PC-9's -

[Silver]

Did we get enough Pilatus PC-9M's for our needs ?

OR

Is the PC-9 the wrong choice ?

Should we have bought a mix of (for example) Grob Tutors - basic trainers, and Aero L-159's - advanced trainers, instead ?

[Turkey]

Buying one aircraft was, I think the best choice, the PC-9 is suitable to take a learner from intro, all the way to wepons training, there is no need for several types, but we should have bought about 20 of the soddin things, to have a good few available for training troops in working with air support.
As far as i know, Pilatus want to introduce the PC-21, I don't see them keeping 2 trainers in production, so the PC-9 is going to go, perhaps we should have waited...............

Roll on some real combat aircrafts!!!!!

[alpha foxtrot 07]

more is always great but as the corps found out, if there is no techies to fix em then it doesn't matter how many you have, i destintly remember a marchetti sitting on IRAN for at least 2 years.

[Turkey]

Well I feel despite the likes of mcgreedy and co, the Air Corps should be expanded,techies, rather then officers, but that may well be another topic.
On the subject of how much is enough, I feel the number of helis being bandied about may also be a bit on the mean side, even with the possablity of 2 M/L's

[alpha foxtrot 07]

getting the army away from ground mobil and more into air mobil is very important. the powers that be are about 20 years behind the modern combat curve on this point. the corps need a full squadron of troop transport helo's for this reason alone. now if you want to make the aircraft more usable get something more flexable (UH-60) but it must first and formost be a combat capable troop transporter!.

[alpha foxtrot 07]

oh yea, double the amount of techies, give them better pay, get rid of all the none essential army training, and fix up the living quaters, all you former techs know what i mean by that.

[Turkey]

I am not too sure about getting rid of all of that army training, Alpha, some of the techies I know seem more then happy to go and perforate targets at odd intervals, 'better then growing up, I suppose!
Demolish the now under-used living-quarters altogether, while insuring that the wages/or some scheme can actully pay for a decent place to live.

[Turkey]

Slight correction here; apparently those nice Pilatus people have no plans to produce an armed/aramable version of the PC-21, so it is possable that there are no plans to terminate the PC-9 production line in the forseeable future, so perhaps the IAC can expand the number over time.

[FiannaFail]

I think eigth is suitable Silver as long as jets follow!!
FiannaFail :'>

[alpha foxtrot 07]

i wanted to reply to you last night turk but my computer thought otherwise, when i say get rid of the army stuff i mean a aer corp cpl does not need to know how too be a section leader and so on up the ranks, i personally dont think aer corps personel being trained to that kind of infantry level is benifical. the basic point and shoot private training is fine but if we need army infantry trained personel they can be got from the army.
basically its a waste of money and time to train aircraft mechanics to any level beyind private on the infantry side of things.
why does a aer corp pilot need to fire the sraaw it caost about 1000 punts a shoot, think of the money that could be saved. name one other air force that does this.
i could talk for ever on this point but i'll stop here.

[n-e-foo]

I suppose this type of training was given seeing as we had no aircraft that could be used in an emergency situation... i.e. invasion/civil war or something. Maybe its a left over remnant of WW2? Or possibly more likely the "troubles"...

It would seem that with cutting this type of training out and re-organistion being undertaken, considerable savings could be made. Which beggars the question: why hasnt it been done already?

Are the air corps in any situation to bargain i.e. say, "look provide us with the funds to purchase x number of y aircraft, and we guarantee you we'll cut Z amount euros out of our costs, thus negating the actual cost of buying these aircraft." Or would they just get a slap and be told to cut those costs anyway? Dont answer that I know the answer already '>

The consistent opinion seems to be that if the air corps made cost cutting measures... the money which would be "saved" would be ironically enough, lost and not get reinvested in equipment/facilities '>

[alpha foxtrot 07]

true'er words have neve been spoken.

[Ben Dover]

PC9 was a fob off for the AC, it wouldnt look good for "neutral" ireland to be buying combat jets. Look how mad the crusties went about cutting down a few trees in the glen of the downs can you imagine the protests at the purchase of some f16's?

[tashkurgan]

8 is enough. Time to move on and get more air-mobility assets such as light and medium lift helis. As I have previously posted, a mixed Hawk fleet would provide all the fast jet experience we would need (and afford). For my .02c I would forgo fast jets in lieu of two C-27J spartans (or similar - not sure if they are exactly the right kit) to support our overseas deployments (can carry ARW landrovers, patrols and PIIIs - well their gearboxes at least).

[Guinness]

He, "Ben Dover" ,

first of all , welcome to the forum and second.... I like the name.
My choise would be Jack Meoff '> .

Third.... you're right.
The Irish people will never exept a lot of money spend on jets if the have no clue what the IAC realy does for the community ( as I understand from the rest of you guys).

Here in Holland things are different.
Our "Air Force" fought the Germans in the early days of WW2 and were send all over the globe to "defend" our territories.
For this reason the Irish people do not realy understand the need for "airpower" to my humble opinion.

Note: I think you're better of this way.

Guinness