Busy days in the Bay over the past few days. Pics by Doug

Colonel Augubugubu....keep on rocking us with your dreams and lies,am a big fan

FighterPilot:


Lady how about if you make an appointment with a psychiatrist to check whether your brain function well or not. I told you that you will be wrong in 99% of probabilities. What if we shift the date to 3rd or 4th of January 2005, so will the same results remain? Nope.

So, to be certain that it will make four years at any day of 2005 you just have to read it from 2004. It will not make sense to put all your hopes on only one chance out of hundred chances.

Gentleman,,the original post was Nov 2005-Feb 2008,,which I know that its 2yrs 3mnth.. all am trying to explain here is 2005-2008 is also 4years.,the same way it can be 3yrs&some months..its a reply to someones post of 2008-2005=3,,,that 1% probability of it being 4yrs is what am talking about.....about shifting date that's why i emphasized on 1-31„..31/12/08 ended at exactly 11:59:60 NOT 12:00 1/7/2009..that particular day had a leap sec.(61) instead of 60..... NO, I don't need a psychiatrist because my brain is in a perfect condition.... I am gaddam right,, with proof:: first with a date calculator which showed 4years and Now Wiki..

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leap_second

bidexiii:


Deviating. Dummies like r very good @ it cos u know nothing of what u r talking about so why don't u take humble bow and work out !

1 parameters ; u should defined ur parameters well I don't know where u came up with the idea ,because no military combact exercise or even stimulation will come up with USAF 3 F15 E's against IAF 18 mig 29. That's not a fear parameter to come up with ? Please I need that source when and where that can of combact exercise took place !
Now coming to the issue of the IAF pilots avoiding USAF BVR contacts,then there was WVR contacts ? can u see ur parameters assumption ar unrealistic because there is nothing in for the f-15E's with a wider radar range and the mig's r avoiding bvr combacts !!!!

-3 usaf f-15E's vs. 18 Iaf mig 29's ratio 1:6
-iaf migs avoiding bvr combact
Ur parameter for the combact exercise is a totally unrealistic !

In one of ur forums u came up with a dummy idea or assumption given a parameters whereby an apache will consistently defeat both "stealthy" F-22's raptor and Su30MKI's (guns only, <100m altitude, mountainous terrain) ; I can argue that for now cos its unrealistic but I totally disagree with, people make assumptiion given conditions/parameters !

2 NATO doctrine is focused solely around BVR combat ; false NATO is focused around BVR and WVR combact: even dummies should know that ?!

2B ; just knew the extent of how dummy ur brains are for u to make such statement that The Gripen C/D can beat the Su30MKI in BVR combat... that is in ur wild dreams !
Gripen C/D does not stand a chance with su30mkI
Here is a source given 10 best BVR combacts jet and ur almighty gripen did not make d list !

http://hushkit.net/2013/06/26/the-ten-best-bvr-fighters-of-2013/
Dummy I av drope enough knowledge to ur brains if u would accept humbly !

First: please speak english, it is very hard for me to understand you.

1. Flight parameters are allways adjusted:

At India's request, the U.S. agreed to mock combat at 3-to-1 odds and without the use of simulated long-range, radar-guided AIM-120 Amraams that even the odds with beyond-visual-range kills.

"That's what the Indians wanted to do," Snowden says. "That [handicap] really benefits a numerically superior force because you can't whittle away some of their force at long range.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1237790/posts

Its a fact buddy, and in 1v1 at RedFlag the IAF pilots got so buttblasted that they refused to do it anymore.

Indians allways refuse to partake in BVR combat because they know that they dont stand a chance in BVR combat - and they want their pilots to get experience combatting NATO pilots. Thus, NATO and IAF agree that they will not do BVR combat as its pointless for the Indians to fly all the way to the UK/US only to have 1 out of 3 of their pilots get into WVR range because NATO bleeped them with AMRAAM's from 200km away and it is pointless for NATO pilots to just sit their and wait for targetting data to be fed to them through AWACS.

2. NATO's focus since the introduction of the Eurofighter/Rafael/F22 has been on net-centric warfare which emphasizes BVR combat - flights of stealthy aircraft with their radar turned off being guided by AWACS via datalink. This is common knowledge, this is why the F35 is being built.

3. Yes, the Gripen C/D can defeat the Su30MKI in BVR combat
http://www.africandefence.net/angolas-su-30ks-are-not-a-serious-threat-to-the-south-african-air-force/

Henry240:


He probably is talking about the hand launched ICHOKU UAV which has been in development for sometime. If you can coerce him to get photos of the vehicle, that would be even great!

Anyway, just get as much as you can from him.

Una still dey here?

Abeg be careful about the kind of info you request and the individuals you are requesting same from!

Cheers!

NAUTIC AFRICA, A PARAMOUNT GROUP COMPANY LAUNCHES SENTINEL VESSELS FOR NIGERIAN NAVY.


http://www.defenceweb.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=40206:nautic-africa-launches-sentinel-vessels-for-nigeria&catid=51:Sea&Itemid=106

NaijaPikinGidi:


Una still dey here?

Abeg be careful about the kind of info you request and the individuals you are requesting same from!

Cheers!

We still dey here dey kick am ohh boss!

How you dey na, i read you five by five.

patches689:



Second, if Kenya and Co want South Africa in Somalia, then get your leaders to ask. We arent going to jump on-board your Crusade just for fun.

You are so ignorant, and so full of it.

Henry120:


You are so ignorant, and so full of it.

How is that ignorant?

How is that full of it?

We are currently doing more than the majority of Africa... must we now also go jump into Somalia for no reason?

patches689:


First: please speak english, it is very hard for me to understand you.

1. Flight parameters are allways adjusted:

At India's request, the U.S. agreed to mock combat at 3-to-1 odds and without the use of simulated long-range, radar-guided AIM-120 Amraams that even the odds with beyond-visual-range kills.

"That's what the Indians wanted to do," Snowden says. "That [handicap] really benefits a numerically superior force because you can't whittle away some of their force at long range.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1237790/posts

Its a fact buddy, and in 1v1 at RedFlag the IAF pilots got so buttblasted that they refused to do it anymore.

Indians allways refuse to partake in BVR combat because they know that they dont stand a chance in BVR combat - and they want their pilots to get experience combatting NATO pilots. Thus, NATO and IAF agree that they will not do BVR combat as its pointless for the Indians to fly all the way to the UK/US only to have 1 out of 3 of their pilots get into WVR range because NATO bleeped them with AMRAAM's from 200km away and it is pointless for NATO pilots to just sit their and wait for targetting data to be fed to them through AWACS.

2. NATO's focus since the introduction of the Eurofighter/Rafael/F22 has been on net-centric warfare which emphasizes BVR combat - flights of stealthy aircraft with their radar turned off being guided by AWACS via datalink. This is common knowledge, this is why the F35 is being built.

3. Yes, the Gripen C/D can defeat the Su30MKI in BVR combat
http://www.africandefence.net/angolas-su-30ks-are-not-a-serious-threat-to-the-south-african-air-force/

Have said it Frm the beginning, you are very good at deviating or you can't read properly.

1) first from what I posted the parameters where fear for both participating side "su30mki vs typhoon" and equally numbers. Frm your own scenario which was USAF f15E vs IAF mig 29 was never a fear parameters in number which I mentioned in my last post. Now I would not go into a foolish argument about drawn parameters in which both sides agreed on or concluded on the parameters and you use that as a yardstick to judge which jet is the best ?
And for the IAF pilots avoiding BVR combat which was Requested and USAF accepted and mocked with later favored the IAF, all these are not fear parameters !
Now from what I posted initially,which I will advice you To go back and read carefully : the typhoon and su 30mkl are jets of the same class and the parameters where fear for both sides, now that's a perfect parameter to equally judge with!

Now let me put in to your awareness are you telling me that the IAF does not have AWACS in which they can feed there mig's with targeting data ? The last time I checked they have three operational Awac's.

2) your argument ie baseless and pointless both countries has Awac's and they can turn off there radar and be guided by there awac's through data link!

3) you are funny, whenever the su30mki is in the skies the f15E dare's not be "airborne" talk of a less superior grippen C/D both in BVR and WVR combat.

bidexiii:


Have said it Frm the beginning, you are very good at deviating or you can't read properly.

1) first from what I posted the parameters where fear for both participating side "su30mki vs typhoon" and equally numbers. Frm your own scenario which was USAF f15E vs IAF mig 29 was never a fear parameters in number which I mentioned in my last post. Now I would not go into a foolish argument about drawn parameters in which both sides agreed on or concluded on the parameters and you use that as a yardstick to judge which jet is the best ?
And for the IAF pilots avoiding BVR combat which was Requested and USAF accepted and mocked with later favored the IAF, all these are not fear parameters !
Now from what I posted initially,which I will advice you To go back and read carefully : the typhoon and su 30mkl are jets of the same class and the parameters where fear for both sides, now that's a perfect parameter to equally judge with!

Now let me put in to your awareness are you telling me that the IAF does not have AWACS in which they can feed there mig's with targeting data ? The last time I checked they have three operational Awac's.

2) your argument ie baseless and pointless both countries has Awac's and they can turn off there radar and be guided by there awac's through data link!

3) you are funny, whenever the su30mki is in the skies the f15E dare's not be "airborne" talk of a less superior grippen C/D both in BVR and WVR combat.

1. No, you have posted none of the parameters of the exercise. Which is exactly my point, until we know the ROE the outcome of the exercise is irrelevant and no conclusions can be drawn from it.

2. No, IAF AWACS and net-centric warfare capabilities are no where near those of NATO ust as the capabilities (technical not performance) of the Su30MMKI are no where near those of the Eurofighter/F-22/Rafael

3. Fact is that the Gripen C/D can defeat the Su30MKI in BVR combat.

Dude, you are wasting my time.

patches689:


1. No, you have posted none of the parameters of the exercise. Which is exactly my point, until we know the ROE the outcome of the exercise is irrelevant and no conclusions can be drawn from it.

2. No, IAF AWACS and net-centric warfare capabilities are no where near those of NATO ust as the capabilities (technical not performance) of the Su30MMKI are no where near those of the Eurofighter/F-22/Rafael

3. Fact is that the Gripen C/D can defeat the Su30MKI in BVR combat.

Dude, you are wasting my time.

1:Dude I told u already uav a problem reading properly and yet u are Gud at diverting!
The RAF and the IAF both had fair parameters not like the USAF and IAF you sited, which you diverted into? Which is not a fair parameters is all circumstance!

2: dude stop saying what you don't know tell me IAF three operational Awac's specifications

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beriev_A-50, IAF awac's can stand any Nato awac's.

3:su 30mkl cannot be compared to a grippen c/d in all ways, both in BVR and WVR combat.

bidexiii:


1:Dude I told u already uav a problem reading properly and yet u are Gud at diverting!
The RAF and the IAF both had fair parameters not like the USAF and IAF you sited, which you diverted into? Which is not a fair parameters is all circumstance!

2: dude stop saying what you don't know tell me IAF three operational Awac's specifications

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beriev_A-50, IAF awac's can stand any Nato awac's.

3:su 30mkl cannot be compared to a grippen c/d in all ways, both in BVR and WVR combat.

1. List the parameters of the exercise

2. Simply having AWACS does not equate to net-centric warfare capabilities

3. I have posted a source that clearly outlines how it can and will defeat the Su30MKI in BVR combat. Sorry to burst your bubble.

patches689:


1. List the parameters of the exercise

2. Simply having AWACS does not equate to net-centric warfare capabilities

3. I have posted a source that clearly outlines how it can and will defeat the Su30MKI in BVR combat. Sorry to burst your bubble.

1. Go backw to the first post and stop arguing blindly.

2. All IAF awac's are where upgraded since 2010 and they meet NATO net -centric standards.

http://defence.pk/threads/afnet-to-boost-iafs-network-centric-warfare-capability.71851/

3. Why are guys so scared of the sh30mkl, come any day or time the f15E /grippen C/D or any jets in his class will never be a match in BVR /wvr combact.

bidexiii:



1. Go backw to the first post and stop arguing blindly.

2. All IAF awac's are where upgraded since 2010 and they meet NATO net -centric standards.

http://defence.pk/threads/afnet-to-boost-iafs-network-centric-warfare-capability.71851/

3. Why are guys so scared of the sh30mkl, come any day or time the f15E /grippen C/D or any jets in his class will never be a match in BVR /wvr combact.

1. I am not arguing blindly, the parameters of the exercise were not published. Thus there is no conclusions that you can draw from it.

2. Again, AWACS alone do not result in net-centric warfare abilities

3. We arent afraid of the Su30MKI - because we can beat them in BVR combat with the Gripen, read the source and stop wasting my time. F15E ra.ped the Su30MKI at red-flag.

patches689:


1. I am not arguing blindly, the parameters of the exercise were not published. Thus there is no conclusions that you can draw from it.

2. Again, AWACS alone do not result in net-centric warfare abilities

3. We arent afraid of the Su30MKI - because we can beat them in BVR combat with the Gripen, read the source and stop wasting my time. F15E ra.ped the Su30MKI at red-flag.

1: ready carefully the IAF came with 4 su30mkl and the RAF was not mentioned but here is a link to show you both sides participated with equally numbers of jets and vice versa in other exercise ; http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/indian-air-forces-top-guns-score-wins-in-the-uk-1204336

2: again here u r trying to divert again, if u read properly again it was not mentioned only that there awac's only was upgraded but the;"AFNET or Air Force Net is a fibre optic-based network on which the Integrated Air Command and Control System (IACCS) of the IAF would ride.

Once AFNET is enabled, the IAF would rapidly link all its ground, air and space assets to have a complete situational awareness of the area it wants to secure and dominate". It was even written body but a canny dude like u who is good @ what he does best - deviating!!!!!

3: if the USAF can't open there mouth and say the f15e will tape the su 30mki talk less of South Africa grippen, unless u rape ur self which is what u guys are Gud at!

bidexiii:



1: ready carefully the IAF came with 4 su30mkl and the RAF was not mentioned but if the numbers of jets where not equal would it not. Ementioned

The parameters of the exercise go beyond the number of jets involved.

What was the missile simulation hit probability?

What were the engagements like? High-low? Low-Low? high-high?

What systems were they allowed to use? Were the Typhoons only operating their systems in training mode? (which is normal against non-NATO countries)

Why are the Indians not bragging about the results of the BVR portion of the exercise?

Get a grip

patches689:


The parameters of the exercise go beyond the number of jets involved.

What was the missile simulation hit probability?

What were the engagements like? High-low? Low-Low? high-high?

What systems were they allowed to use? Were the Typhoons only operating their systems in training mode? (which is normal against non-NATO countries)

Why are the Indians not bragging about the results of the BVR portion of the exercise?

Get a grip

Sorry I was not done posting

patches689:


The parameters of the exercise go beyond the number of jets involved.

What was the missile simulation hit probability?

What were the engagements like? High-low? Low-Low? high-high?

What systems were they allowed to use? Were the Typhoons only operating their systems in training mode? (which is normal against non-NATO countries)

Why are the Indians not bragging about the results of the BVR portion of the exercise?

Get a grip

Read the new link I posted on the same exercise it was well detailed the parameters was equally and fair dude

Denel makes international top 100 of defence companies

"Denel is ranked number 100 on the list of global defence manufacturers and the second largest in the southern hemisphere."


http://www.defenceweb.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=40225:denel-makes-international-top-100-of-defence-companies&catid=7:Industry&Itemid=116

jln115:
Denel makes international top 100 of defence companies

"Denel is ranked number 100 on the list of global defence manufacturers and the second largest in the southern hemisphere."


http://www.defenceweb.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=40225:denel-makes-international-top-100-of-defence-companies&catid=7:Industry&Itemid=116

Denel in top 100 defence manufacturers
August 11, 2015 at 08:32pm
By ANA Reporter
Cape Town – South Africa’s state-owned defence and technology company Denel has been ranked
among the top 100 global defence manufacturers, the company announced on Tuesday.
Denel’s inclusion among the world’s
top 100 defence manufacturers, at
No 100, was announced by the
international publication, Defense
News, which ranked the companies
based on an analysis of their
revenue achieved during the 2014
financial year. Denel saw its revenue
grow over the past four years from
R3.2 billion in 2011 to R4.6 billion in
2014.
“This is the first time that Denel has
entered the global top 100 list in the
company’s history,” said Denel
Group Chief Execuitive, Riaz Saloojee
in a statement.
The company was, according to the
ranking, now the second largest
defence manufacturer in the southern hemisphere – right behind the Brazilian aerospace
conglomerate, Embraer, which occupies the 55th position on the global list. In addition, Denel’s 17%
growth in revenue also placed it 13th on the list of companies in terms of year-on-year growth.
Delighted at the news, Saloojee said: “As a state-owned company our primary focus is to ensure the
strategic independence of the South African National Defence Force and enable it to protect the
country’s territorial integrity and participate in peacekeeping operations on the continent.”
Since the results of the ranking was announced, Denel has seen a further 28% increase in its revenue
for the 2014/2015 financial year. A 34 percent surge in exports helped the company to see revenues
leap up to R5.85 billion in March this year

Loud explosions continue to ring out near Maiduguri as the military fight with terrorists in Kayamula village of the Jere Local Government Area (LGA).

The military has reportedly been exchanging gunfire this evening with Boko Haram terrorists near Maiduguri, the Borno State capital.

Loud explosions continue to ring out near Maiduguri as the military fight with terrorists in Kayamula village of the Jere Local Government Area (LGA).

A resident of the Giwa Barracks area of Maiduguri speaking with SaharaReporters said soldiers ordered everyone to go inside their homes because many were trying to flee the area with their family.

Another resident, Mustapha Yusuke, said ''our children are crying because of the loud explosions near our area, it is late already I am just confused. ''

Kayamla is a remote village near Giwa Barracks, about 5 kilometers away from Maiduguri.

http://saharareporters.com/2015/08/11/soldiers-and-boko-haram-exchange-gunfire-near-maiduguri

jln115:
Denel makes international top 100 of defence companies

"Denel is ranked number 100 on the list of global defence manufacturers and the second largest in the southern hemisphere."


http://www.defenceweb.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=40225:denel-makes-international-top-100-of-defence-companies&catid=7:Industry&Itemid=116

And then some on here have the nerve to say Denel produces crap. They can speak to us when their own companies get into the top 1000....in 2050.

ssaengine:


And then some on here have the nerve to say Denel produces crap. They can speak to us when their own companies get into the top 1000....in 2050.

Hehe I think it's going to take a bit longer than that!

ssaengine:


And then some on here have the nerve to say Denel produces crap. They can speak to us when their own companies get into the top 1000....in 2050.

Congratulations, you made the list of top 100 selling MRAPs. Not much of an achievement, but since you are South-Africans, what more can i say. Keep selling those MRAPs.


By the way, we've already started exporting vehicles to both Rwanda and the South-Sudan, and our company is still very young.

jln115:

Hehe I think it's going to take a bit longer than that!

When a Nigerian enters into any business line, sooner we begin to dominate that business. Watch out for our companies, we've already started exporting.

..... And eh.... Would you stop as$-licking Frum's as$ in the photo-sharing thread, it's becoming quite embarrassing.

WHAT MILITARY EXPERTS SAYS NO PSEUDO ANALYST

A recent article in Netwerk24 asserted that Angola’s recent purchase of Su-30Ks poses a serious threat to South Africa’s security and air power capabilities. Although this may bear some thought and consideration, a counter-argument in response is detailed below.

SAAF
The South African Air Force is one of the world's oldest independent air arms, having been founded on 1 February 1920. With a long history that includes participation in both World Wars, the Korean conflict and the Angolan Civil War, it boasts a significant level of air power doctrine and broad-spectrum capabilities. Its front-line fighter aircraft is the Gripen C.
In short, modern air combat is no longer merely about raw performance, it’s about the interaction of complex systems of systems, all of which have a part to play. Fighter pilots are now concerned not only with dogfighting, basic radars and short-range missiles, but with juggling a complex array of jammers & other EW systems, tactical data links, covert and active radar modes and missiles which are massively more advanced than just a few years ago.

This is also subject I covered when the procurement was first announcedOne interesting look at how those systems can interact to allow even flawed aircraft like the F-35 to prevail is highlighted in this fascinating simulation of the F-35’s theoretical capabilities in BVR air combat from the Royal Aeronautical Society’s Tim Robinson.

If we look at the SAAF’s situation, there are some clear gaps that need to be filled:
1) A lack of a proper AEW aircraft
2) A lack of aerial refuelling platforms
3) A lack of an operational beyond-visual range (BVR) missile

The first can be mitigated somewhat by the use of a single Gripen in the AEW role feeding radar data to the attacking Gripens which operate in EMCON nose-cold mode, with all active transmitting sensors turned off. The Gripen has an impressively small RCS, making it difficult to detect unless the Su-30Ks are burning the sky with their radars on full power, which would make them vulnerable to being detected from far out by the Gripen EW systems.

The second is a problem, mitigated slightly by the way the Gripen is designed to be easy to sustain and operate away from main bases, but it’s a gap that ideally needs to be filled. Without it the Gripen has an 800 km – 900 km combat radius with 30+ minutes on station, adequate for most defensive scenarios but there’d be a lot more flexibility in mission scenarios if that could be extended by aerial refuelling.

Finally, the lack of a BVR missile is temporary and can be rectified quickly if the need were there by acquiring MBDA Meteors and giving the SAAF pilots needed refresher training. As it is, I would expect a BVR missile buy within the next five years, as it is on the Gripen roadmap as a necessary capability.

Finally, there’s doctrine. For various reasons, the Angolans allowed their air force to lose much of the expertise it gained in the 1980s and with it their ability to keep up with the latest developments in air power doctrine and technique. The SAAF, on the other hand, has the Air Power Development Centre and still places as much emphasis on up-to-date techniques and training as funding allows. This was highlighted by the excellent performance of 2 Squadron’s pilots in within visual range combat in Ex Lion Effort, where they also learnt valuable lessons in effective BVR combat.

Finally, beginning from next year the Gripens will be armed with the A-Darter, an extremely capable short-range air-to-air missile which is better than the R-73s the Angolan Su-30s are going to be equipped with. It’s nearly smokeless, very difficult to jam or decoy and has a range of at least 20km with good terminal manoeuvrability. In the interim they carry the equally-impressive IRIS-T, procured as a stop-gap until the A-Darter entered production.

So, let’s walk through a possible scenario in which four SAAF Gripens have to come up against four Angolan Su-30Ks for some reason. Let’s assume equal starting altitudes, a hostile situation allowing a first-shoot ROE and equivalent closing distance. We’ll also assume no ground radars, though those would play a factor in a real situation.

The first thing the SAAF would do is send a single Gripen D up near its service ceiling behind the lines, with its radar on full power and the picture being data-linked to the four Gripen Cs in the advance flight. The SAAF Gripens might fly in a wide formation of two each, providing good separation for their EW sensors and the ability to initiate a pincer movement if necessary. The SAAF pilots will constantly adjust positioning to ensure that they’re not outpacing the Gripen D in the AEW role and moving outside its protective radar umbrella.

Angola’s Su-30Ks carry the relatively old NIIP N001 Myech radar, which features an older conventional mechanically-steered cassegrain antenna and few of the electronic niceties that came in later variants. As a result of its age and widespread use, the radar has been quite well-studied and its capabilities are known. For one, it can detect a 1 m² – 3 m² target at between 80 km – 100 km depending on flight profile and when at full power. The Gripen C has a frontal ideal RCS of 0.1 m², going higher depending on angle, so let’s call it 0.5 m² to be fair and to account for marketing exaggerations. Simplifying things a lot, that would drop the Su-30K detection range down to 40 km – 50 km at best and the tracking range down to somewhere around 15 km – 20 km.

Note too that the Swedes have been developing and customising the Gripen’s systems to handle new-generation Sukhois and MiGs from the start, as a result of which there is serious capability in the onboard EW systems and radar.

The Gripen’s PS-05/A, on the other hand, which in this scenario is up at 50 000ft, is said to be able to acquire a Su-30K-sized aircraft at 120km and track it for a firing solution not much later. And the moment the Su-30Ks appear on that radar, the information is immediately sent to the four Gripen Cs flying ahead allowing them to use it to launch Meteor or Marlin missiles. As they’d be about 60 km away from the Flankers and out of detection range and don’t turn on their radars the entire time they won’t be seen until missile release.

In other words, given current capabilities plus the acquisition of a BVR missile, the Su-30K pilots would get missile launch warnings before they could see a single one of the launch aircraft. They’d be able to detect the Gripen D in the AEW role, but it would be too far away to do anything about and the Meteor has a good probability of kill for a long-range missile. Splash four Flankers.

This is without the PS-05/A Mk4 and Mk5 upgrades, which double detection and acquisition range. It also ignores the use of the Gripen EW system to jam the N001, which it’s quite effective at as the N001 does not have spectacular peak transmitting power.

Of course, this is a contrived scenario and it elides a lot of the complexities and variables, but it’s nonetheless as accurate a look at the relative capabilities of the SAAF’s new-generation Gripens vs Angola’s old-generation Su-30Ks as we can make with open source data. Were we speaking about latest-generation Su-30s with AESA radars and better defensive subsystems the picture would change drastically, but we’re not.

The Su-30K also has performance advantages over the Gripen in a close-in dogfight, but those too are mitigated by the Gripen’s carriage of the IRIS-T or A-Darter high off-boresight missiles and Cobra HMDS which allow pilots to fire missiles at targets in any direction, including directly behind their aircraft.

In sum, this acquisition is not the threat it initially appears to be. Nor do the Angolans intend it to be that, as they seem to want to use their Su-30Ks the same way they’ve used their Su-27s, for their ability to cover vast distances and mount long-range airstrikes in Angola. No doubt they find this discussion bemusing.

http://www.africandefence.net/angolas-su-30ks-are-not-a-serious-threat-to-the-south-african-air-force/

Snapshot analysis: Boko Haram’s latest video

On 23 June, the Islamist militant group Boko Haram released a new video showing some of their recent activities. They did so under their newly adopted name: Wilayat Gharb Afriqiya (Islamic State of West Africa province). In the video, the group showed what appeared to be an attack conducted by a group of fighters on foot and in vehicles, resulting in the death of several Nigerian military personnel, and the capture of weapons, ammunition, and vehicles. The location and specifics of its target are unclear.

Boko Haram
Boko Haram, (official name Jama'atu Ahlis Sunna Lidda'Awati Wal-Jihad) is a militant group based in north eastern Nigeria, and fighting against the control of the Nigerian state in the region. The organisation has previously been responsible for a number of attacks on regional capital Maidiguri and surrounding towns, as well as being behind the kidnapping of schoolgirls from Chibok in 2014.
The video itself showed notably improved production value compared to video releases prior to 2015. This improvement in quality is associated with the group’s growing relationship with the Islamic State (ISIS). There is substantial debate around the extent of that alliance, and the possible consequences it might bring. What follows is some brief commentary on some stills captured from the video.

Establishing shot: Boko Haram fighters are seen advancing toward a number of structures, apparently already partially overrun.



Still 1: Shows a Boko Haram ‘technical’ (a light, unarmoured vehicle with a heavy machine gun bolted to the back) in action. The vehicle itself appears to have been captured from the Nigerian military. A unit number can be seen on the back: 81 Bn.



Still 2: Shows three Boko Haram technicals firing up the road at an unknown target. Although lightly armoured, these vehicles provide a significant potential firepower advantage for the insurgents against small, isolated Nigerian military units, especially when used aggressively in the fashion shown in the video.



Still 3: A fairly typical example of the infantry tactics and weapon handling displayed through much of the video. Here, a fighter wielding an FN MAG sprays what might be generously called ‘suppressing fire’ while a man serving as a loader points out targets. Although quite a lot of shooting takes place, it is unclear who or what they are shooting at, nor do they seem to have any particular concerns about finding cover from return fire.



Still 4: A Boko Haram fighter fires his FN MAG light machine gun around a corner, without using the sights. Interestingly, you can make out three ‘K’ symbols crudely marked on the weapon’s receiver – their meaning is unclear. Nigerian military markings showing “23 Bn” are also visible on the stock of the weapon, suggesting that, as with many or most of Boko Haram weapons, it was captured from the Nigerian military.



Still 5: Another example of poor weapon handling – a Boko Haram fighter aims his weapon one handed down a wall. In the same sequence another fighter moves into the open space visible on the right to fire an RPG at an unseen target. Despite it being easy to criticise the lack of training displayed by the Boko Haram fighters, later sequences show a number of dead Nigerian military personnel – indicating these tactics were effective to at least some degree. The insurgents have also employed relatively high levels of firepower in other videos as well, with the apparent intention of breaking the resolve of the Nigerian military and security forces they are attacking.



Still 6: After a number of short sequences showing the bodies of dead Nigerian military forces, the video transitions to a sweeping shot of collected spoils of battle. Piles of captured weapons, ammunition, and miscellaneous items are shown in this sequence. Visible in this image are numerous AK variant rifles and magazines at centre, as well as some RPG launchers at bottom right.



Still 7: As the camera pans left, a mortar tube is partially visible in the foreground, along with crates of ammunition, what appear to be stacked landmines, and some spare FN MAG barrels in the bottom left corner. While fuel and ammunition are likely considered a prime prize for Boko Haram, the logistics of conducting a protracted insurgency mean that supplies of items such as spare barrels are also vital.



Still 8: A closer look at those Kalashnikov rifles, belts of machine gun ammunition, RPG warheads, and mortar shells in protective cannisters.



Still 9: As the camera pans right, we get a closer look at several RPG launchers, and an eclectic mix of light machineguns, including at least one FN MAG, a number of RPKs, and what appears to be a somewhat rare M60.



Notes on the spoils of war sequence: This collection of captured arms and ammunition is not in any way a war-winning haul by itself. In fact, the entire video appears to show little more than what might be described as an ‘ordinary’ engagement. What is important to consider is the context. Boko Haram is ostensibly pressed by a renewed offensive by the Nigerian military, and by the combined efforts of Cameroon, Chad, and Niger. The implied consequence of that two-front fight was that the insurgents were cut off from cross-border resupply, and increasingly confined to shelter, notably in the Sambisa forest.

With that in mind, this video appears to be intended to show that the group is still active (which is already readily apparent from numerous attacks it conducted in June alone), and that it is still finding ways of sustaining itself.

http://www.africandefence.net/snapshot-analysis-boko-harams-latest-propaganda-video/

Henry120:


Congratulations, you made the list of top 100 selling MRAPs. Not much of an achievement, but since you are South-Africans, what more can i say. Keep selling those MRAPs.


By the way, we've already started exporting vehicles to both Rwanda and the South-Sudan, and our company is still very young.

Sometimes it's better to find a quiet spot to go and get jealous alone, then come back to the group confident, pretending as if you dont care. Otherwise you end up looking pathetic.

If you had read the article it says the list is based on 2014 revenue. You now desperately stumble with an answer claiming it's because of the sale of MRAP vehicles. Really? BAE Land Systems outsells Denel when it comes to MRAPS. Besides the Casspir, Denel itself doesnt actually produce a lot of them. Which is why Denel bought BAE Land Systems this year to increase that capability.

So where did the 2014 revenue come from? Turrets to Malaysia, Mokopa to Algeria, maintenaince and repair by Denel Aviation, etc etc etc. So get into your imaginary MRAP and drive off into the sunset.

Henry120:


When a Nigerian enters into any business line, sooner we begin to dominate that business. Watch out for our companies, we've already started exporting.

..... And eh.... Would you stop as$-licking Frum's as$ in the photo-sharing thread, it's becoming quite embarrassing.

A$$ licking? Hahaha the only ones licking each others a$$es is you and agugubugu. And honestly do you think Nigeria will have a company in the top 100 in 35 years? The answer is NO!

It took us years and years to get there(Longer than 35 years) and you honestly think a Nigerian company is just going to catapult into the top 100 when your still struggling to make decent mraps?

ssaengine:


Sometimes it's better to find a quiet spot to go and get jealous alone, then come back to the group confident, pretending as if you dont care. Otherwise you end up looking pathetic.

If you had read the article it says the list is based on 2014 revenue. You now desperately stumble with an answer claiming it's because of the sale of MRAP vehicles. Really? BAE Land Systems outsells Denel when it comes to MRAPS. Besides the Casspir, Denel itself doesnt actually produce a lot of them. Which is why Denel bought BAE Land Systems this year to increase that capability.

So where did the 2014 revenue come from? Turrets to Malaysia, Mokopa to Algeria, maintenaince and repair by Denel Aviation, etc etc etc. So get into your imaginary MRAP and drive off into the sunset.

When you post comments, i just can't help but feel that you are a girl. The pettiness in your comments are always very apparent.

The fact is, the South-African defence industry depends primarily on the sale of MRAP vehicles, and they constitute over 85% of all total revenue generated by said defence industry in each fiscal year. I mean, these are indisputable facts.

Now carry on selling your MRAPs, everyone makes and sells those these days anyway.