agaugust:


How will SA use tactical data link against Egypt in the first place....or any other place for that matter?

Patchesagain:



Your BRT is:

- Not as well armored
- Has inferior situational awareness
- Has an inferior gun
- Has no Hunter-Killer capabilities
- Has no protection against COIN and 4G threats
- Is not data-link compliant
- Has no fire-support variant
- Has no APC variant
- Has no ambulance variant
- Has no Tank-Hunter Variant
- Has no Command Variant

agaugust:


Citation needed, we need proof, post proof of your claim.

FighterPilot:


HN-900 data link is just only a copy of LINK 11. It is not a preferable choice.

Patchesagain:



Protection - badger with add on armor has the same protection, and has withstood MULTIPLE RPG hits. Unlike your BTR it has protection against IEDs/Mines

Patchesagain:


Mobility - Badger can be amphibious

Patchesagain:


Armament - Badger IFV has a superior 30mm (most advanced in the world).

agaugust:


I spent a while week proving that to Andrewza with NAF photos and weblinks, he was humbled at the end. I wont waste my time repeating old stories, you deny the truth beause it hurts your Southie ego as your country has NOTHING compared to NAF ISTAR aircraft which will now be joined by JF-17 Thunder 4th Gen multi-role jet fighter....likely NAF is getting BVR missiles and Anti-Ship missiles...watch NAF grow lion's teeth !
.

Patchesagain:


We ordered 236 in our first haul...

Patchesagain:


Your BRT's dont have ATGM's they have AGL's instead

Patchesagain:


1. We rejected it because we dont need it or use it in that configuration - see, we (unlike you) have a doctrine, that means we can rely on role-specific units

2. No:

BTR4 is only protected against small arms and shell splinters in standard form:

A baseline version of the BTR-4 provides all-round protection against 7.62-mm ball rounds and artillery shell splinters.
http://www.military-today.com/apc/btr_4.htm

The vehicle, in its standard form, can provide protection against small arms fire and mine blasts.
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/btr-4-armoured-personnel-carrier/

Badger is protected against 30mm on the frontal arc in its BASELINE format:

AMV offers the best ballistic protection level in its class, providing front sector protection against APFSDS rounds up to 30 mm and excellent defence against IEDs, EFPs as well as TNT mines of up to 10 kg.
http://patria.fi/en/products-and-services/armoured-wheeled-vehicles/patria-amv-armoured-modular-vehicle-product-family

So, in baseline format - Badger is better protected.

3. No, according to the manufacturer this is untrue.

Patchesagain:


Licence built copies.

Show us 100% Egyptian missiles!!

Patchesagain:


wow
3 jets
So impressive
*clap*

agaugust:

....and you got ONLY 5 Badgers in 18 years...clap for SANDF

jln115:

Here.is my contarary source..... Or did you struggle to read it the first time?

http://www.military-today.com/apc/badger.htm

Henry240:


No Evidence = No Bueno


Finish Patriah AMV =/= Badger..... Remember


Badger IFV can only provide protection against 7.62 all sources prove this. If you have a contrary source on the Badger, provide it.

jln115:
Hahaha what ever bro, keep.believing your beegeagle blog!!

jln115:

Read up my retaarded little friend:

http://www.military-today.com/apc/badger.htm

the Badger, also packs a formidable punch and is better protected than most current APCs

The Finnish Patria AMV is one of the most protected APCs that are currently available. Also it offers great protection against landmines. With add-on armor fitted front arc withstands hits from 30-mm armor-piercing rounds. Interior is fitted with spall liners. Two uparmored Polish Army vehicles were hit in Afghanistan by RPG-7 rockets, however armor was not penetrated and vehicles managed to return to base. Vehicle also has a top-class mine protection. It has integral protection in its belly, rather than using a V-hull, as with most mine-protected vehicles. It withstands blasts equivalent to up to 10 kg of TNT under any wheel or anywhere under the hull. Protection of the Badger is likely to be similar.

mzilakazi:


Egypt import ecerything and they rely on the outside world for tech. They even came to South Africa yo ask us to train their technicians, Engineers and technologists.

agaugust:


I spent a while week proving that to Andrewza with NAF photos and weblinks, he was humbled at the end. I wont waste my time repeating old stories, you deny the truth beause it hurts your Southie ego as your country has NOTHING compared to NAF ISTAR aircraft which will now be joined by JF-17 Thunder 4th Gen multi-role jet fighter....likely NAF is getting BVR missiles and Anti-Ship missiles...watch NAF grow lion's teeth !
.

mzilakazi:



Only with itself and not with other platforms.

Patchesagain:


1. Junk Fighter 17 is inferior in every single way

2. Only 3 jets ordered

3. SAAF currently has 14 Grip pilots - no proof that they are not qualified. With 10 more completeing advanced fighter training in Russia, meaning that when they complete their training, and the 4 other pilots retire... we will have 19 Gripen Pilots.

4. Citations needed that you have all your jets operational and pilots qualified.

agaugust:


It took South Africa few years to build nuclear weapons because white men were in control

It took South Africa 20 years to build a simple data link software because black Zulu-Bantu dullards were in control
.

Patchesagain:


So the Freccia is obsolete?
So the Piranha V is obsolete?
So the Kodiak is obsolete?
So the Terrex is obsolete?
So the Boxer is obsolete?
So the Stryker is obsolete?
So the Pandur II is obsolete?
So the AV8 is obsolete?
So the VCBI is obsolete?
So the Ajax is obsolete?
So the CV90 is obsolete?
So the Puma is obsolete?
So the K21 is obsolete?

Notice a trend here?

Henry240:


1 - the JF-17 block II which we are getting is more superior to your Gripen C/D


2 - 3 jets of a required minimum of 25-40 jets ordered.


3- it sure won't take us 18 years to train 9 un-qualified pilots.

jln115:
Jf17 is 3rd Gen according to the manufacture!

FighterPilot:


Badger with anti-tank missile turrets....

agaugust:


It took South Africa few years to build nuclear weapons because white men were in control

It took South Africa 20 years to build a simple data link software because black Zulu-Bantu dullards were in control
.

FighterPilot:
Badger with mortar.

agaugust:


BTR-4 has all those options available. http://tanknutdave.com/the-ukrainian-btr-4-apc-family/

Nigeria ordered 10 BTR-4 in initial batch, we have not taken delivery of all. Need to wait and see,

SANDF too does not have all those Badger variants in service yet. You are too broke to buy more than the 5 units that you have for now
.

FighterPilot:


Whatever is called junk fighter shall remain inferior before GRIPEN Jet. Junk Fighter was made as a low cost junk to meet the pockets of poor countries.

GRIPEN JAS 39 IS 4.5 GENERATION IN THE SAME CLASS WITH RAFALE.

agaugust:


Same way BTR-4 with add on armour can withstand PG hits http://tanknutdave.com/the-ukrainian-btr-4-apc-family/

IFVs are not supposed to be MRAPs with full land mine protection, but still BTR-4 has protection against anti-personnel mines, the extra under chassis protection can be added on as you did for Badger. You dont have monopoly of add on armour, others too do it.

IFV job is combat, transport with firepower NOT anti-IED job of MRAPs. Your doctrine is warped.