Fighter jets for the Air Corps?

shaveAbullock wrote: »

Do you think some of the current fleet may be taken out of service with no replacement?

It's not something I see the general public being overly concerned about and that's the type of cutback they will be looking for.

I don't. Its already a pretty lean operation with now all modern airframes, so end of life considerations don't arise at the moment. And frankly, manpower issues limit operations anyway.

But, I don't think the current administration would have rushed in a fourth PC12 if they didn't back the Corps as an important resource.

roadmaster wrote: »

Could the current casas solider on in a utility role when the 295's arrive or will 30 year old planes that spent there life flying low over the sea swallowing in salt be ready for the scrap heap?

I do think retaining the 235s would be an easy way to squeeze much more utility from the AC. To fly 4 instead of 2 aircraft would obviously require more personnel, but it would allow for an aircraft available for MPA at home and an aircraft available to deploy overseas be it in an MPA or transport role.

That is if it was relatively inexpensive, in which case they would presumably use the introduction of both 295s for some sort of inspection and refurbishment.

As others have pointed out, aircraft are retained for decades elsewhere and the French have been flying MPAs like the Breguets forever, but it is true to say that the 235s have taken a beating and the fact that the manufacturer was impressed with their condition when they went for their most recent upgrade is telling.

Larbre34 wrote: »

I don't think we want another Gulfstream saga with aging airframes frankly. Besides, we don't have the manpower to get the optimum service from 8 fixed wing transport/MPA.

In terms of a realistic boost in the Corps' utility though (i.e. ruling out Gripens etc), this would be a straightforward and quick win with little to no headaches. The Gulfsteam was blown out of proportion, those things happen from time to time (the aircraft was repaired and returned to service by the buyer) and the cost has to be weighed against utility. In this case, headlines won out and the State lost the ability to do longer range medevac, MATS and other functions.

We have pilots and techs well versed in the 235 and an established parts/service logistics chain. The only hiccup is not having enough pilots and techs as you say, as well as having to potentially refurbish the aircraft to give them another decades (or so) worth of service.

So very little capital expenditure required (relative to a new airframe) and the cost of training more pilots/techs is reduced (compared to that of a new type of aircraft) with the effect of doubling the number of aircraft of this type which might allow for simultaneous operations at home and abroad, or much better availability at home when not deployed.

NewSigGuy wrote: »

There is a problem where we have 8 training aircraft to train pilots for 2 Casa's, A L-45 and 4 PC-12's.

AFAIK no other air force uses a PC-9 class aircraft to train helicopter pilots.

Isn't the PC9 for basic airmanship, with further type rating in the other fixed wing and the EC-135 used for introduction to rotary training?

Larbre34 wrote: »

Isn't the PC9 for basic airmanship, with further type rating in the other fixed wing and the EC-135 used for introduction to rotary training?

Full Wings(pilot) Course is flown on the PC-9, pilots are only streamed after they have qualified.

COVID continuing to throw up surprises... let the speculation commence.

EDIT: Speak of the devil...

The KC-390 is in limbo at the moment due to the abandonment of the Boeing-Embraer tie up.

It's not a bird I'd be buying until the one and outs of that are sorted.

If he wants "heavy" it's likely a 4 engined turboprop of which there are only 2 contenders or a Cargo jet converted civil or mil spec.

Given the likely surfeit of certain civil airframes available for conversion in the near future, I wouldn't be at all surprised if *converted civil* is the path chosen.

Especially given the extensive civil maintenance infrastructure at Dublin and Shannon.

donvito99 wrote: »

Some sort of 'Government Jet' i.e. jointly owned by the Departments of Defence, Foreign Affairs and the Taoiseach, say, with flying and maintenance contracted out might be more palatable than a jet wholly owned and operated by the DF/AC.

Something the size of A300/310 or 757/767 is useful in that they'll carry approx 35+ tonnes/200pax over 5000kms.

The Dutch Gov bought a 737 BBJ and KLM were awarded the contract to maintain and fly it. Between Dublin and Shannon, and Ryanair and Aer Lingus, there are options along those lines.

This is what I see happening TBH.
A returned 737, as we have plenty of maintenance and support available in country for the type and it would likely be utilised for other roles and private hire when not in state use.

banie01 wrote: »

The KC-390 is in limbo at the moment due to the abandonment of the Boeing-Embraer tie up.

It's not a bird I'd be buying until the one and outs of that are sorted.

If he wants "heavy" it's likely a 4 engined turboprop of which there are only 2 contenders or a Cargo jet converted civil or mil spec.

Given the likely surfeit of certain civil airframes available for conversion in the near future, I wouldn't be at all surprised if *converted civil* is the path chosen.

Especially given the extensive civil maintenance infrastructure at Dublin and Shannon.

Sure as hell wouldn't want the AC to be one of the first buyers, is the Portuguese buy still going ahead? In terms of what could be bought I'd go with European though the A400 would be too much for us.

sparky42 wrote: »

Sure as hell wouldn't want the AC to be one of the first buyers, is the Portuguese buy still going ahead? In terms of what could be bought I'd go with European though the A400 would be too much for us.

The whole break up of that deal is going to cost Boeing a large settlement and an apology, or if Embraer want to play hardball a very embarrassing court case IMO.

Boeing basically pulled the plug on an agreed deal that passed due diligence and all the preliminary stages.
It's akin to refusing to draw down the mortgage after signing contracts!
There seems to be a lot more ongoing regarding that deal too, none of which reflects well on the US side.

I think A400 is too much for us, and lacks MATS flexibility of that's a need.
That said, a pool of A400 alá the pooled NATO AWACS wouldnt at all be a bad "EU" resource, give those battlegroups some decent logistics support whilst allowing a national logistics service during time of crisis.

I do think it will be a twinjet, either split cargo or convertible and it's an ideal option for us in fairness.

banie01 wrote: »

The whole break up of that deal is going to cost Boeing a large settlement and an apology, or if Embraer want to play hardball a very embarrassing court case IMO.

Boeing basically pulled the plug on an agreed deal that passed due diligence and all the preliminary stages.
It's akin to refusing to draw down the mortgage after signing contracts!
There seems to be a lot more ongoing regarding that deal too, none of which reflects well on the US side.

I think A400 is too much for us, and lacks MATS flexibility of that's a need.
That said, a pool of A400 alá the pooled NATO AWACS wouldnt at all be a bad "EU" resource, give those battlegroups some decent logistics support whilst allowing a national logistics service during time of crisis.

I do think it will be a twinjet, either split cargo or convertible and it's an ideal option for us in fairness.

Didn't the Germans suggest something like that when they were trying to offload some of their A400's in their latest cuts? Or have they changed that policy since? Sadly given our current "stance" on Defence I think we'd have issues joining such a group mainly because we might have to pay for it and our wonderful left would be screaming about an "EU Military" or "PESCO" or some random ****e.


But yeah something like that I mean NZ operates 757's in such a "swing role" transport, troops and cargo, now the 757's might too buch but a couple of A330 variants perhaps if they could be got?

Or another C295.

Heraldoffreeent wrote: »

Or another C295.

We'd need more than one of them to do any meaningful rotation or it would stretch out for ages.

Maybe a C130 with a fit out similar to the US Coast Guard. It could cover transport and SAR. Although the C295MPA could probably cover the second role.

The Embraer is nice but you don't really want to be an early customer. We've done that already with the helicopters.

When people hear the words "Government jet" they tend to get vexed!