Which Jet ?

[pilatus]

the government wont even provide the air corps with choppers to provide a SAR service.so as for gripens with a unitcost of between 30to40 million euro(the government had to sell gormanstown to fund light strike aircraft)so were is the funding going to come from for a 12aircraft squadron of gripens to provide a thin air defence.dont get me wrong i believe the government should wake up and give the corps the equipment it needs to serve the nation which it has done since 1922.this is reflected in their motto,forfaire agus tairseact(vigilant and loyal)

[Imshi-Yallah]

Well lets see Harriers are really really slow, they are high maintenance and have a very high accident risk (they are also really only suitable for CAS), the F-16s being sold off in Europe arent in very good condition and even Pakistan only wants them for parts.
RE: Dispersion, first of all the point of dispersion is to protect your air assets while they are in the act of preventing a forced entry.
Secondly compared to raising around 4 billion euro to implement a genuine fighter capability closing a mile of motorway one day a year (as Singapore does) will be fairly easy.

Once again I level the accusation of Gucci-fever, operational effectiveness and military and political utility are what should determine defense purchases, not what makes the people feel like big swinging dicks. (EDIT: Of course this last phrase refers to the swagger of Dickie Rock at the heyday of the dancehall scene)

[n-e-foo]

Ugh thats them having an uninformed pop at the government for the sake of it I dare say. "propellor = obsolete".

I remember reading an article about the public preferring flights on jet aircraft to turboprops - even brand new ones such as the ATR-42/Saab 340... it wasnt to do with speed... people felt they were old technology and thus unsafe!

That said; should the government have any pretensions about the purchase of the PC-9M giving the Air Corps an adequate ADF capability , they deserve every bollocking they get.

I wouldve thought even an F-16 with full load could get airborne using the afterburner from Bal if the government jet can?!

[Silver]

Just to clarify things, I'm not advocating L-159's, I merely suggested that they were the most likely choice if the government were 'forced' to make a purchase in the next 1-2 years - especially given their penny-pinching attitude to the Air Corps in the past.
(I also mentioned the L-159 to get the debate going - and boy has it worked   :'> ).

But seriously, I too would be an advocate of the F-5 if we were making a purchase in the next few years - which BTW,I don't think will happen.
As pilatus stated above, if they won't purchase SAR helis, what chance 12 jets  '> .

Well, you all do have a point.
Why does a country like Ireland need strike / fighter capabilty in the first place.
As being 'the gateway to Europe" all your surounding countries will defend you to the last man / ship / aircraft.

There will be no differance in that even when you buy 6 B-2 bombers and 12 F-15E's.
Ireland will be defended if only for your extreme strategic location on the globe.

On the other hand I can understand that a country wants to be selfsupporting !!

This discusion won't lead us anywhere as the politicians have a total different why of thinking anyway.

 '>  Guinness

[Fouga]

Air Corps crew will commence training in Switzerland in the PC-9M in January and there will be a PC-9 display team for the 2004 Salthill Airshow.

[Silver]

You're spot on there Guinness !

And that's exactly the way the Irish government(s) have always viewed Irish defence : i.e. -
 "The UK (or EU) or US will come to our assistance, so we don't need any costly jets".  

And I don't see their attitude changing anytime soon  '>

Thanks for the support there Silver,

ofcourse I do hope that the Irish Gouverment will decide to buy jets if only for all you guys out there.
On the other hand...........now you all have a great excuse to the mrs. to come out spotting here!!!.

I will guide you guys around here.

 '>  Guinness

[Silver]

If the government were forced (for security reasons) to finally bite the bullet and purchase 10-12 jets in the next 1-2 years, what would they purchase ?

- Aero L-159 perhaps ?
 

[Irish251]

When people talk about the Air Corps needing jets, it is rarely clear what role they feel needs to be fulfilled, e.g. advanced training, counter-insurgency, air defence, public display role, or support of Irish forces deployed abroad.  There is plenty of types to choose from, but there needs to be a clear need.  Don't get me wrong - I'd love to see the Air Corps with jets again, but given the costs and competing priorities, a strong case would have to be made.

What kind of security role do you have in mind?  If it is air-to-air interception, you would need to be talking F-16 class equipment, with all of the support and air defence systems that would require in order to be effective.  Somehow I don't think we are likely to see that happening here.

[Imshi-Yallah]

F-5s are the only sensible option in that unlikely scenario, then again to get any operational value (including co-op training) you'd need the full 24.
In the next 5-10 years the M-346, Mako and F-50 would all be serious options.
But you make a critical error in thinking that ppl care, I believe we should have an effective combat airforce from an army (and ethics) perspective but as long as ppl only want fighters for ostentation then its a lost cause as the perceived utility will never match the cost.

[Imshi-Yallah]

Ok the case against fighters: Cost and Value for money concerns.

The case for:
1. The potent political value of being able to say that you will defend your territory this includes the ability to defend moving territory (i.e. The NS).
2.Overwhelming military superiority on this Island.
3. The development of a viable fighter culture to ensure that essential skills and a warrior cult are maintained in the air arm.
4. The ability to train the other services to operate under air cover and to operate with CAS support and fast jet recconaisance: these two would be especially important in the training of troops for NATO led peace enforcement missions: both as Infantry support and to facilitate the operation of counterbattery operations.

Secondly the case for the F-5 in particular:
Its cheap to run, cheap to buy, still very capable for the roles we need it for.
It is compact and can operate from facilities that would choke an F-16 style fighter in a mire of inadequacies.
The F-5 is also fairly politically bland, not having taken part in any controversial operations since the Vietnam war when it escaped publicity due to being an ARVN AF aircraft.
Against that is its age and impending obsolescence, t would need replacement in ten to 15 years and even then only if young airframes can be acquired.

[Silver]

I view the need to have jets as follows -

A. To show that we are willing to defend our country.
B. To train with the Army and Naval Service.
C. To have the ability to intercept drug smugglers, etc.
D. To maintain a level of advanced training which would allow said pilots to move to F-16 class fighters, in the event of wartime situation, in a relatively short period.
C. To maintain a jet display team.

The F-5 would indeed be an excellent choice.
However, bearing in mind the costs and maintainence levels required, I believe the likes of the Aero L-159 would be among the most realistic choices for the Air Corps.
(Other options would be the Aermacchi MB339, Alpha Jet or Hawk Jet).


As a former GOC, The Air Corps, said -
"We are not going to be flying up and down the airways everyday, but there are times when we need to get up there and monitor our airspace !".

[alpha foxtrot 07]

to answer the question possed.
if we needed a/c due to some war we would get F-16/F-15 and we would not have to pay for them they would be given to use by the US, which has hundreds of them in storage for just that situation, but if our pilots are going to any way effictive they need to have experience in the operation of fighter a/c and fighter tactics, so the case for the L-39 is a strong one if we are going to have experience in the pilot ranks. we all know that it is a perisable skill and the no. of pilots in the corps with the experience gets smaller every year. the last class to train in the fouga was the fighting 15th and that was some time ago.

[Turkey]

Some random? comments;
Alpha, I do not mean to be an annoyin little git, but, as far as I can see, most of the F-16's currently in storage, in the USA, are gettin on a bit and would probally need serious work before flying, never mind fighting.
 The L39 would serve no purpose beside the PC-9's, FGS, I could probally cycle a bike faster then one of them. I think you must mean the L159, which seems to have turned out to be a bit of a lemon. In which case, I must agree with CQ and Silver, on the F-5, at least untill the F-50 goes into production, 'still think that there is a case for the Jaguar international thou'.
As for display teams, I think Bord Failta should buy 4 Pitts speicals,[danm sight cheaper too] and have the IAC operate them, otherwise forget display teams, in the unlikely event of us getting jets, I doubt if the operating hours will be used to cause some'ooohs' and 'ahhhhs' from the generally ungrateful public.
But while I know this will not happen, all other things being equal, the most sensible thing to do might be to just bite the bullet and buy new build F-16's, and before anyone asks, I have not touched any magic mushrooms or similiar.
 '>