MikeCZAR:
What is "total fire power caliber"?

You ran into the slaghuis lamb! You can't save him its too late, we are now cutting chump steaks!

I endorse @aguagust 200%

When you fire a single barrel gun, the probability that the two bullet would hit the same target is less that 5% in a static sniper rifle, because of the variables of nature (majorly wind), which changes the trajectory of the bullet. Now imagine how impossible this is on an helicopter performing strafing runs.

Secondly when you fire both guns in let's say 5 sec short burst

Single barrel: approximately fires an hypothetical 25 rounds in 5seconds

Gatlin gun: fires approximate 75 rounds in the same time frame, hence it give the impression of three guns firing at you at once.

This approach is more effective and would result in a higher kill rate.

He never said three bullets get fired at once, stop twisting his words to score cheap points. And I noticed someone Taking a cheap shot at his speech impediment, how low can you go? Making fun of a stammerer doesn't make you intelligent, neither does it make you a superior human.

lezz:
would you have accepted if i told you otherwise?

would you have concurred even if the whole world says you are wrong ? you wouldn't!!!

you would have looked for a another way to twist the facts.

I'm currently taking a nation-wide inventory on fixed assets of FRSC. that's why i have not been lighting candles on your ass for some time.

i make cursory glances time after time in between field trips, and i often left with a grin watching @agaugust turning the screws inside your ass. FACT

Uhm...So are you saying air is more dense at higher altitude?

Henry120:
Jln115, I support Agaugust 200%. So, speak for your self.

Really? So you agree with Agaugust, that air is more dens at higher altitude?

agaugust:


Your personal opinion and anger CANNOT defeat my science, you need to scientifically eliminate this American weather experts' professional conclusion of the whole matter:

"Cold air contracts, becomes more dense, and thus heavier than warm air." www.ussartf.org/predicting_weather.htm

Keep crying brah, keep crying river of tears into two cups...you will end up a haircut shop barber due to your brain,s under-development
.

"the farther away you get from the earth, the thinner the atmosphere gets. The total heat content of a system is directly related to the amount of matter present, so it is cooler at higher elevations."
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/if-heat-rises-why-does-th/

"Altitude is the height you are above sea level. The higher up you are the lower the temperature will be. This is because air that is higher up is less dense than it is at lower altitudes and air temperature depends on its density. As a general rule for every 1,000m higher you go the temperature will drop by 6.5 °C."
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Basic_Geography/Climate/Climate_Elements

"air at higher altitudes is less dense. Since fewer air molecules exist in a certain volume of air, there are fewer molecules colliding with each other, and as a result, there will be less heat produced. This means cooler air."
https://water.usgs.gov/edu/watercyclecondensation.html

Keep being r3tarded bro!!

xwolverine:


I endorse @aguagust 200%

When you fire a single barrel gun, the probability that the two bullet would hit the same target is less that 5% in a static sniper rifle, because of the variables of nature (majorly wind), which changes the trajectory of the bullet. Now imagine how impossible this is on an helicopter performing strafing runs.

Secondly when you fire both guns in let's say 5 sec short burst

Single barrel: approximately fires an hypothetical 25 rounds in 5seconds

Gatlin gun: fires approximate 75 rounds in the same time frame, hence it give the impression of three guns firing at you at once.

This approach is more effective and would result in a higher kill rate.

He never said three bullets get fired at once, stop twisting his words to score cheap points. And I noticed someone Taking a cheap shot at his speech impediment, how low can you go? Making fun of a stammerer doesn't make you intelligent, neither does it make you a superior human.

Did you know: Your brain is a muscle?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/nigeria/11596210/South-African-mercenaries-secret-war-on-Boko-Haram.html

South African mercenaries' secret war on Boko Haram
Mercenaries from South Africa have proved quietly decisive in helping the Nigerian military turn around its campaign against Boko Haram, writes Colin Freeman in Abuja

With their roots in South Africa apartheid-era security forces, they do not fit the standard image of an army of liberation. But after just three months on the ground, a squad of grizzled, ageing white mercenaries have helped to end Boko Haram's six-long year reign of terror in northern Nigeria.
Run by Colonel Eeben Barlow, a former commander in the South African Defence Force, the group of bush warfare experts were recruited in top secrecy in January to train an elite strike group within Nigeria's disorganised, demoralised army.
Some of the guns-for-hire cut their teeth in South Africa's border wars 30 years ago. But their formidable fighting skills – backed by their own helicopter pilots flying combat missions – have proved decisive in helping the military turn around its campaign against Boko Haram in its north-eastern strongholds.

The Islamists have now fled many of the towns they once controlled, leading to the freeing of hundreds of girls and women last week who were used by Boko Haram as slaves and bush wives.
The role of Col Barlow's firm in turning around one of the most vicious African insurgencies of modern times has been kept largely quiet by Nigeria's outgoing president, Goodluck Jonathan, who lost elections six weeks ago to ex-general Muhammadu Buhari.

But last week, Col Barlow discussed his company's role in a seminar at the Royal Danish Defence College, and in a separate interview with a Sofrep.com, a special forces website, he described in detail the "aggressive" strike force that was created to push Boko Haram onto the back foot.
“The campaign gathered good momentum and wrested much of the initiative from the enemy,” said Col Barlow, 62. “It was not uncommon for the strike force to be met by thousands of cheering locals once the enemy had been driven from an area.”
He added: “Yes, many of us are no longer 20-year-olds. But with our age has come a knowledge of conflicts and wars in Africa that our younger generation employees have yet to learn, and a steady hand when things get rough.”
During apartheid, Col Barlow served with the South African Defence Force, a mainly white military unit that defended the regime against insurrection and fought border wars in neighbouring Angola and what is now Namibia.
In 1989, as apartheid was beginning to crumble, he co-founded Executive Outcomes, a private military company made up of many ex-members of South Africa's security forces. One of the first modern "private armies", in 1995 it successfully helped the government of Sierra Leone defend itself against the rebels of the Revolutionary United Front, notorious for chopping off the arms of their enemies.

Another co-founder of Executive Outcomes, which dissolved in 2000, was Simon Mann, the Old Etonian later jailed in Equatorial Guinea over his attempts to plot a coup there.
Col Barlow's new company is known as STTEP, which stands for Specialized Tasks, Training, Equipment and Protection. It is thought to have sent around 100 men to Nigeria, including black troopers who previously served in elite South African units. Others even fought as communist guerrillas against the South African Defence Force.
It is not known how much the Nigerian military has paid for STTEP's services. But the fact that the Nigerian government felt it necessary to bring them in raises questions about the level of help that it was receiving from the British and US militaries, who offered mentoring packages in the wake of Boko Haram's kidnapping last year of more than 200 schoolgirls from the north-eastern town of Chibok.
Describing Boko Haram as "a bunch of armed thugs who have used religion as the glue to hold their followers", Col Barlow said the initial plan was for his men to train up a team to help free the schoolgirls. However, as Boko Haram continued to run amok across northern Nigeria, massacring hundreds at a time in village raids, the plan turned to schooling Nigeria's largely traditional army in “unconventional mobile warfare”.

Read more... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/nigeria/11596210/South-African-mercenaries-secret-war-on-Boko-Haram.html

agaugust:


Me troll? So what are you? An angel? No, you are more like a vampire my friend.

I am a hunter, I go to the woods, I kill deer with my rifle. We fire 2 shots rapidly on a deer, we get to it where it fell, we find 2 different gun shot wounds close to each other, not in a straight line of second bullet tailing the first bullet behind and pushing it deeper into the deer on the same bullet hole, it never happened.

When you receive T-129 gatling fire in y.our coconut head, there will be 3 leaking holes with your Soweto brain popping out in 3 places.

A gatling gun will release 3 bullets on one trigger pull as the gun revolves in super rapid speed, I have posted 3 videos to prove that already.

Rooivalk will NEVER match the firepower of T-129 gun, the white man that invented 3 barrel gatling saw 1 barrel gun as I adequate, making him invent a superior gun.

However, if you still want count how many holes a 3 barrel gun drill in y.our Soweto head, I advice you bring that head to Lagos, Nigeria has 3 barrel gatling guns on our Mi-35 Hinds, just put your head a few inches directly in front of one, tell NAF gunner to fire with one trigger pull.

After the experiment, come back and post your experince on this forum
.

As suspected. You are unable to answer. Fake fake fake. No one cares what happens downstream at the target. The same question is asked, let me even make it clearer for you.......when you pull the trigger on a gatling gun do the bullets come out the barrel following the same trajectory? (i.e in a line) yes or no?

It's obvious bullets wont stay 1 behind the other in a line if you fire at a target far away. So you post above is irrelevent. Can distract other fo.ols not me?

Again...what is the orientation of those 3 rounds when leaving the barel of a gatling gun? In a line or side by side?

MikeCZAR:
Did you know: Your brain is a muscle?

Anatomically, the brain definitely is not a muscle; it's predominantly gray and white matter, with cellular structure and function totally different form that of a muscle. It is also far more complex.

If the question was meant to be an insult...then I shudder at the thought of how unintelligent you could be, all because you don't agree with a line of thought. If you have a dissenting view, put it forward and lets deliberate like adults, not making innaliloquent statements like someone suffering from lalochazia.

DieVluit:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/nigeria/11596210/South-African-mercenaries-secret-war-on-Boko-Haram.html

South African mercenaries' secret war on Boko Haram
Mercenaries from South Africa have proved quietly decisive in helping the Nigerian military turn around its campaign against Boko Haram, writes Colin Freeman in Abuja


Col Barlow's new company is known as STTEP, which stands for Specialized Tasks, Training, Equipment and Protection. It is thought to have sent around 100 men to Nigeria, including black troopers who previously served in elite South African units. Others even fought as communist guerrillas against the South African Defence Force.

Describing Boko Haram as "a bunch of armed thugs who have used religion as the glue to hold their followers", Col Barlow said the initial plan was for his men to train up a team to help free the schoolgirls. However, as Boko Haram continued to run amok across northern Nigeria, massacring hundreds at a time in village raids, the plan turned to schooling Nigeria's largely traditional army in “unconventional mobile warfare”.

Read more... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/nigeria/11596210/South-African-mercenaries-secret-war-on-Boko-Haram.html

Col Eben himself on Beegeagles' blog stated that the role of his team was purely an advisory role for the SF Battalion. How do you prove otherwise, or simply put how logical does it sound to you that 100 PMCs liberated a place the size of Belgium from terrorists. Does that make sense?

Col. Eben's team finished their contracts in mid March, Nigerian troops entered Sambisa the boko-haram's headquarters in the middle of April, how did they fight the war on Nigeria's behalf... Was it materially or spiritually?


When the US uses the PMCs in Iraq its normal, but when Nigeria uses one on an advisory role, they are suddenly fighting Nigeria's war, talk of double speak. The same US that was disgraced out of Vietnam and Yemen

And to the South-africans playing to the scripts of the white supremacists, putting your neighbour's light out would not make yours shine brighter.

xwolverine:



He never said three bullets get fired at once, stop twisting his words to score cheap points.

Nope that is exactly what he said:

xwolverine:


agaugust:

When a T-29 gun fires a round, it sends out 3 shells of 102 mm each,

xwolverine:


Col Eben himself on Beegeagles' blog [s]stated that the role of his team was purely an advisory role for the SF Battalion. How do you prove otherwise, or simply put how logical does it sound to you that 100 PMCs liberated a place the size of Belgium from terrorists. Does that make sense?

Col. Eben's team finished their contracts in mid March, Nigerian troops entered Sambisa the boko-haram's headquarters in the middle of April, how did they fight the war on Nigeria's behalf... Was it materially or spiritually?


When the US uses the PMCs in Iraq its normal, but when Nigeria uses one on an advisory role, they are suddenly fighting Nigeria's war, talk of double speak. The same US that was disgraced out of Vietnam and Yemen

And to the South-africans playing to the scripts of the white supremacists, putting your neighbour's light out would not make yours shine brighter[/s]

Its not the Colonel

Its some deranged fool pretending to be him.

Thus: Your post is empty

xwolverine:

Secondly when you fire both guns in let's say 5 sec short burst

Single barrel: approximately fires an hypothetical 25 rounds in 5seconds

Gatlin gun: fires approximate 75 rounds in the same time frame, hence it give the impression of three guns firing at you at once.

This approach is more effective and would result in a higher kill rate.

1. Gyroscopically stabilized guns using firing computers and range finders do not have problems with accuracy.
2. The rate of fire of the gun on the T-129 gives is 20 seconds worth of trigger time before it has run out of ammo. The Rooivalk has 58 sec worth of trigger time.

High rates of fire from precision weapons are wasteful and inefficient and significantly reduce the time that the asset can remain in-theater.

There is a reason that the best Attack helo's such as the Apache, Rooivalk, Z-10, Mi Mil-28, Ka-50 and Eurocopter Tiger all use guns of this type.

So, in conclusion, the Rooivalk can "shoot" for LONGER, send MORE ordinance down range and send BIGGER ordinance down range with the gun that it has.

patches689:


Its not the Colonel

Its some deranged fool pretending to be him.

Thus: Your post is empty

Really?


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

The South African contractors of STTEP trained and served alongside the Nigerian Strike Force in combat against Boko Haram starting in January of 2015, putting a significant dent in the terrorist organization and helping to pave the way for Nigerians trapped behind enemy lines to participate in democratic elections in late March. With their three-month contract expiring, STTEP made a controlled withdrawal from Nigeria and had all of their employees returned home by late March.

Once it was determined that their contract would not be extended, “It then became a matter of withdrawing our employees in groups whilst a skeleton crew remained in place to ensure all equipment was handed back to the army in a controlled and orderly manner,” STTEP’s chairman, Eeben Barlow, told SOFREP. “The Nigerian Air Force flew our men to a large city from where they departed Nigeria.”

When asked if STTEP successful fulfilled the services stipulated in their contract with the Nigerian government, Barlow answered, “As our contract was of a mere three month’s duration, I think we achieved the best we could with very limited resources.” The South African contractors were initially brought on to help the Nigerian military rescue the Chibok school girls who were kidnapped by Boko Haram terrorists, but as the enemy made significant advances in northern Nigeria, STTEP had to adjust their approach at the request of the Nigerian government. They were now to train the strike force to conduct “unconventional mobile warfare,” Barlow said (these tactics are detailed in a previous article). “I can only commend the training team for achieving what they did in a very short space of time,” Barlow said.

But when it came to turning the tide against Boko Haram, Barlow made it clear that, “The credit goes to the Nigerian Army, who were supported by the strike force we trained. The strike force was a force-multiplier in the area of operations.”

The strike force plowed into enemy-held terrain while the Nigerian Army sent in infantry to secure the strike force’s rear areas and sure up any gains made. As far as the punishment that the Nigerian forces dolled out to the enemy, Barlow said, “I do know that the enemy lost many of their technicals and that they suffered heavy casualties.”

But considering the impressive performance of the South African contractors and their host-nation counterparts in the Nigerian strike force, the question becomes why their contract was not extended for a further three months. While Boko Haram has been put on the ropes, they have yet to be crushed and permanently defeated.

“Obviously we, as a sub-contractor, were not privy to the decisions made regarding the contract, and we accept whatever decision the client-government makes,” Barlow said. Had the contractors overstayed their welcome, the media reports about out-of-control mercenaries would have been accurate, but the South Africans had no interest in camping out in mega-FOBs in Nigeria or occupying their host’s country.

The impact of the Nigerian elections

One factor contributing to the contractors’ withdrawal may have been the elections themselves. “The end of our three months coincided with the elections, and as is now known, a change of government. This obviously changed the political and military landscapes. With this change in government comes a change in many things, one of course being if STTEP is required or not,” Barlow said.

Another issue may have been the pressure African governments are subjected to by the international community for employing South Africans to help resolve their security issues. “Much of this pressure originated locally from the South African print media by apparent under-control journalists publishing misinformation on the company’s activities, even to the extent of claiming we were driving main battle tanks (MTBs) into battle!” Barlow is no stranger to media smear campaigns against the companies he has worked for, as Executive Outcomes came under the same pressure for their role in the Angola and Sierra Leone conflicts in the 1990s.

International institutions and academics have no shortage of consternation when it comes to the use of certain types of private military companies. Most of these individuals were educated to believe in the Westphalian system, in which the state has the only legitimate monopoly on the use of force. Of course, there have always been huge exceptions to this rule since the current global order was established, but that doesn’t seem to deter them much. Besides that, STTEP was contracted by the government of Nigeria! How this differs so much from the myriad of American private military companies who contract in Iraq and Afghanistan is hard to fathom.

If any nation is guilty of outsourcing military tasks, it’s certainly the United States. “The current market maker for modern force is the United States, as it has turned to the private sector in unprecedented ways to support its wars in Iraq and Afghanistan,” Sean McFate writes in his recent book “The Modern Mercenary.”

“For example, the United States has relied on contractors to develop the Afghan National Army and Afghan National Police, even awarding DynCorp International a contract worth up to $1 billion to train the police.” McFate also references PMCs like Lincoln Group, which came under investigation for running propaganda in the Iraqi press, and Total Intelligence Solutions, which, “runs spy rings for the U.S. government overseas.”

However, some private military companies are more equal than others. Little is said in the British press about Sterling Corporate Services or in the American press about MPRI, as the scandals have mostly focused on Blackwater contractors. Ironically, the same press that cries about the atrocities committed by Boko Haram also goes ballistic when a firm like STTEP effectively helps to cut the same terrorists down to size. Agenda-driven media accounts of Barlow and his activities only exacerbate the situation.

Take, for instance, a recent article published in the Guardian, which was more than likely written in response to part four of this series in which Barlow rejects the racial narrative his company has been accused of by the press. The Guardian article is actually quite an embarrassment for the writer, David Smith, and his editors, who spin a superficial narrative about old white mercenaries fighting for profit in Nigeria. The article cites those who are far removed from the conflict, pointing out that, although they have turned the tide against Boko Haram, they’re still just a bunch of old white racists.

“The South African government has been fed such a false narrative by the South African media that it is possible they requested the Nigerian government not to extend the contract. The media here has tried very hard to turn this into a racial issue with the intent to create as much suspicion as possible,” Barlow wrote. “It is a sad day for Africa when a few in the media want to ensure a continuation of conflict as opposed to an end to it, and want to dictate who a government may use and who not.”

As for the claim that the SADF veterans are getting up there in age, Barlow doesn’t bat an eye. “Yes, many of us are no longer 20-year-olds,” Barlow told SOFREP. “However, we are all mentally and physically fit, and can hack it with our younger-generation employees. But, with our age has come knowledge of conflicts and wars in Africa they have yet to learn, a wealth of experience the youngsters do not have, and a steady hand when things get rough.” While the infantry may be a young man’s game, unconventional warfare requires a different, more mature, type of soldier.

Meanwhile, Nigeria is left to struggle with their internal security dilemmas, first among them being Boko Haram. “The enemy was not annihilated and was able to flee the battlefield with some of their forces intact, and will no doubt regroup and continue their acts of terror to enforce their political and religious philosophy,” Barlow said. “The ending of Boko Haram will be political and economical in nature, as you cannot kill an aspiration.”

The Nigerian government will have to continue to battle Boko Haram on the battlefield, but this effort will have to be done in tandem with political and economic reform in order to create a lasting peace. Barlow acknowledged this reality, arguing that military force is important, but not enough by itself. “Like elsewhere on the continent, the majority of the security problems will continue to be driven by socio-political factors and motivated at times by extremism.”

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.”

The future for the Nigerian strike force that STTEP trained is uncertain. Will it continue to operate as a highly mobile direct-action unit, or be disbanded? While STTEP and the strike force took Boko Haram down a few pegs, their final battle remains to be fought. If anything, the contractors and their Nigerian partners have provided the Nigerian government with some breathing room to institute the needed military, economic, and political reforms needed to ensure the Boko Haram is permanently neutered as a threat to the Nigerian people.

Barlow and his men demonstrated in Nigeria that it is possible to chalk up incredible successes against enemy insurgents, a vexing problem set that the American military has failed to adequately address in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Somalia, Yemen, and elsewhere.

“To defeat such an enemy militarily, we must out-think and outsmart him by adopting tactics, techniques, and procedures that are so unexpected and unconventional that he becomes confused and loses his cohesion. That is what we tried to do with the strike force, but three months is a very short time in which to do that effectively,” Barlow said, explaining his approach to warfare—a rejection of conventional thinking that lumps such conflicts into counterinsurgency models. “However, if the Nigerian Army does not annihilate the armed Boko Haram members, the government will not be able to negotiate from a position of ultimate strength or be able to govern in a secure environment.”

International institutions and academics have no shortage of consternation when it comes to the use of certain types of private military companies. Most of these individuals were educated to believe in the Westphalian system, in which the state has the only legitimate monopoly on the use of force. Of course, there have always been huge exceptions to this rule since the current global order was established, but that doesn’t seem to deter them much. Besides that, STTEP was contracted by the government of Nigeria! How this differs so much from the myriad of American private military companies who contract in Iraq and Afghanistan is hard to fathom.

If any nation is guilty of outsourcing military tasks, it’s certainly the United States. “The current market maker for modern force is the United States, as it has turned to the private sector in unprecedented ways to support its wars in Iraq and Afghanistan,” Sean McFate writes in his recent book “The Modern Mercenary.”

“For example, the United States has relied on contractors to develop the Afghan National Army and Afghan National Police, even awarding DynCorp International a contract worth up to $1 billion to train the police.” McFate also references PMCs like Lincoln Group, which came under investigation for running propaganda in the Iraqi press, and Total Intelligence Solutions, which, “runs spy rings for the U.S. government overseas.”

However, some private military companies are more equal than others. Little is said in the British press about Sterling Corporate Services or in the American press about MPRI, as the scandals have mostly focused on Blackwater contractors. Ironically, the same press that cries about the atrocities committed by Boko Haram also goes ballistic when a firm like STTEP effectively helps to cut the same terrorists down to size. Agenda-driven media accounts of Barlow and his activities only exacerbate the situation.

Take, for instance, a recent article published in the Guardian, which was more than likely written in response to part four of this series in which Barlow rejects the racial narrative his company has been accused of by the press. The Guardian article is actually quite an embarrassment for the writer, David Smith, and his editors, who spin a superficial narrative about old white mercenaries fighting for profit in Nigeria. The article cites those who are far removed from the conflict, pointing out that, although they have turned the tide against Boko Haram, they’re still just a bunch of old white racists.

This was the opinion given by Eben Barlow himself, and you would rather believe the accounts of a journalist sitting in a comfy office in Abuja over the words of the person on ground. What warped logic is that?

Work horse of the SAAF. Will be interesting to see what finally gets chosen to replace them. Probably C130-J.

patches689:


1. Gyroscopically stabilized guns using firing computers and range finders do not have problems with accuracy.
2. The rate of fire of the gun on the T-129 gives is 20 seconds worth of trigger time before it has run out of ammo. The Rooivalk has 58 sec worth of trigger time.

High rates of fire from precision weapons are wasteful and inefficient and significantly reduce the time that the asset can remain in-theater.

There is a reason that the best Attack helo's such as the Apache, Rooivalk, Z-10, Mi Mil-28, Ka-50 and Eurocopter Tiger all use guns of this type.

So, in conclusion, the Rooivalk can "shoot" for LONGER, send MORE ordinance down range and send BIGGER ordinance down range with the gun that it has.

The AH-1Z Viper, RAH-66 Comanche, AH-1W Cobra using the gatling gun are not good attack helicopters because you said so.


How many rounds of ammo would you need to take out enemies in tanks? The Rooivalk's gun becomes useless against an enemy like the ISI with M1 Abram tanks.

The primary role of an attack helicopter has evolved over the years, a 1990 helicopter is obsolete in this day and age of BVR missiles. With a superior radar the T129 doesn't need to be close to the theatre before engaging, it would have acquired targets, fired the missiles and returned to base while the Rooivalk is still looking for enemies to shoot at.


The T-129 has a radar that can track up to 128 targets at the same time and prioritise in real time. With this, the actual focus of the T-129 is not in shooting. If a single missile will take out more than the what shooting the whole rounds. Whats the point?

xwolverine:



The AH-1Z Viper, RAH-66 Comanche, AH-1W Cobra using the gatling gun are not good attack helicopters because you said so.

- RAH-66 Comanch is cancelled
- AH-1W Cobra, a relic living on borrowed time.

Congratulations on missing the main point of my post though

xwolverine:



This was the opinion given by Eben Barlow himself, and you would rather believe the accounts of a journalist sitting in a comfy office in Abuja over the words of the person on ground. What warped logic is that?

And your point is?

xwolverine:


Really?


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

This proves that he posts on beegugug's blog how?

patches689:


This proves that he posts on beegugug's blog how?

Its Beegeagle not beegugug.

I apologies if you are dyslexic, but your other posts suggests otherwise.

The quote proves Col. Eeben's opinion, as corroborated on Beegeagle's blog that the victory is Nigeria's.

The point of argument is not about the identity of Eeben on Beegeagle's blog, there's no way to verify who the Eeben on Beeg's blog is.

Please stay on topic.

patches689:


- RAH-66 Comanch is cancelled
- AH-1W Cobra, a relic living on borrowed time.

Congratulations on missing the main point of my post though

In case you missed this part:

How many rounds of ammo would you need to take out enemies in tanks? The Rooivalk's gun becomes useless against an enemy like the ISI with M1 Abram tanks.

The primary role of an attack helicopter has evolved over the years, a 1990 Rooivalk helicopter is obsolete in this day and age of BVR missiles, being obsolete is not about the possibility of upgrading the capability to carry a BVR missile, but in the total outlay of the platform and its avionics. With a superior radar the T129 doesn't need to be close to the theatre before engaging, it would have acquired targets, fired the missiles and returned to base while the Rooivalk is still looking for enemies to shoot at.


The T-129 has a radar that can track up to 128 targets at the same time and prioritise in real time. With this, the actual focus of the T-129 is not in shooting. If a single missile will take out more than the effect achieved in shooting the total rounds. Whats the point?

patches689:


- RAH-66 Comanch is cancelled
- AH-1W Cobra, a relic living on borrowed time.

Congratulations on missing the main point of my post though

On the issue of guns, take for instance the Apache Longbow's M230 30mm lightweight automatic cannon is effective, but limited.

It fires 30mm linkless ammunition at a rate of 625 shots per minute. However, the gun duty cycle to prevent overheating is as follows: six 50-round bursts with 5 seconds between bursts followed by a 10-minute cooling period. For bursts limited settings other than 50, the duty cycle can be generalized as no more than 300 rounds fired within 60 seconds before allowing the gun to cool for ten minutes, after which the cycle may be repeated.

In short, an Apache can only fire 300 rounds before having to take a ten minute break to allow the gun to cool, and this assumes the gun never jams or malfunctions. Time on station is limited by fuel, and pilots attempting to avoid enemy anti-aircraft fire shouldn't circle aimlessly for 10 minutes after each brief gun engagement. Perhaps a rotating gatling gun is required, but that is only part of the solution.

Source: http://g2mil.com/gunfighter.htm

In essence, the Gatling gun is more effective.

If the Apache with a superior R & D compared to the Rooivalk has this limitation, the incompetence of the Rooivalk becomes more glaring that it becomes a joke.

And on a side note, the Comanche was cancelled because of soaring costs not because it was ineffective.

MikeCZAR:


Who fires two "shots rapidly" at an animal? Who wants his or her meat damaged? Riddled with bullets.

How do you fire "two shots rapidly" with a hunting rifle? In Nigeria you hunt with machine gun?

Modern self loading multiple shot hunting rifle, not Zulu hunting spear. You are as obsolete as a Rooivalk.

MikeCZAR:


You're not a military researcher!
You're not a hunter!

Envy + Inferiority Complex = Suicide
.

MikeCZAR:
What is "total fire power caliber"?

Two 7.62 mm calibre bullets from AK-47 rifle means a total physical mass of metal 15.24 mm is lodged inside y.our forehead
.

agaugust:


Modern self loading multiple shot hunting rifle, not Zulu hunting spear. You are as obsolete as a Rooivalk.

Envy + Inferiority Complex = Suicide
.

They probably don't know about the 10 minutes cool off period required for the old Rooivalk's gun.

xwolverine:



Its Beegeagle not beegugug.

I apologies if you are dyslexic, but your other posts suggests otherwise.

The quote proves Col. Eeben's opinion, as corroborated on Beegeagle's blog that the victory is Nigeria's.

The point of argument is not about the identity of Eeben on Beegeagle's blog, there's no way to verify who the Eeben on Beeg's blog is.

Please stay on topic.

The point, that you fail so abysmally to see is as follows:

1. Your military - when left to its own devices - was unable to stem the semi-conventional assault by Boko Haram, who were (largely) lightly armed at the time. The only heavy weapons (read: Armor/Artillery) they have has been captured from your army.
2. Your military - despite a $1 billion bail-out was unable to re-capture said lost territory
3. Your military was then forced to purchase the services of foreign mercenaries (Nationality of mercenaries is irrelevant at this point in time)
4. These mercenaries then provided training that your military was unable to provide for itself
4a. These mercenaries then provided technical support that your military was unable to provide for itself
4a. These men provided leadership that your miilitary was unable to provide for yourself.
5. It was only with the assistance of these mercenaries and pressure from the more effective Cameroonian and Chadian militarys that you were able to acheive any gains against boko-haram at all.

The conclusion is clear, your military is unable to provide the training/skills/support/leadership that your "boots" (grunts) need to win battles in semi-conventional warfare against untrained, lightly armed opponents.

MikeCZAR:
Almost dropped my coffee cup.

Let me break it down:

3 barrels.

Fires a less powerful round.

With a higher rate.

Sure, a 3 barrel gatling gun from T-129 is enough to make you drop your coffee and run like SANDF, it's more deadly than 1,000 Seleka rifles.

Less powerful round? How?

102 mm Vs 139 mm, both will k.ill

So how is 102 mm less powerful? Can you survive it?

Nigerian AK-47 is 7.62 mm calibre

South African R-4 rifle is 5.56 mm calibre

You have just admitted that AK-47 rifle has a more powerful bullet than R-4 rifle. Thank you
.

xwolverine:



In case you missed this part:

How many rounds of ammo would you need to take out enemies in tanks? The Rooivalk's gun becomes useless against an enemy like the ISI with M1 Abram tanks.

The primary role of an attack helicopter has evolved over the years, a 1990 Rooivalk helicopter is obsolete in this day and age of BVR missiles, being obsolete is not about the possibility of upgrading the capability to carry a BVR missile, but in the total outlay of the platform and its avionics. With a superior radar the T129 doesn't need to be close to the theatre before engaging, it would have acquired targets, fired the missiles and returned to base while the Rooivalk is still looking for enemies to shoot at.


The T-129 has a radar that can track up to 128 targets at the same time and prioritise in real time. With this, the actual focus of the T-129 is not in shooting. If a single missile will take out more than the effect achieved in shooting the total rounds. Whats the point?

1. ISL Abrams can be defeated with the Mokopa or rendered combat ineffective with the Ingwe ZT3. Helo guns are not inteded for use against MBT's, and since our F2 autocannon fires a bigger round - it will be more effective than the gun found on the T-129

2. BVR missiles have allmost nothing to do with helicopters.

Allow me to highlight point 2:

- You say that T-129 radar allows BVR engagement. Let us consider the armament of the T-129:
-- AGM-114 Hellfire, max range: 8km (NOT BVR)
-- BGM-71 TOW (NOT RADAR GUIDED), max range: 4,2km (NOT BVR)
-- Hydra 70 (NOT RADAR GUIDED), max range: 8km (NOT BVR)
-- Spike (NOT RADAR GUIDED), max range: 25km (NOT BVR)
-- Mirzak-U, max range: 8km (NOT BVR)

So congratulations, you have shown only that you have no idea what you are talking about

xwolverine:



On the issue of guns, take for instance the Apache Longbow's M230 30mm lightweight automatic cannon is effective, but limited.



Source: http://g2mil.com/gunfighter.htm

In essence, the Gatling gun is more effective.

If the Apache with a superior R & D compared to the Rooivalk has this limitation, the incompetence of the Rooivalk becomes more glaring that it becomes a joke.

And on a side note, the Comanche was cancelled because of soaring costs not because it was ineffective.

You are saying that all helicopters with a single-barrel gun are incompetent designs?

You do realize the worlds best attack helo has a single barrel gun?

agaugust:


Two 7.62 mm calibre bullets from AK-47 rifle means a total physical mass of metal 15.24 mm is lodged inside y.our forehead
.

So its the total caliber of bullets fired?

Is that what you are saying?

MikeCZAR:
We are talking about radar not submarine warfare!

Oh really? I am sure we were talking about submarine warfare because you said Nigerian Lynx helicopter has no torpedoes and that SAN will sail submarine to attack Nigeria and we can do nothing about it. That is what you said and everybody read it here !

Are torpedoes guided by radar inside water? Yesterday was a bad day for y.ou man !

Nigeria has anti-submarine warfare capability.

CASE CLOSED

agaugust:


Oh really? I am sure we were talking about submarine warfare because you said Nigerian Lynx helicopter has no torpedoes and that SAN will sail submarine to attack Nigeria and we can do nothing about it. That is what you said and everybody read it here !

Are torpedoes guided by radar inside water? Yesterday was a bad day for y.ou man !

Nigeria has anti-submarine warfare capability.

CASE CLOSED

Nigerian ASW helicopter with no crew?

How will it sink a submarine if it is stuck in its hangar?