Henry120:


There is something wrong with you.

What did the Rafales do in libya, asides taking out obsolete AA guns.

When has any modern fighter done anything other than that?

Rafael does what other jets do... but better. Better avionics, better payload, better precision, better everything

Rafael is arguably the best strike fighter in the world, not even the F35 JSF will be able to topple it in that role.

agaugust:


My pleasure....


"“The sad facts of the Gripen system are as follows: 26 Gripen fighter jets were delivered; 10 or fewer are operational; 12 are in long-term storage; there are six qualified pilots; there are about 150 flying hours available to the entire squadron for 2013.”"

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/south-africa-military-maintenance-matters-010956/

Now show us a source that says NAF has only 3 F-7 pilots !
.

Citations have been posted that show that over 800 hours were flown that year.

Furthermore your citation is outdated.

Henry120:


When we start exporting, you would see what the world is buying.

What do you have that is worth exporting?

agaugust:


Why not, you actually have 6 pilots, worse than my estimate of 9.



"“The sad facts of the Gripen system are as follows: 26 Gripen fighter jets were delivered; 10 or fewer are operational; 12 are in long-term storage; there are six qualified pilots; there are about 150 flying hours available to the entire squadron for 2013.”"

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/south-africa-military-maintenance-matters-010956/

Now show us a source that says NAF has only 3 F-7 pilots ! Are you afraid to prove your own claim the way I proved mine ?

.

Why are you posting that old source over and over?

The claims in your source were debunked in the Artical posted on defenceweb.

agaugust:


Sorry dude, you failed.... http://www.vanguardngr.com/2013/11/nigerian-navy-export-war-ships/
.

How many have you sold?

ZERO

agaugust:


9 pilots
9 navigators
= 18 Gripen air crew......from your own source.

.

Where in the source does it say that?

I'll just leave this here:

When it came to the subject of military reform in Nigeria, Barlow offered a few words of advice:

“I would like to see a reorganization of the security forces, including training to enable the security forces to pose an effective and credible deterrent to any bad guys. By reorganization, I mean a redesigning of the order of battle as African armies are merely clones of their pre-independence rulers, making them slow to react, lacking in flexibility, and relying on relative strengths. But all of this will require a refocused strategic vision and threat analysis, coupled to sound advice, training, and the correct equipment. From an equipment point of view, Africa has become the dumping ground of old, obsolete equipment that is purchased on bad advice.”

Source: http://sofrep.com/40865/eeben-barlow-speaks-pt-6-south-african-contractors-withdrawal-nigeria/

frumentius:
I'll just leave this here:

When it came to the subject of military reform in Nigeria, Barlow offered a few words of advice:

“I would like to see a reorganization of the security forces, including training to enable the security forces to pose an effective and credible deterrent to any bad guys. By reorganization, I mean a redesigning of the order of battle as African armies are merely clones of their pre-independence rulers, making them slow to react, lacking in flexibility, and relying on relative strengths. But all of this will require a refocused strategic vision and threat analysis, coupled to sound advice, training, and the correct equipment. From an equipment point of view, Africa has become the dumping ground of old, obsolete equipment that is purchased on bad advice.”

Source: http://sofrep.com/40865/eeben-barlow-speaks-pt-6-south-african-contractors-withdrawal-nigeria/

True story

African militaries have become obsessed with devloping armies that mimic western ones... grand armies designed for set peace battle involving huge formations of tanks and artillery... a complete over emphasis on heavy arms operating under the false pretext that African war will operate along the same lines as European or Asian war.

Instead, the focus should be on motorized and light mechanized formations, with high mobility and organic motorized transport. Able to respond quickly to crises with fluidity and flexibility.

Obviously, South Africa learnt this lesson during the Border war (hence our obsession with wheeled vehicals as well as IFV's and our disdain for tracked vehicals) while nations such as Cameroon have seen success with similar formations in the form of their Rapid Response Brigade as well as Nigeria with their 70(something) strike force. Whilst Chad is the master of light mobility warfare, their skills are beyond reproach and they have demonstrated that their model of army is superior to the cloning of European Armies by defeating the Libyans and their Soviet styled military.

But at the same time Nigeria and Cameroon lack any functional air-assault brigades, while we operate one helo-born air-assault brigade (6 SAI, Prince Alfred's Guard, First City Regiment) as well as a Parachute Regiment. Both lack any independent organizations which can perform such high mobility tasks in support of motorized formations.

Too many nations have fallen into the trap of purchasing cheap left-overs from the cold war, a type of war that is impossible in Africa and thus equipment that is completely unsuitable in Africa. Its simply seen as a cost saving factor... old soviet equipment is cheap, you can get lots of it for a realativly small ammount of money. While modern tailerd equipment on the other hand is expensive... just look at the badger.

Which leads to the next point, most African military are too big. A small well equipped and trained military will allways be superior to a larger poorly equipped and trained one in high mobility warfare.

The thing is that we all know what Nigeria and the rest of Africa needs, not BMP's and T72's, but ZBD-09's and some form of Centuaro, Rooikat, High Mobility Combat Vehical (Japan) as well as a dramatic cut in the size of their armies.

The rest of Africa shows a complete lack of independent thinking, instead of saying "what do we need in this context" the thinking seems to be "If they buy it we should buy it, because maybe they know more than we do"

patches689:


African militaries have become obsessed with devloping armies that mimic western ones... grand armies designed for set peace battle involving huge formations of tanks and artillery... a complete over emphasis on heavy arms operating under the false pretext that African war will operate along the same lines as European or Asian war.


Too many nations have fallen into the trap of purchasing cheap left-overs from the cold war, a type of war that is impossible in Africa and thus equipment that is completely unsuitable in Africa. Its simply seen as a cost saving factor... old soviet equipment is cheap, you can get lots of it for a realativly small ammount of money. While modern tailerd equipment on the other hand is expensive... just look at the badger.



The rest of Africa shows a complete lack of independent thinking, instead of saying "what do we need in this context" the thinking seems to be "If they buy it we should buy it, because maybe they know more than we do"

Well said Patches, and if I may add, there also seems to be a wholesale adoption of foreign doctrine in the use of assets, without any thought whatsoever to its utility to local context. An example:
In daytime operations in perfect weather during the Battle of Kibati, the Ukrainian and Congolese Hinds failed to make an appreciable impact on M23 not because of any deficiency in the choppers, but because of reliance on tactics culled from Soviet doctrine. They would all fly one after the other in a linear fashion, get to a pre-determined point, fire their rockets and peel off. M23, having been trained and commanded by Rwandan officers, were no fools and easily withstood this.

Even after the Ukrainians brought in their FACs, doctrine still calls for the Hind to directly fly over the FAC to its objective. No elastic multi-directional rocket fire and the fixed cannon means no deflective fire. And this was in perfect weather.

The lack of effective long-range all-weather sensors in the Hinds effectively ruled them out for inclement weather operations. No fault of the Ukrainian, Congolese (and Belarussian, Ukrainian private pilots who flew some of the Congolese machines) crews and their Hinds, who were only applying tactics they've been trained.

frumentius:


Well said Patches, and if I may add, there also seems to be a wholesale adoption of foreign doctrine in the use of assets, without any thought whatsoever to its utility to local context. An example:
In daytime operations in perfect weather during the Battle of Kibati, the Ukrainian and Congolese Hinds failed to make an appreciable impact on M23 not because of any deficiency in the choppers, but because of reliance on tactics culled from Soviet doctrine. They would all fly one after the other in a linear fashion, get to a pre-determined point, fire their rockets and peel off. M23, having been trained and commanded by Rwandan officers, were no fools and easily withstood this.

Even after the Ukrainians brought in their FACs, doctrine still calls for the Hind to directly fly over the FAC to its objective. No elastic multi-directional rocket fire and the fixed cannon means no deflective fire. And this was in perfect weather.

The lack of effective long-range all-weather sensors in the Hinds effectively ruled them out for inclement weather operations. No fault of the Ukrainian, Congolese (and Belarussian, Ukrainian private pilots who flew some of the Congolese machines) crews and their Hinds, who were only applying tactics they've been trained.

One question we should ask our selves about new complex assets is that do most African armed forces:

Have the ability to unpack, understand and evaluate new sophisticated weapon systems then come up with new operating guidelines and tactics putting the foundation to rewriting or modifying their doctrine?

Most African armed forces are taught how to operate such weapons as don't they have the capacity to do what I've just stated above.

Coming up with new doctrine needs deep scientific understanding of how what you've just bought works.

MikeCZAR:
One question we should ask our selves about new complex assets is that do most African armed forces:

Have the ability to unpack, understand and evaluate new sophisticated weapon systems then come up with new operating guidelines and tactics putting the foundation to rewriting or modifying their doctrine?

Most African armed forces are taught how to operate such weapons as don't they have the capacity to do what I've just stated above.

Coming up with new doctrine needs deep scientific understanding of how what you've just bought works.

Mike, it seems to me that most African militaries - for varied reasons I won't go into now - simply do not devote time to thinking through these 4 inter-locking concepts in this this simple formulation:
1) Doctrine (how we will fight);
2) Organisation (how we are organised to fight);
3) Training (how we train to fight); and lastly
4) Material (what we fight with).

frumentius:

Mike, it seems to me that most African militaries - for varied reasons I won't go into now - simply do not devote time to thinking through these 4 inter-locking concepts in this this simple formulation:
1) Doctrine (how we will fight);
2) Organisation (how we are organised to fight);
3) Training (how we train to fight); and lastly
4) Material (what we fight with).

I concur.

Though the SANDF is a victim of your second point. But the defence review will fix that.

patches689:


True story

African militaries have become obsessed with devloping armies that mimic western ones... grand armies designed for set peace battle involving huge formations of tanks and artillery... a complete over emphasis on heavy arms operating under the false pretext that African war will operate along the same lines as European or Asian war.

Instead, the focus should be on motorized and light mechanized formations, with high mobility and organic motorized transport. Able to respond quickly to crises with fluidity and flexibility.

Obviously, South Africa learnt this lesson during the Border war (hence our obsession with wheeled vehicals as well as IFV's and our disdain for tracked vehicals) while nations such as Cameroon have seen success with similar formations in the form of their Rapid Response Brigade as well as Nigeria with their 70(something) strike force. Whilst Chad is the master of light mobility warfare, their skills are beyond reproach and they have demonstrated that their model of army is superior to the cloning of European Armies by defeating the Libyans and their Soviet styled military.

But at the same time Nigeria and Cameroon lack any functional air-assault brigades, while we operate one helo-born air-assault brigade (6 SAI, Prince Alfred's Guard, First City Regiment) as well as a Parachute Regiment. Both lack any independent organizations which can perform such high mobility tasks in support of motorized formations.

Too many nations have fallen into the trap of purchasing cheap left-overs from the cold war, a type of war that is impossible in Africa and thus equipment that is completely unsuitable in Africa. Its simply seen as a cost saving factor... old soviet equipment is cheap, you can get lots of it for a realativly small ammount of money. While modern tailerd equipment on the other hand is expensive... just look at the badger.

Which leads to the next point, most African military are too big. A small well equipped and trained military will allways be superior to a larger poorly equipped and trained one in high mobility warfare.

The thing is that we all know what Nigeria and the rest of Africa needs, not BMP's and T72's, but ZBD-09's and some form of Centuaro, Rooikat, High Mobility Combat Vehical (Japan) as well as a dramatic cut in the size of their armies.

The rest of Africa shows a complete lack of independent thinking, instead of saying "what do we need in this context" the thinking seems to be "If they buy it we should buy it, because maybe they know more than we do"

Let me correct in-inaccuracies in your post.

First things first, African countries were colonies of western powers for some 100- 200 years. It isn't out of place that African armies would retain the doctrines or try to mimic or in the case of french west-africa maintain strong military bonds with former colonialists.

It takes time, political will and experience to change these doctrines. Even with these in place many countries might still want to retain their status quo for a number of varying reasons.


- the Strike force did not come into existence in the 3months STTEP was on ground in Nigeria. Strike force members are mainly from the the 72 ranger battalion the Americans were initially tasked to form, until relationship got awry. They (strike force) come from the much larger 72 special forces bn based in markurdi.

It is not a new force.

- while Nigeria doesn't operate a helicopter assault brigade, 82nd Division (Airborne and Amphibious) HQ in Enugu is designed to support motorised formations.


While small well armed militaries have their advantages, quantity also has it's own quality. A small well armed military cannot dominate the grounds in an AOR the size of the North-East, no matter how well trained or we'll equipped they are, it just isn't possible.

Nigeria had tinkered with the idea of running a small force, and did reduce it's force numbers drastically, however it was all in fruition, as the possibility of such a force been effective in Nigeria isn't feasible.


The idea is been able to find the right balance to both quantitatively and qualitatively equip militaries.

- the last point is apt, and as a result of a massive inferiority complex many africans suffer from.

patches689:


Name a fighter that has

Su-27 flanker has seen real combat BVR against equal aircraft/opponents.

patches689:


This discussion has been had and citations have been posted where the UN states the rooivalk was needed as hinds lacked capabilities

UN has NEVER said Rooivalk is better than Hind, the video is South African and the comments therein are now denied by South Africans here because it revealed the short legged 2 km range of Rooivalk gun and bad news for marketing or propaganda
.

patches689:


MANPADS? Rooivalk has laser warning

Long range ground based AAA? Rooivalk has Ingwe ZT3 and Makopa

Hind too has laser warning.

SAAF Rooivalk has no missiles, no ingwe or mokopa armed on it.

Mokopa ? 10 km range ATGM ? When a 15 km SAM is launched by Tanzania what will Rooivalk do ?
.

patches689:


Accuracy >firepower

Hind gun is salved to TV guidance and bangs on target. Accuracy is excellent on the Hind, plus superior firepower combo....beats Rooivalk
.

patches689:


Hovering to land

And

Hovering in combat

Are two different things.

If the hind tries the maneuvers the rooivalk can do it will cut off its own tail with its rotors (the best part is that i am not joking - this is actually a thing)

Citation needed. I just read your personal Southie opinion
.

patches689:


Screencap with subtitles + time stamp

Prove your claims

All other Southies here yesterday did not argue about the mentioned 2 km range on the Rooivalk video.

You want time stamp, go photo shoot it by yourself....clue, the journalist said it....as informed by the pilot behind the scene.

patches689:


How many of those have been modernized?

50 times more than the number of existing Rooivalks
.

patches689:


If you could afford them

You would have them

But you cant

Hind E costs more than Super Hind
.

andrewza:


And the NG is better. Sweden's threats have upgraded so they upgraded. Our threats are the same.

Angola and Uganda fly Su-30 Flankers, the Ugandan version is brand new and more sophisticated than the Gripen.

Your threat has increased. Uganda has ASM and ARM for its new Su-30 jets
.

andrewza:


No IFV can survive a 20mm hit on the roof. So why the 30mm that as less rounds.


The badger frontal arc can take a 30mm hit....

Helicopters attack the IFV roof not frontal arc.

andrewza:



Does it matter. At least 2 countries thought it was a good upgrade to swap out the Russian guns for a SA built 20mm.

2 countries out of 20....cool minority.

patches689:


20mm is better because Accuracy

Citation needed

patches689:


Refer to the english he used... "OVER 2km" as apposed to "UP-TO 2km"

He said ABOUT 2 km NOT over....ABOUT....could mean less than 2 km....Rooivalk gun is weak ranged
.

agaugust:


He said ABOUT 2 km NOT over....ABOUT....could mean less than 2 km....Rooivalk gun is weak ranged
.

You speak South African English?

agaugust:


Angola and Uganda fly Su-30 Flankers, the Ugandan version is brand new and more sophisticated than the Gripen.

Your threat has increased. Uganda has ASM and ARM for its new Su-30 jets
.

In your dreams?

patches689:


So what is the Mokopa and Ingwe ZT3?

Your hinds have no air to air missiles so what is the point of saying that?

Same way Rooivalk too has not missiles in SAAF
.

agaugust:


Su-27 flanker has seen real combat BVR against equal aircraft/opponents.

The T-55 has been in almost every major conflict since going operational from the October war to the Gulf war.

patches689:


Didnt you say the same thing about the A-darter?

And the Badger?

Lol

A-Darter is NOT yet in service....production plan is NOT = arsenal indcution

Bader IFV....5 units produced in 15 years....1 unit per 3 years....cool production rate....Adam Smith will envy your economics of 'mass prodcution'
.

patches689:


The T-72 out-sold the abrams

Is the T-72 better than the Abrams?

No one has been sold the F-22 Raptor... does that mean it is the worst fighter in the world?

F-22 Raptor sale is banned and forbidden by American law....no export allowed....banned, embargoed.

T-72 and Abrams are not same generation, don't compare there specs, RHA+ERA is 2nd generation, COMPOSITE is 3rd generation...thought you said you drink tanks like water....like it's in your blood....LOL
.