Why arm the PC-9's?

What scenario drives the requirement to arm the PC-9's?  A general IRA uprising?  Civil War?  A massive terrorist ground assault somewhere in Ireland that could not be handled by ground forces?  These seem so incredibly unlikely as to be unjustifiable. Provision of Close Air Support capability to an international operation is the only realistic requirement, though while a more realistic possibility, is not terribly likely either.  Something else?

Or are they just a fig leaf, a sop to say Ireland operates armed aircraft even if they have no utility? Is there any real requirement for Ireland to operate armed fixed wing combat aircraft?  Probably not.

If there is no real requirement to operate armed PC-9's, they should be soley dedicated to providing ab initio training to 4-6 pilots a year and training for 2-3 Instructor Pilots.  In which case, six is probably sufficient, without armament.  The savings could have gone to procuring additional AB-139's or a credible airlifter such as the CASA C-295 or Lockheed C-130J-30, for which there are clear and sensible requirments.

[Buran]

What about training the ground forces to operate in conjunction with close air support?
Our ground forces are likely to operate abroad with others providing close air support.

[Frank]

Well for starters the main purpose of the Defence Forces as a whole is to defend the State against external aggression, and as such the Air Corps & armed aircraft contribute to the defence of the State, however small or token the force may be.

Another reason I would say we have armed PC-9's is to maintain the weapons capability & experience.  

Once you lose that capability & experience it takes a long time to build it back up again.


Regards,

Frank.

[Imshi-Yallah]

Because the IRA are a threat and short of this daydream coming true

Quote

hi Imshi, Im Bill Gates,and since I think you're such a swell guy heres, 30 Gripen C/Ds, 8 AB139s, 8 EH101s, 4 C295s and six A129s for your birthday"

They are the only means we have of preparing for and in the eventuality practicing combat air operations.
Apart from the reasons given above of preparation and practice, there is a real operational role for armed turboprops in escorting helicopters and providing local real time recconaissance and early warning for transport aircraft and ground elements operating against insurgent forces.
If someone had real ambition for the IAC they'd be sending pilots to Brazil to learn their tactics.
It comes to down to that same line in the sand, do we want the IAC to fulfill a meaningful military role or continue as an inefficient state run service providing what could be done cheaper and better by the private sector.

[202]

Old redeye, bulls eye, perfect analysis.

Was there even one occasion during the high intensity conflict fought in NI over a period of twenty five years that the UK forces fired from a fixed wing aircraft?

[Flyboy]

Quote (Imshi-Yallah @ 08 Feb. 2005,05:02)

Because the IRA are a threat

When did the IRA develop an Air Wing, and where do they store their planes, in an underground bunker in Louth or Meath, with an underground runway, very impressive !

I thought this would get some lather up.  

I'll buy the CAS training argument, and the armed escort/recce argument, particularly when you consider where Irish forces are likely to be operational over the next 20+ years and what they will be about, such as peace enforcement in Africa and ISAF duty in Afghansitan, etc.  This suggests the PC-9's are deployable and should train-up accordingly. Maybe that's already in the plan.

As for maintaining experience and skills, maybe, but for what eventuality?  The development of a true air combat capability? I don't see that looming anywhere over the horizon - no requirment equal to the cost.  A realistic evaluation of potential threats to the Republic pretty much exludes the need for an armed fixed wing capability.  So I'm back to my original question as to whether or not armed PC-9's are good value for money considering actual requirments?  

The next wave of hotshot IAC pilots will fly the AB-139 in the Battlefied Support Helicopter role in Ireland and overseas, including SF insertions and extractions at night on NVG's, with 7.62mm mini-guns pointing out either side, and most likely as part of a multi-national air component.  So six or eight 139's is the right number to provide a credible, deplyable force package of at least four.  And Ireland needs an airlifter.  Just a question of building a balanced force.

Cheers

[Imshi-Yallah]

Quote (Flyboy @ 08 Feb. 2005,07:41)

Quote (Imshi-Yallah @ 08 Feb. 2005,05:02) Because the IRA are a threat When did the IRA develop an Air Wing, and where do they store their planes, in an underground bunker in Louth or Meath, with an underground runway, very impressive !

Who said anything about air to air? So apart from the pointlessness of your rant lets address the issue?
What the IRA have tried to do on numerous occassions is target slow moving aircraft from a thing called the "ground" with HMGs and small arms fire, allegedly they have even procured some old model MANPADS, if counter insurgency operations are to be carried out it requires the safe movement of troops at a greater speed than the guerrilla can melt away.
Therefore it requires air travel, in the example of NI, the british only really had to worry about these attacks at take off (hence the rather thrilling take off drills still employed in NI) as they generally had a large presence on the ground.
In the case of an army with a much smaller boots to turf ratio (such as the Brazilians, or us) helicopter landings become a much more vital part of operations as timely reinforcement or relief can only realistically be delivered by air, therefore the ability to have transports escorted and protected is essential.
The PC-9 has the ability to move alongside or ahead of a transport helicopter or fixed wing prop, and scout the area for local ground threats, if the need arises they can also defend themselves and the aircraft they are escorting, also they have a decent loiter time for escorting units on the ground.
So both in the domestic counter insurgency role and in future operations overseas armed turboprops have much potential to do jobs generally performed at greater expense by armed rotary assets, they dont offer quite as much but still offer a lot for a significantly smaller cost package.
As for why stay in practice, its not much of a price to pay for being a little more prepared for the worst eventuality.

Oh and 202 there was never a high intensity conflict in NI :'>
Thanks for your expert input all the same.

[Silver]

Good post Imshi !

*Silver sits in shock after agreeing with Imshi*

[RMR]

YEAH,GOOD POST IMSHI.AS THE FELLA SAYS,"BETTER TO HAVE IT AND NOT NEED IT THAN TO NEED IT AND NOT HAVE IT"!!

[Flyboy]

I wasn't "ranting", I was introduciing a bit of light humor. Seems it went right over your head Imshi !

[Imshi-Yallah]

I dont think that "joke" and subsequent back pedal would have been comprehended by the soles of my feet never mind the top of my head :'>
Better luck next time

[FiannaFail]

Can anyone tell me why we should have an unarmed air wing?  This "we are Irish and everyone loves us" doesn't wash.  It didn't stop Irish citizens getting murdered in Iraq. And it wouldn't stop international terrorists attacking targets in this country if it suited them. We have the responsibility to defend our country to the best of our ability, more so if we are truely neutral.  Anyway I for one would love to have had the opportunity to make an aerial assault on some IRA gobsh***s and give them the message who are the real Irish Armed forces!!!

Flyboy -  you will find some people have no sense of homour on this site.  Research shows us that laughing improves our overall health - you have to pity some of them.

FiannaFail

[Turkey]

I have to agree with both Imshi and ff,[the world may soon end  '> ]
Close air-support is something that has to be experienced by troops in order to operate with it, never mind against it. Our troops have to know roughly what kind of s**t they will have to endure once they deploy supported abroad.they have to know how to call in air-support and realise what it means when they do.
The PC-9's are unlikely to be much use for Air-to-Air work unless desperation sets in and we are attacked by, at most, a fleet of laden troop helicopters.
The last fast moving jet shot down by cannon/mg fire was a long time ago, all recent A-to-A kills have been with AIM-9 or AIM-120, at type which the PC-9 cannot operate. But if we wish to operate aircrafts which can carry this equipment in the future we have to start somewhere and the PC-9 is the means to provide this start.
At the time of this aircrafts purchase, a numbbrain suggested to me that the piper cub or super cub would be more suitable aircrafts to train our aircrews, they would , if all we wish them to do is fly piper cubs, but an awful lot more is demanded of our pilots, before they are relased to spend a whole lot more money getting their 737 cert' to fly for o leary, or similiar.

[Silver]

The GOC, The Air Corps, stated that he wanted the best equipment to keep AC pilots up-to-date with avionics etc so that, in the event of an emergency, they could transition smoothly to jets ...........or words to that effect.
Makes sense to me.  

The PC-9's could prove very useful in COIN ops, 'opportunity targets', anti-smuggling ops, Army/Navy training, etc etc ..............just look at how the Brazilian Air Force have utilised their Tucanos !