Ireland gets free military air-coverage from the UK (?)

[Tartiflette Fan]

I have put the (?) in the title because this statement from the daily telegraph does seem somewhat fantastical, especially as they also say that naval coverage is added gratis.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/12/14/ireland-couldnt-stop-father-christmas-crossing-its-airspace/

" After all, without an air force, Ireland is unable to monitor its own skies, far less police them. Under a once-secret defence pact between our countries that has been in place since the 1950s, the job of defending Ireland falls on the UK. British jets frequently have to get airborne to intercept Russian planes entering Irish airspace. The last thing we need is for the RAF to have to scramble on Christmas Eve to deal with an unidentified flying object over Dublin.Our aerial assistance comes without any price tag despite Ireland (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/ireland/) being the second richest country in the EU by GDP per capita. Perhaps as a Christmas goodwill gesture, Varadkar could offer at least some reimbursement for the services of the boys in blue."

Is this really as true as the DT claims - or is/was there an unstated quid pro quo somewhere ? If this really was done for nothing when Ireland was a poor agricultural economy, why on earth has no government in more recent times told the Irish that they have to hand over some of that cash they got from abetting all the international tax-dodging schemes. Would anyone care to guess what this coverage costs the UK ?

I do recognise that there is some benefit to the UK in keeping Russian intruders that much further away from British shores.

[TURIN]

Bit late if the UFO is over Dublin to be honest.

[TURIN]

I found this after a very brief search.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/why-do-british-fighter-jets-protect-irish-airspace/#:~:text=Many%20believe%20that%20the%20UK,so%20let%27s%20get %20into%20it.

[Tartiflette Fan]

I found this after a very brief search.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/why-do-british-fighter-jets-protect-irish-airspace/#:~:text=Many%20believe%20that%20the%20UK,so%20let%27s%20get %20into%20it.

Thanks. As I initially said - and is repeated in this article - both sides benefit, however Ireland bernefits at no cost to itself.

[First_In_Last_Out]

Really long winded boring article to arrive at the conclusion that they “allow” us to protect them. Well done all round….situation normal :rolleyes:

[Captivep]

Isn't Ireland still a part of the EU? Why yes, yes it is.

Great job UK, the populist win of the century right there. It's so wonderful not to think through the results of an impulsive act.

The UK probably enjoys the knowledge that whatever lingering feelings about some past events, the Irish don't have supersonic interceptors that can get to London in just a few minutes. Perhaps the UK could acknowledge that selling potatoes at a profit off the island wasn't the smartest move during a famine and that restitution may take a while. In contrast, the American Choctaw tribe sent money to help Ireland in 1847, which the Irish still recall favorably.
I've tried, I really have, to find a single crumb of relevance in this post to the subject under discussion but without success.

As for the actual subject, an agreement such as this one between two sovereign nations to the benefit of both seems entirely sensible.

[ORAC]

This has, of course, been previously discussed to death....

https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/641148-further-consideration-irish-air-defence.html?highlight=Ireland+fighters#post11064993

https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/633616-ireland-considers-purchase-ad-fighters-11.html?highlight=Ireland+fighters#post11453781

[chevvron]

The articles mention in several places that Russian traffic is 'invisible' to to other aircraft.
Surely there are 'raw' unprocessed primary radars (eg Mount Gabriel) which can detect the blips of ALL traffic even those which do not emit from a transponder or other types of electronic conspicuity.

[papabravowhiskey]

The articles mention in several places that Russian traffic is 'invisible' to to other aircraft.
Surely there are 'raw' unprocessed primary radars (eg Mount Gabriel) which can detect the blips of ALL traffic even those which do not emit from a transponder or other types of electronic conspicuity.
I've gained the impression that Mt. Gabriel was a secondary surveillance radar only, not primary radar. I seem to recall discussions about the need to "fill in" coverage.

[TURIN]

I've tried, I really have, to find a single crumb of relevance in this post to the subject under discussion but without success.

As for the actual subject, an agreement such as this one between two sovereign nations to the benefit of both seems entirely sensible.
Indeed. I suppose the very idea that two EU nations were able to make independent sovereign decisions is a moot point these days.

[Ninthace]

Any two nations making decisions that affect mutual interests are likely to need to compromise. Compromise means surrendering a degree of independence to arrive at a common position.

[BEagle]

A few decades ago I was supporting QRA in the mighty VC10K, replacing another which had landed to refuel at Prestwick. Whilst in transit, SOC gave us the heads-up that a couple of Bears, which had earlier descended to low level on their way to the Bay of Biscay, were expected to return Northbound shortly....

A Shacklebomber then called up to say that they'd got a contact a long way West, which was heading North - suspected Bears. So we were cleared to fly direct across Irish airspace to nab the Bears, then shadow them waiting for a Phantom or two to join us. I queried the instruction with our nav, who was a Flt Cdr - he told me that there was indeed a high level agreement in place for such an event, but it was rather hush-hush...

So off we went, caught our Bears, refuelled a Q jet when it finally arrived, then followed the Russians until they left the 'area of interest'. Refuelled to max landing weight from the other VC10K which took over the task, then RTB'd direct to Brize.

Another great day out for the UK AD team - and top spot by the Shack crew!

[chevvron]

I've gained the impression that Mt. Gabriel was a secondary surveillance radar only, not primary radar. I seem to recall discussions about the need to "fill in" coverage.
Ah didn't know that; I only mentioned it as it's the only 'Area' radar I know of in Ireland, but surely there must be others which do have primary radar otherwise there will be a massive 'hole' in radar coverage.

[OvertHawk]

Ah didn't know that; I only mentioned it as it's the only 'Area' radar I know of in Ireland, but surely there must be others which do have primary radar otherwise there will be a massive 'hole' in radar coverage.

I think that's rather the point!

[Una Due Tfc]

I think that's rather the point!

Primary RADAR is only in place at Dublin, Cork & Shannon airports with a range of approx 60nm. Beyond that, SSR only in Irish airspace.

[chevvron]

So it might benefit the UK if an air defence type radar having primary radar with the capability of providing Area services (the UK and Ireland are already makng plans for their 'funcrional airspace block) too was sited in or near near the border with the Irish Republic, although a single one could be sited somewhere like Enniskillen and that could provide coverage for most of Ireland and provide a backup for the Irish Air Defence proposal.
Surely the EU would provide funding for this, in fact the airspace extending into the Shanwick OCA is already busy enough to warrant it.
There used to be RAF radar sites at Killard and Bishops Court but I think these are long gone.

[fitliker]

The Germans were not safe in neutral Irish waters , why would the Russians think they would be any safer ?
https://uboat.net/maps/irish_sea.htm

[Video Mixdown]

I don't see how any of this excuses Ireland from failing to maintain suitable military forces and expecting a neighbouring country to provide air, and now it seems, naval defence. The 'mutual benefit' argument just fudges the issue. The mutual benefit we gain from working closely with NATO and other allies is predicated upon all parties providing their share of military capability, and some of them are smaller than Ireland.

[nomilk]

So what would be the benefit(s) vs disadvantage(s) for the UK if we leave the agreement? Even without it, Ireland seems pretty safe due to its size/importance, and geographical position.

[Video Mixdown]

So what would be the benefit(s) vs disadvantage(s) for the UK if we leave the agreement? Even without it, Ireland seems pretty safe due to its size/importance, and geographical position.
That’s not the point. You could say the same about any number of small European countries but they all take responsibility for their defence. I have no problem cooperating with Ireland on these matters, but they should pull their weight too.

[nomilk]

We cannot decide for Ireland what is best for Ireland and what it should do, so my question is still unanswered: Is it better for the UK to terminate the agreement and do without?

[Mil-26Man]

We cannot decide for Ireland what is best for Ireland and what it should do, so my question is still unanswered: Is it better for the UK to terminate the agreement and do without?

If the agreement is to the UK's benefit also (which it is), why would it be better to terminate it?

[Mil-26Man]

That’s not the point. You could say the same about any number of small European countries but they all take responsibility for their defence. I have no problem cooperating with Ireland on these matters, but they should pull their weight too.

You know, the Americans could say much the same about most of European NATO when it comes to not pulling their own weight, including increasingly the UK.

[nomilk]

If the agreement is to the UK's benefit also (which it is), why would it be better to terminate it?Video Mixdown seems to have strong views that Ireland should "pay" .... or what?
I wondered if this outweighs the advantages for the UK. No answer so far, only stating some principles of what is expected of small states in general.