Irish Air Corps Orders

Take the air craft and their crews on to the Naval strength. Jesus how complicated do you want it to be ? Have a look at the air craft I am referencing on the Irish air corps site. Come back to me when you realise what a straight forward move this is. I hope you are not offended
It isn’t a straight forward or simple move - even in a small service - and the aircraft and personnel are just one part of the equation.

Firstly, you assume that the Maritime Patrol Aircraft (MPA) are only involved in maritime operations.

Secondly, how many of the Air Corps personnel would want to transfer to the Navy? Do terms and conditions of service need to be modified? How would this affect pay, rank, promotion and pensions? How would retention be impacted for highly skilled personnel suddenly unable to transfer to other aircraft types and bases? How would recruitment be affected?

Then there’s all the supporting infra, systems and expertise involved with an aeroplane. The CN235s are not complex types but will still presumably have software, C4I, airworthiness, standards and other supporting elements. Many of these will involve Air Corps personnel who also support other types and capabilities, all with skills probably absent in the Navy.

Finally, do the Navy even want the financial and other overheads mentioned above? If they do, will the maintain financial support at the same levels?

Sometimes air forces operate ‘MPA’s for good reasons.

Regards,
MM
 
Confused by the fact that the Defence Forces are a single organisation with a single Chief of Staff for all services: currently Vice Admiral Mellet (rank created to allow the former FOCNS to be CoS), under him GOCs of 1 Brigade, 2 Brigade, GOC Air Corps and the FOCNS.
Rank structures have been set to allow the same pay scales throughout, even if this makes, as I understand it, for some irrelevant ranks in the NS from a naval perspective. The AC didn’t even get separate uniforms until , I don’t know, fifteen or twenty years ago.
Some basic training is common. They share a single budget.
But each service recruits specifically.
The problem of locality is a historic one. At independence we simply took over every existing British installation, making recruitment and deployment very much locally-based. As many if not most of these installations were chosen with, bluntly, occupation and control in mind rather than defence, there were too many and scattered. Many of these are being closed, there seems to be move to centralization but...we still have a culture of soldiers expecting to live and work their entire careers in one area, where barracks accommodation is seen as only for recruits and single soldiers until they buy their own place.
This applies to the AC, getting them to operate out of any base but Casement has been a problem. They didn’t like being in Donegal, they hated being on a ship, ideas like basing a helicopter in Shannon are not popular...even Athlone, where an AC helicopter operates from as an air ambulance, is seen as an austere location.
A state that doesn’t want to spend and doesn’t really understand the military (I’m sure the Minister who Also Has Defence in his Portfolio forgets about it sometimes...the constitution places an absolute limit on the number of full cabinet ministers and so there is a lot of double jobbing), a civil service that seems to have inherited the anti-military culture of the first civil service...who were suddenly in 1922 turned from British to Irish Civil servants and spent the next fifteen years trying to limit the state and the military in particular in the expectation of London’s return, a tiny DF left in its bases and an AC that expects a twenty minute commmute to work. It’s a mix for inertia that only changes when a crisis of cash or operations forces change.
 
Last edited:
It isn’t a straight forward or simple move - even in a small service - and the aircraft and personnel are just one part of the equation.

Firstly, you assume that the Maritime Patrol Aircraft (MPA) are only involved in maritime operations.

Secondly, how many of the Air Corps personnel would want to transfer to the Navy? Do terms and conditions of service need to be modified? How would this affect pay, rank, promotion and pensions? How would retention be impacted for highly skilled personnel suddenly unable to transfer to other aircraft types and bases? How would recruitment be affected?

Then there’s all the supporting infra, systems and expertise involved with an aeroplane. The CN235s are not complex types but will still presumably have software, C4I, airworthiness, standards and other supporting elements. Many of these will involve Air Corps personnel who also support other types and capabilities, all with skills probably absent in the Navy.

Finally, do the Navy even want the financial and other overheads mentioned above? If they do, will the maintain financial support at the same levels?

Sometimes air forces operate ‘MPA’s for good reasons.

Regards,
MM
As far as I know their MPA provide an ambulance service in addition to the primary.

The personnel issue would take a little readjustment. Its certainly not the end of the world as is being portrayed here.The closure of barracks due to the crash has shown that that personnel will get on with reassignments. If they are not happy with the move then not a problem, ask for some transferees from the Army who want to do the job, train them up and problem solved.

As for maintenance, the Navy has no aircraft. They can follow the precedent set for the Garda aircraft and let civilian contractors do the work. Zero barrack room lawyers to contend with.

Of the 3 services, the Navy has the most wiggle room to justify an increase. As far as I know they are a one stop shop compared to the various agencies here in the UK. Add to that they are involved in a sector that brings in a serious amount of money to the economy.
 
Inzile has it exactly right; the entire DF still has a strong garrison mentality and inertia about location. Trying to get the AC to relocate anything is a constant uphill struggle; Finner and Monaghan were less than universally loved, more tolerated than anything else; the current deployment for air medevac is based in Athlone but that is only liked by the pilots as it boosts their annual hours;
Right now, pilot and tech retention is at critical levels and to copy what happened in the last three decades, the practice has reoccurred of offering pilots retention bonus, whilst allowing techs to leave freely. This has the effect of pissing off non-Officers and non-Pilots alike, so morale hits the floor, as per....Promotion is at a standstill or else dependent on having Military courses completed or having a UN trip done, not about having technical courses done, so people are leaving as fast as they can sign the papers. The result is that maintenance is suffering, at a time when airframes are reaching their mid-lives and the heavy lifting has to be done. Same ol', same ol'. At the rate they are going, there won't be anyone around to fly, crew or fix the PC-12s (and already, they have decided to skimp on maintenance courses on the new type, the stoopid cuntz). Hell of a way to run an air force...
 
Inzile has it exactly right; the entire DF still has a strong garrison mentality and inertia about location. Trying to get the AC to relocate anything is a constant uphill struggle; Finner and Monaghan were less than universally loved, more tolerated than anything else; the current deployment for air medevac is based in Athlone but that is only liked by the pilots as it boosts their annual hours;
Right now, pilot and tech retention is at critical levels and to copy what happened in the last three decades, the practice has reoccurred of offering pilots retention bonus, whilst allowing techs to leave freely. This has the effect of pissing off non-Officers and non-Pilots alike, so morale hits the floor, as per....Promotion is at a standstill or else dependent on having Military courses completed or having a UN trip done, not about having technical courses done, so people are leaving as fast as they can sign the papers. The result is that maintenance is suffering, at a time when airframes are reaching their mid-lives and the heavy lifting has to be done. Same ol', same ol'. At the rate they are going, there won't be anyone around to fly, crew or fix the PC-12s (and already, they have decided to skimp on maintenance courses on the new type, the stoopid cuntz). Hell of a way to run an air force...
'Force'? ;) Didn't the current GOC almost lose one of the 139s on their delivery trip from Italy?
 
As far as I know their MPA provide an ambulance service in addition to the primary.

The personnel issue would take a little readjustment. Its certainly not the end of the world as is being portrayed here.The closure of barracks due to the crash has shown that that personnel will get on with reassignments. If they are not happy with the move then not a problem, ask for some transferees from the Army who want to do the job, train them up and problem solved.

As for maintenance, the Navy has no aircraft. They can follow the precedent set for the Garda aircraft and let civilian contractors do the work. Zero barrack room lawyers to contend with.

Of the 3 services, the Navy has the most wiggle room to justify an increase. As far as I know they are a one stop shop compared to the various agencies here in the UK. Add to that they are involved in a sector that brings in a serious amount of money to the economy.
I'm not an authority on Irish military capabilities but suggest the MPA probably does overland C2ISR work as well.

Meanwhile, I don't believe I suggested the personnel issue was 'the end of the world'. However, as we have found to our cost, contractorisation of aircraft engineering is far from a panacea and often results in a less flexible and reliable yet more expensive service (eg GR4, E-3D and MFTS) which undermines retention and, to a lesser extent, recruitment.

Finally, maintenance is only one aspect of support which also involves broader airworthiness and release to service, aspects which are ignored at your peril (eg Nimrod and Watchkeeper).

Regards,
MM
 
The problem of locality is a historic one. At independence we simply took over every existing British installation, making recruitment and deployment very much locally-based. As many if not most of these installations were chosen with, bluntly, occupation and control in mind rather than defence, there were too many and scattered. Many of these are being closed, there seems to be move to centralization but...we still have a culture of soldiers expecting to live and work their entire careers in one area, where barracks accommodation is seen as only for recruits and single soldiers until they buy their own place.
there is very little single living in Accomodiation and practically zero married quarters in the DF.

The most recent reorg of the PDF resulted in people having to commute possibly to the other side of the country (even at senior ranks). In the army if you want promotion it is more or less a given you have to move.

(I’m sure the Minister who Also Has Defence in his Portfolio forgets about it sometimes...
the current Minister is the Taoiseach (aided (or not) by a Junior Minister)


a civil service that seems to have inherited the anti-military culture of the first civil service....
in fairness to the DoD attitudes have changed over the last 20 years or so.


As far as I know their MPA provide an ambulance service in addition to the primary.
air ambulance, VIP transport, utility transport, parachuting etc

The personnel issue would take a little readjustment. Its certainly not the end of the world as is being portrayed here.The closure of barracks due to the crash has shown that that personnel will get on with reassignments. If they are not happy with the move then not a problem, ask for some transferees from the Army who want to do the job, train them up and problem solved.
afaik few AC pilots would only hold one type ratings. Therefore those pilots (who are already in too short supply) will deplete the strength further and possibly make other ops impossible.

The last barracks closures were due to cuts all the ones prior to that were efficiencies (there were a good few barracks which only housed a Coy/Sqn).

Of the 3 services, the Navy has the most wiggle room to justify an increase. As far as I know they are a one stop shop compared to the various agencies here in the UK. Add to that they are involved in a sector that brings in a serious amount of money to the economy.
as are the AC - which is why it makes sense to retain as is


I'm not an authority on Irish military capabilities but suggest the MPA probably does overland C2ISR work as well.
some capability
 
I agree the AC needs to be kept. But right now it has two military roles, army support and naval support. I think it needs to push for greater capacity in those areas, in preparation for the day when budget and government permit an air defence role.
 
Honestly, I'm only interested in the military roles. There, the AC is a support service to the operatively effective service arms of state policy, such as it is.
That should change, but until it does, get on board.. In heart and mind as well as practice. If that was happening, there would still be a helicopter on the Eithne.
And they would have brought the plans for P32 to Appledore.
 
At best bumpy, I wouldn't call that particularly rough.

And FWIW, the sort of seas the RAN avd RNZN have contend with are rather different to the North Atlantic,
Even the Anzac class Frigates have to watch the weather after they bent one going into the Roaring Forties to rescue some idiot yachties.

HMNZ Canterbury’s well able to deal with SS9. They were warned it was a bad idea to put the seaboats where they did in alcoves, and they were told to ballest the ship to reduce vertical acceleration, which they now have.
Why would the IDF want to send a Landing ship out in the worst weather they could think of when they have plenty of ocean going, the ex RN Peacock Class are Typhoon rated, patrol ships?
You sail as well?
 
Report from an NZ sailor type on IMO is that the boys visiting the RNZN were less interested in the Canterbury itself than in the concept of ops for a small navy using an amphibious sealift capability.
 
The Air Corps are not allowed to serve abroad until the government let's them so they will probably stick with domestic stuff until they get the nod to go and play with the grown ups.....they learned the hard way that allegedly quick disconnect kit did not do what it said on the tin.
They were by the 1st Defence White Paper.... now allowed (as per 2nd White Paper)
 
I understand your instinct to defend the troops, and it's well placed. But the senior leadership was lacking in the Congo. They allowed the first troops to go in an almost negative image of Germans in Russia: wrong uniforms and equipment. The battalion should have moved heaven and earth to relieve jadotville, the government should even have sent more troops. The Swedes, or a Swede, was horrified at the complacency before Niemba: "this is war!" The army only learns from disaster, the government only learns the wrong lesson. But you are right that the UN also got a shock from the Congo, never to be repeated except ib the much more controllable situation of Timor and, maybe, Liberia.

Oops, thread drift. Back to flighty things. I look to post-2023 budgets for any real air corps funding change, when debt repayment levels are due to drop. And I expect the navy to get the major dibs, apart from AD radar and planned replacements.
The Department of Defence did
 
I've tweaked the Thread title as I notice the IAC have ordered a pair of Airbus C-295s configured for maritime ops to replace their CN235MPs which have been in service for 25 years.

The C-295MPA is already operated in various standards by several countries such as Portugal, Oman and Chile.

The current IAC CN235MPs are unarmed and essentially serve a Coastguard (maritime patrol and SAR), ISR and transport role. I'd expect the new aircraft to pick up these tasks while offering a useful increase in capacity.

Regards,
MM
 
They could of laid out that panel a bit better.
Pray to G-d that he's got GPS on his smartphone, an analogue ASI and artificial horizon. Telling ATC that your position, height, heading and speed is blue , black and pink might not be well received.
 
Pray to G-d that he's got GPS on his smartphone, an analogue ASI and artificial horizon. Telling ATC that your position, height, heading and speed is blue , black and pink might not be well received.
Filling the panel with off the shelf kit and pretending it's top secret is going a bit over the top.
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top