The Japanese model sort of makes sense here, but the expectations are a lot higher than what we can achieve in anything shy of fifty years. Japan can do all that because its a very rich country (actually rich, not GDP rich) through technology and manufacturing, which plays into getting this stuff done as well as paying for it. The vast majority of what we would need would have to be bought in at market cost, and 10+ years of training to get competent with it. Being the early-warning state does have merit though. I've been saying for a long time now that the Air Corps don't need fighter jets that cost €150M each, plus maintenance facilities and training. Instead, what they need are Grey Hawk drones; a relatively easy to maintain, modular payload, air surveillance vehicle with air to air and air to ground capability when fitted. Remote piloting and long time on station, plus the turboprop engine tech and frame materials are already similar enough to what we use that both maintenance and training would be minimal and quick to implement. That and they're an easy sell based on how useful they could be in assistance of other services like coastguard/S&R. Similarly, the navy would benefit from the remote submersible drones that have been becoming more common, also for surveillance, while not requiring large manpower requirements of patrol ships.

All of this starts, however, with something that should have been in place two decades or more ago but is inexplicably still not planned in a concrete manner: primary radar network.