered. L59 was on bidders list before when it was beaten by Pilatus. New aircraft is able to tick all rhe bixes now. The company has been building planes for 100 years. No queztions about competance. The were building aurcraft for the Luftwaffe in WW2. When the present commission gives its report you can bet your life they will recommend a substantial investment in the AC, WHICH IS A BLEEDIN JOKE IN ITS PRESENT FORM.

Spoiler:
No they won't, and even if they did it would go to the same place the PWC report in the 90's that said we needed 12 ships for the Navy... The Shredder.

sparky42 · 16-02-2021 8:30pm

Dohvolle wrote: »

That's a bit harsh.
Don't you know there is nobody in DoD qualified to operate a shredder. It'll go to landfill.

Nah, they'll just fly tip it somewhere when they see the price of getting into the Landfill.

roadmaster · 16-02-2021 8:41pm

An compare to there civil servant cousins in the Dail, where when they want to spend. PJ we need a printer, How big Tom? The biggest god dam printer we can buy!

1o059k7ewrqj3n · 16-02-2021 8:44pm

we should buy the viggen

Sgt. Bilko 09 · 16-02-2021 9:27pm

Dohvolle wrote: »

I bet you still make toast by holding a slice of bread on a fork in front of the superser.
The 80s is over dude. That Mullet may be cool in OZ but those shoulder pads aint coming back.

I presume you mean "Gripen".

The viggen was unreal in its prime...SR71 story comes to mind

sparky42 · 16-02-2021 10:18pm

Sgt. Bilko 09 wrote: »

The viggen was unreal in its prime...SR71 story comes to mind

Sadly it's day is long gone at this stage.

roadmaster · 16-02-2021 11:39pm

If my some miracle the Air Corps did get Interceptors maybe the way forward would be sending pilots abroad for training like they have done recently with the helicopter pilots .

sparky42 · 17-02-2021 12:27am

roadmaster wrote: »

If my some miracle the Air Corps did get Interceptors maybe the way forward would be sending pilots abroad for training like they have done recently with the helicopter pilots .

Honestly there's no other option than that really for the numbers we would be talking about and the costs, there's plenty of options depending on what aircraft would be selected by this miracle.

Negative_G · 17-02-2021 12:41am

I enjoy discussion as much as the next person but this is getting tedious at this stage.

Take a step back for a second and look at the multitude of problems within the DF. Conpletely ignoring the socioeconomic and political spheres.

Fast Jets of any description are the furthest possible thing on the minds of of the Dept Of Defense and the Government. Even if they were gifted a squadron of F16s, the Mx, training and fuel budget would cripple the DF without *signficiant* further investment. There is absolutely no indication that this is coming.

People cling onto the WP. As someone mentioned previously, the PWC report which was also supposed to be a shining light to drive a change in policy produced absolutely nothing.

Since then, the DF have had the following:
2000 White Paper
2015 White paper
2015 UL climate survey
2017 Workplace Survey
2019 Whitepaper Update
2019 PSPC report

What came from all of these? A 5-10% restoration of allowances. That was the sum total.

What's next? The 2021 commission on defence. Another paper exervise that will produce nothing.

The white paper counts for nothing. It is meant to guide policy over a prolonged period of time, which in reality does not. Take the recent reports of the AC wanting to be considered for SAR. Zero mention of this in the WP2015. So much for driving policy.

The defence forces is being driven into the ground. The numbers and the reports don't lie.

I'd love to see a squadron of fast jets with the tri colour on them as much as most but its nothing more than a fantasy.

Discussion is all well and good but a little bit of perspective would be great for all concerned.

There will be no PC9 replacement this decade. The fleet are no where near the end of their structural life based on hours and there are mid life upgrades being planned which is considerably cheaper than purchasing a fleet of new aircraft.

Larbre34 · 17-02-2021 1:25am

Me: sees the military forum has some new activity on a thread

Also me: sees the activity was prompted by a typical nonsense post by JBW and nopes out of the thread faster than that well worn gif of the toddler that does a swift about turn and leaves.

roadmaster · 17-02-2021 10:17am

Negative_G wrote: »

I enjoy discussion as much as the next person but this is getting tedious at this stage.

Take a step back for a second and look at the multitude of problems within the DF. Conpletely ignoring the socioeconomic and political spheres.

Fast Jets of any description are the furthest possible thing on the minds of of the Dept Of Defense and the Government. Even if they were gifted a squadron of F16s, the Mx, training and fuel budget would cripple the DF without *signficiant* further investment. There is absolutely no indication that this is coming.

People cling onto the WP. As someone mentioned previously, the PWC report which was also supposed to be a shining light to drive a change in policy produced absolutely nothing.

Since then, the DF have had the following:
2000 White Paper
2015 White paper
2015 UL climate survey
2017 Workplace Survey
2019 Whitepaper Update
2019 PSPC report

What came from all of these? A 5-10% restoration of allowances. That was the sum total.

What's next? The 2021 commission on defence. Another paper exervise that will produce nothing.

The white paper counts for nothing. It is meant to guide policy over a prolonged period of time, which in reality does not. Take the recent reports of the AC wanting to be considered for SAR. Zero mention of this in the WP2015. So much for driving policy.

The defence forces is being driven into the ground. The numbers and the reports don't lie.

I'd love to see a squadron of fast jets with the tri colour on them as much as most but its nothing more than a fantasy.

Discussion is all well and good but a little bit of perspective would be great for all concerned.

There will be no PC9 replacement this decade. The fleet are no where near the end of their structural life based on hours and there are mid life upgrades being planned which is considerably cheaper than purchasing a fleet of new aircraft.

Are you saying the DOD & the state dont care?

ohnonotgmail · 17-02-2021 10:19am

roadmaster wrote: »

Are you saying the DOD & the state dont care?

The state certainly doesn't.

Markcheese · 17-02-2021 10:27am

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

The state certainly doesn't.

Politically , spending on a fast jet programme would be suicide .. and it's not just the capital spend ,it's the ongoing spend .. there is a lot that could be done for the df without becoming an enormous sh1tshow though

Negative_G · 17-02-2021 10:37am

roadmaster wrote: »

Are you saying the DOD & the state dont care?

That's exactly what I'm saying.

If you can point me towards tangible evidence that they do care I'll happily discuss it.

Soundbites from senators and TDs are all well and good but until they are actioned, they count for very little.

17-02-2021 11:18am

Negative_G wrote: »

That's exactly what I'm saying.

If you can point me towards tangible evidence that they do care I'll happily discuss it.

Soundbites from senators and TDs are all well and good but until they are actioned, they count for very little.

Why would anyone in the Dail approve spending for jets while the current attitude of "Shure if we need jets we'll just ring up Brize Norton and ask them to scramble a few jets for us" persists?

We havn't yet gotten highspeed public transport. High speed jets are decades away. There's lots of talk about the benefits Bus Connects will bring, but at the end of the day we're still talking about a bus. Woop-de-doo. With that sort of attitude existing we're lucky we have planes that can actually take off.

roadmaster · 17-02-2021 11:41am

Negative_G wrote: »

That's exactly what I'm saying.

If you can point me towards tangible evidence that they do care I'll happily discuss it.

Soundbites from senators and TDs are all well and good but until they are actioned, they count for very little.

I am being sarcastic i know the state doesn't care about the defence forces

jonnybigwallet · 17-02-2021 12:30pm

Shame to see such a lot of negativity around this issue. I thought my modest proposal to get things moving in the right direction was eminently affordable and would have given the Corps a real morale boost. I suggest keeping 4 of the PC9's for ab initio training.

17-02-2021 12:38pm

jonnybigwallet wrote: »

Shame to see such a lot of negativity around this issue. I thought my modest proposal to get things moving in the right direction was eminently affordable and would have given the Corps a real morale boost. I suggest keeping 4 of the PC9's for ab initio training.

95% of the people on this thread would love your idea to become reality, but we are realists based from experience. With a bit of careful lobbying, you could easily get 70 million for a world class gold resort, but getting the same amount to upgrade the air corp, simply isn't happening. Fact of life unfortunately.

jonnybigwallet · 17-02-2021 1:07pm

Oh well...It's all right to spend 2 billion on a childrens hospital I suppose. But 100 million for the AC is not affordable. What a bleedin joke!

roadmaster · 17-02-2021 1:38pm

If the air corps was part of the army as a corps like artillery or engineering would it be treated any better?

jonnybigwallet · 17-02-2021 1:42pm

Well at least the so called navy got 4 half decent patrol ships and talk about a multi purpose ship in the pipeline.

Negative_G · 17-02-2021 1:59pm

Dohvolle wrote: »

I don't understand why this is not the case in the DoD.

Two words. Civil servants.

https://youtu.be/HEvpiaPk6rs

roadmaster wrote: »

I am being sarcastic i know the state doesn't care about the defence forces

Apologies. My sarcasm detector needs a service!

sparky42 · 17-02-2021 2:47pm

Markcheese wrote: »

Politically , spending on a fast jet programme would be suicide .. and it's not just the capital spend ,it's the ongoing spend .. there is a lot that could be done for the df without becoming an enormous sh1tshow though

Hell, can you just imagine the protests outside the daíl after only a week of jets flying out of Baldonnel?

jonnybigwallet · 17-02-2021 3:04pm

I thought you were in favour of Gripens?

Larbre34 · 17-02-2021 4:23pm

For the 7 Millionth time.

The L-39 type offers no appreciable increase in capability over the PC-9M.

If you're going to buy jets, buy proper jets (supersonic interceptors of the type we need). If you're going to replace advanced trainers, buy advanced trainers that are the best at what they do and shorten the progression to the fast jets.

If the AC do replace the PC9s on time, they'll still have to go to tender and I'd be hoping the PC-21 would win that competition. They are a superb advanced trainer and light strike aircraft and our pilots training with the RAAF are already familiar with the type.

jonnybigwallet · 17-02-2021 5:11pm

Fair play to ya. Yeve done ur homework on the Pc21 which is an excellent aircraft! I just prefer the Vodo****ov for a number of reasons including the necessary advances to be made in rhe engineering support role.

Heraldoffreeent · 17-02-2021 6:59pm

jonnybigwallet wrote: »

Fair play to ya. Yeve done ur homework on the Pc21 which is an excellent aircraft! I just prefer the Vodo****ov for a number of reasons including the necessary advances to be made in rhe engineering support role.

Or, more likely, coz its a jet, any ould jet, a feckin jet!!

Negative_G · 17-02-2021 10:55pm

Larbre34 wrote: »

If the AC do replace the PC9s on time, they'll still have to go to tender and I'd be hoping the PC-21 would win that competition. They are a superb advanced trainer and light strike aircraft and our pilots training with the RAAF are already familiar with the type.

The pilots with the RAAF have absolutely nothing to do with the PC-21. They are flying King Airs.

The purpose of that arrangement is to build multi engine experience, not abinitio training.

hurleronditch · 18-02-2021 12:33am

jonnybigwallet wrote: »

Oh well...It's all right to spend 2 billion on a childrens hospital I suppose. But 100 million for the AC is not affordable. What a bleedin joke!

I’m in no way defending the sorry mess that is the construction of the children’s hospital, but you could have chosen another example like a white water rafting centre in central Dublin or greyhound racing as your strawman!!

Not many politicians will support some toys for the aer Corps that we’ve survived 100 years without needing over sick children.

Insert Simpsons gif here.

jonnybigwallet · 18-02-2021 9:47am

Heraldoffreeent wrote: »

Or, more likely, coz its a jet, any ould jet, a feckin jet!!

Suggest you look at the title of this board.

Heraldoffreeent · 18-02-2021 2:33pm

jonnybigwallet wrote: »

Suggest you look at the title of this board.

Lol!! Johnney on his high horse!

jonnybigwallet · 18-02-2021 4:48pm

I have read the specification. Have you?

ohnonotgmail · 18-02-2021 5:21pm

jonnybigwallet wrote: »

I have read the specification. Have you?

At best it is a light-attack jet. At best. It is no jet fighter.

jonnybigwallet · 18-02-2021 5:24pm

Exactly! And a damned good one until Sparky and company's Drakens come screaming over the horizon towards Baldonnel!

ohnonotgmail · 18-02-2021 5:28pm

jonnybigwallet wrote: »

Exactly! And a damned good one until Sparky and company's Drakens come screaming over the horizon towards Baldonnel!

so we go and buy jet trainers and then what? the pilots will have nothing to progress to.

CalamariFritti · 18-02-2021 5:30pm

Lads when this pandemic is over we wont have enough money to buy a paper plane. Not that we ever had enough money for anything you are talking about. Only saying.

roadmaster · 18-02-2021 9:10pm

jonnybigwallet wrote: »

Exactly! And a damned good one until Sparky and company's Drakens come screaming over the horizon towards Baldonnel!

Jonny i am starting think you work for the Department of Defence and your just hear to cause a bit of mischief !

Fighter jets for the Air Corps?

Comments