Interceptors for Ireland

Sounds like what Ireland needs is some Mk1 Eurofighters. Should be quite a few available for cheap. Tornado ADVs would be perfect, but are any even available? Refurbed F-5Es? FCK-1s?
 
Desertfox said:
Sounds like what Ireland needs is some Mk1 Eurofighters. Should be quite a few available for cheap. Tornado ADVs would be perfect, but are any even available? Refurbed F-5Es? FCK-1s?
Click to expand...
The 3 contenders would probably be:

1) Typhoon Tranche 1
2) Gripen C
3) Mirage 2000C (from French or Greek storage - would have to integrate Mica IR or some other basic IR-homing missile capability)

Probably in that order of capability & cost, with Mirage 2000s probably not being viable beyond 2030-2035 so only a temporary solution while waiting for something else (used Rafales?).
 
H_K said:
The 3 contenders would probably be:

1) Typhoon Tranche 1
2) Gripen C
3) Mirage 2000C (from French or Greek storage - would have to integrate Mica IR or some other basic IR-homing missile capability)

Probably in that order of capability & cost, with Mirage 2000s probably not being viable beyond 2030-2035 so only a temporary solution while waiting for something else (used Rafales?).
Click to expand...
The issues with any “temporary solution” are a) the minute their operational rates start declining due to any age related issues our opposition and Tankie twats are going to scream bloody murder and use it to hammer defence spending, and perhaps more importantly b) they aren't likely to be Temporary. IF/When any fighter capability is ever bought then they are going to be a once in a generation spend, see for example pretty much every other Irish defence procurement.
 
TomS said:
As for tanker, yeah, it's a stretch, but if they do decide to adopt KC-390 as a transport, turning a couple into flex tankers is really quite simple. Just underwing hose reel pods, one crew station in the cockpit, a couple of cameras, and a roll-on tank or two in the cargo bay. The same aircraft could even be re-rolled for offshore SAR with a EO/FLIR pod under the fuselage and life rafts on a pallet at the rear ramp. Same third crew station can be used for the EO/IR operator instead of AAR.
Click to expand...
Not sure how I missed this earlier, but I really do like this idea. Half a dozen or so KC-390s would be excellent. Maybe a dozen, depends on how much flying we're expecting them to do as MPAs. A dozen airframes would allow for spreading the flying hours out better.



Ainen said:
Super hornet is a lot of plane. It is literally twice the Gripen E, for worse intercept performance (slower) without range gain.
It's also optimized for anything but intercept performance, in this sense being worse than legacy hornet.

Look at intercept profiles. Ireland isn't reall fighting for air superiority over fish. We're not taking 3 big tanks.
I.e. as interceptor, JAS-39E reaches longer ranges from standby on ground, faster.
Click to expand...
It is. But note starviking's objection to my single-engined suggestions for planes:

starviking said:
However, any IAC interceptors are going to operating a significant amount of their time out in the North Atlantic. it can be a tough place to lose your only engine.
Click to expand...


Which is why I was suggesting the M346 that you crapped on for being barely supersonic. The next step up for an actually supersonic twin engine plane is a Super Bug or Rafale. Which yes, IS a lot of airplane.
 
Honest Injun? Hot air that will run and run like a panto on repeat.

Will anything happen considering it will require a vote in the Dáil Éireann?
 
Foo Fighter said:
Honest Injun? Hot air that will run and run like a panto on repeat.

Will anything happen considering it will require a vote in the Dáil Éireann?
Click to expand...
What defence procurement has ever needed a stand alone Dáil vote? The Minister of the day gets Cabinet approval and the procurement process happens. There isn’t going to be a vote on the radar systems when they are picked for example.
 
Although Sweden is now a NATO member it is the closest country to Ireland in asserting its uniqueness and history if non alignment.
A small number of Gripens would be sufficient to go up and warn off intruders.
 
What about Korean FA-50 (a combat version of supersonic T-50 trainer)? They already were brought by Poland, so they already have a presence on European weapon market. Reasonably cheap, reasonably capable; could reach Mach 1.5 and could be equipped with several types of radars.
 
sparky42 said:
What defence procurement has ever needed a stand alone Dáil vote? The Minister of the day gets Cabinet approval and the procurement process happens. There isn’t going to be a vote on the radar systems when they are picked for example.
Click to expand...
My reasoning is the rather large increase in defence budget OR reducing spend elsewhere in public finances. Probably both.
 
Foo Fighter said:
My reasoning is the rather large increase in defence budget OR reducing spend elsewhere in public finances. Probably both.
Click to expand...
The defence budget is set in the overall budget, there’s never a point where there is a one off vote on the matter, take for example the move to LoA2, that’s effectively doubling the 2022 budget by 2028 (supposedly) and there was never any vote on that. If the government pushes onwards to LoA3 there won’t be a vote on that either.

I mean when you take all the rumours flying around on capital buys, there’s no vote on the matter, there’s just the Cabinet signing off on them and that’s that.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Which is why I was suggesting the M346 that you crapped on for being barely supersonic. The next step up for an actually supersonic twin engine plane is a Super Bug or Rafale. Which yes, IS a lot of airplane.
Click to expand...
AIDC F-CK-1... Why hasn't Taiwan tried to export them? It's the prefect plane for a small country wanting a cheap/simple supersonic twin.
 
Desertfox said:
AIDC F-CK-1... Why hasn't Taiwan tried to export them? It's the prefect plane for a small country wanting a cheap/simple supersonic twin.
Click to expand...
Because most nations are reluctant to buy Taiwanese military hardware - both due to unclear status of such deals (buying weapon from the nation that you don't even recognize) and fear of Chinese repercussions. Also, intense US technology transfer to Taiwan complicate things by requiring to get US permission for their tech export. Of course it doens't means that such deals are impossible. Just annoyingly complicated.
 
As I understand it, the Irish military currently has zero air defence/intercept capability. It seems to me that there are sustainable, lower-cost solutions that will work depending on the mission. So what exactly is the mission?
 
cluttonfred said:
As I understand it, the Irish military currently has zero air defence/intercept capability. It seems to me that there are sustainable, lower-cost solutions that will work depending on the mission. So what exactly is the mission?
Click to expand...
Apparently to have SOME control over the national airspace without being forced to call other nations for help. Essentially to:

* Being able to oppose non-violent intrusion into Ireland airspace (criminal activity, demonstrative airspace violations, recon attempts)
* Being able to provide some grade of territorial defense in case of armed agression (not very likely, but not impossible either)
 
cluttonfred said:
As I understand it, the Irish military currently has zero air defence/intercept capability. It seems to me that there are sustainable, lower-cost solutions that will work depending on the mission. So what exactly is the mission?
Click to expand...
I believe that the primary thing they are looking for is called "Air Policing", the ability to intercept someone wandering into Irish airspace. Some 90% of the time, this is a very lost civilian plane, who is very happy to find someone to guide him to a landing place. Some 90% of the remaining times, this is a Russian plane annoying people, that needs a fighter escort to make sure they don't do something stupid. And about 90% of the remaining times of this, it's someone squawking the wrong transponder codes for some stupid reason. The final ~0.1% of all interceptions or less, it's someone squawking the wrong transponder codes because bad men are on their airplane and want to crash the plane into an important building.

Which means a supersonic fighter, with a radar because you're going to have these interceptions at night and in bad weather, and because most of your interceptions are going to be big aircraft, airliners or bombers, you need BVRAAMs for warhead size.

Plus we have a strong vote for twin engines because operating alone or in pairs over the North Atlantic is a terrible place to lose your only engine.



Desertfox said:
The F-CK-1 is but the trainer AIDC T-5 version is mid-production and reportedly half as expensive as a T-50.
Click to expand...
Combined response:
Dilandu said:
No wonder, T-5 is less than half as capable; no radar (yet), transsonic speed only.
Click to expand...
Ah, that may take it out of contention entirely. Mostly the lack of radar, as long as it can hit M1.2 or more.
 
there is still the option on secondhand F-16AM/BM's, they are quickly becoming available in larger number (those that arent going to Ukraine). although not new, they can be used as a stopgap sollution until more capable and modern aircraft can be delivered.

other options could be ex-Swiss or Finish F-18C/D as these are to be replaced by F-35A's, these are relativly newer then the older F-16MLU's (finish aircraft dating from the mid-to-late 90's) and could become available soon. that's also the case for ex-Greek Mirage 2000-5's.
 
Spey_Phantom said:
there is still the option on secondhand F-16AM/BM's, they are quickly becoming available in larger number (those that arent going to Ukraine). although not new, they can be used as a stopgap sollution until more capable and modern aircraft can be delivered.

other options could be ex-Swiss or Finish F-18C/D as these are to be replaced by F-35A's, these are relativly newer then the older F-16MLU's (finish aircraft dating from the mid-to-late 90's) and could become available soon. that's also the case for ex-Greek Mirage 2000-5's.
Click to expand...
Oh, hey, put me down in favor of the Finn Hornets, assuming that they still have a thousand hours or more remaining.
 
Spey_Phantom said:
there is still the option on secondhand F-16AM/BM's, they are quickly becoming available in larger number (those that arent going to Ukraine). although not new, they can be used as a stopgap sollution until more capable and modern aircraft can be delivered.

other options could be ex-Swiss or Finish F-18C/D as these are to be replaced by F-35A's, these are relativly newer then the older F-16MLU's (finish aircraft dating from the mid-to-late 90's) and could become available soon. that's also the case for ex-Greek Mirage 2000-5's.
Click to expand...

The "deal of the century" four nations converted 315 of their 348 F-16s to the MLU stadard in the mid-1990's. The airframe however are 45 years old, average. And of course 4700 F-16s have been build so far.
My bet would be second-hand F-16s (as per Ukraine, Argentina, and so many other nations) or, if "fresh" planes are wanted, then F/A-50. In both case it's a Lockheed win...
 
It sounds to me like this is a case of wanting to go too far, too fast. I can't think of any twin-engine, supersonic, radar-equipped interceptors that are even remotely simple or affordable. Maybe some twin-engine patrol aircraft with sea, land, and possibly air radar would make more sense to start?
 
cluttonfred said:
It sounds to me like this is a case of wanting to go too far, too fast. I can't think of any twin-engine, supersonic, radar-equipped interceptors that are even remotely simple or affordable. Maybe some twin-engine patrol aircraft with sea, land, and possibly air radar would make more sense to start?
Click to expand...
KAI FA-50(maybe future F-50), i guess.
 
I think a capable transonic solution like the M-346 which has two engines, Mach 0.95 speed, capable radar, Sidewinders, and a gun pod would be the most logical 80% solution with a call to friends at NATO if anything high speed needs to be intercepted. The BAE Hawk 200, which has intercept radar, could also do the job and cost less but with only one engine.
 
Last edited:
Dilandu said:
"Life extension" and "reasonable money" rarely mix well past certain point.
Click to expand...
I was talking about "Reasonable" as in for the resut. Not cheap. If the options are wieghed against each other, could the life extension route be reasonably costed compare to other aircraft option abilities?
 
Scott Kenny said:
I believe that the primary thing they are looking for is called "Air Policing", the ability to intercept someone wandering into Irish airspace. Some 90% of the time, this is a very lost civilian plane, who is very happy to find someone to guide him to a landing place. Some 90% of the remaining times, this is a Russian plane annoying people, that needs a fighter escort to make sure they don't do something stupid. And about 90% of the remaining times of this, it's someone squawking the wrong transponder codes for some stupid reason. The final ~0.1% of all interceptions or less, it's someone squawking the wrong transponder codes because bad men are on their airplane and want to crash the plane into an important building.

Which means a supersonic fighter, with a radar because you're going to have these interceptions at night and in bad weather, and because most of your interceptions are going to be big aircraft, airliners or bombers, you need BVRAAMs for warhead size.

Plus we have a strong vote for twin engines because operating alone or in pairs over the North Atlantic is a terrible place to lose your only engine.




Combined response:

Ah, that may take it out of contention entirely. Mostly the lack of radar, as long as it can hit M1.2 or more.
Click to expand...
The one area you are missing out is air control for international events, ie Heads of State visits, or when Ireland holds the EU presidency and you’ve heads of the other 26 governments at summits, hence one of the reasons for the current radar and MANPAD systems. Traditionally either the USAF for American presidents or the RAF handle that tasking currently.
cluttonfred said:
I think a capable transonic solution like the M-346 which has two engines, Mach 0.95 speed, capable radar, Sidewinders, and a gun pod would be the most logical 80% solution with a call to friends at NATO if anything high speed needs to be intercepted. BAE Hawk 200, which has intercept radar, could also do the job and cost less but with only one engine.
Click to expand...
While we are NATO adjacent, it’s important to note the only formal agreement/understanding Ireland has is with the U.K., but what the actual terms and conditions of that is anyone’s guess as successive Irish governments have denied its existence for decades and are currently before the courts over it. However that still leaves a couple of issues, firstly god forbid a worse case situation of an RAF engagement leaves whatever Irish government of the day with “problems”, and secondly what made sense for the U.K. from the 60s may not really suit London today given the decline in RAF numbers, ie there’s few enough P8s or Typhoons.

As to the question of the Light Fighter/armed trainer like the M346, it’s basically the same argument the AC and Finance have been having since the 1980s when it was the Hawk and Alpha Jet were the ones on offer, does it buy Ireland the worst of all worlds? In other words while of course it’s cheaper than a full fat fighter of the same generation it’s still multiple times the cost of the basic trainer capability that has to be maintained as well, while still incurring many of the same costs of the fighter with some gaps. I mean if this ever happens, whether it’s a light fighter or full fat one, all the supports/stores/people are going to have to be funded/trained anyway regardless of what actually ends up being bought, so how much actual savings do you get and do they make sense or “penny wise and pound foolish”?

Keep in mind at things stand currently this is still something that may happen in LoA3 post 2028 when the budgets may be between 3-5 billion for defence, so the costs the department floated of 100 million a year would actually be viable and reasonable.

All that being said of course there is a newish wrinkle potentially. Rumours are that the Departments have for once agreed that a Replacement date will actually happen, ie that the PC9 replacement will start this year, and that opens up more questions.
 
Here's an idea...why not host a NATO fighter squadron from another country at a base on Irish soil? The basing agreement would include the obligation to respond to intrusions into Irish airspace based on X parameters. Less patriotic but perhaps a much cheaper and more sustainable way to get the job done.
 
cluttonfred said:
Here's an idea...why not host a NATO fighter squadron from another country at a base on Irish soil? The basing agreement would include the obligation to respond to intrusions into Irish airspace based on X parameters. Less patriotic but perhaps a much cheaper and more sustainable way to get the job done.
Click to expand...
And which nation do you think is going to just volunteer for such a deployment to a non NATO nation? Who has spare strength to do so and interest in such, particularly for a nation whose main issue is not being arsed on defence spending since 1998? And that's not even touching the domestic fallout.
 
cluttonfred said:
It sounds to me like this is a case of wanting to go too far, too fast. I can't think of any twin-engine, supersonic, radar-equipped interceptors that are even remotely simple or affordable. Maybe some twin-engine patrol aircraft with sea, land, and possibly air radar would make more sense to start?
Click to expand...
It is a very big step up, but that's what the mission requires around Ireland.
 
Scott Kenny said:
It is a very big step up, but that's what the mission requires around Ireland.
Click to expand...
I can understand the need for supersonic and high climb rate to chase down an airliner or Russian snooper.

But why twin engines? After all, there are hundreds of single engine F-35s and F-16s operating over water every day. If single engine is good enough for the USN, USMC, RN, RCAF, RNoAF, RAAF etc, why shouldn’t it be good enough for Irish air policing?
 
sparky42 said:
The one area you are missing out is air control for international events, ie Heads of State visits, or when Ireland holds the EU presidency and you’ve heads of the other 26 governments at summits, hence one of the reasons for the current radar and MANPAD systems. Traditionally either the USAF for American presidents or the RAF handle that tasking currently.
Click to expand...
Oh, crud, did not even consider that problem!

And I doubt that a post-Brexit UK would be willing to supply the air control for the EU summit...



sparky42 said:
Keep in mind at things stand currently this is still something that may happen in LoA3 post 2028 when the budgets may be between 3-5 billion for defence, so the costs the department floated of 100 million a year would actually be viable and reasonable.

All that being said of course there is a newish wrinkle potentially. Rumours are that the Departments have for once agreed that a Replacement date will actually happen, ie that the PC9 replacement will start this year, and that opens up more questions.
Click to expand...
Replacing PC9s with M346s would be a semi-viable option, though I still think you'd want actual fighters with BRAAMs for the job.
 
H_K said:
But why twin engines? After all, there are hundreds of single engine F-35s and F-16s operating over water every day. If single engine is good enough for the USN, USMC, RN, RCAF, RNoAF, RAAF etc, why shouldn’t it be good enough for Irish air policing?
Click to expand...
Probably because losing a single engined plane that is 1/12 of your entire Air Force is likely to result in Questions Being Asked In Parliament (or rather, the Irish equivalent) and your further career ending at that moment.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom