agaugust:


Nope, it's because as a military researcher who knows 1,000 times more than you do, I knew from day one that a jet with fly-by-wire is 4th Gen, and I told you many times over and over again, buy since you were born m.entally backward, you CANNOT think independently beyond a questionable website comment that you should have queried.

Foolish boy with transplanted Zulu medula oblongata.

Why don't read my original post on this matter retaard!!
I also said I thought fly by wire ment its 4th gen...but PAC obviously thinks otherwise.

agaugust:


Guess why intelligent Nigerians refused to agree with Janes while you South African dullards did agree?

Nigerians think independently, South Africans are enslaved in their thinking, they swallow everything they see written, you cannot query things.

Nope...unlike you, we take the manufacturers specifications, above some Nigerians retaarded opinion.

jln115:


I also said I thought fly by wire ment its 4th gen...but PAC obviously thinks otherwise.

You NEVER said that you liar, you just kept saying it's 3rd gen and even claimed it was according to me and PAC....you have been provd to be unable to think independently without external help 24/7. Dullaard.

jln115:

Nope...unlike you, we take the manufacturers specifications, above some Nigerians retaarded opinion.

Nope....unlike you, we Nigerians are intelligent enough to CHALLENGE any manufacturer in this world, we think independently. If the manufacturer says something contrary to world accepted facts, we challenge it, buy you South Africans lack the intelligence to do that, you can be fed stomach full with sand and gravel, you will still say thank you for the meal.

AugustineAgain:


It's available in South Africa, I have read it online. Link ZA is 80% a failure.

jln115:

Post the report bro!!

Patchesagain:


So then provide a citation to substantiate your claims

[size=14pt]

"Delivery of SDPP’s started in 2005 with frigates and submarines and was followed by LIFT aircraft in 2006, maritime helicopters in 2007 and fighter aircraft in 2009. The impression by many was that Link-ZA compliance by SDPP acquisition projects would imply message exchange inter-operability between all these platforms.

Disappointingly it was found that most platforms could only exchange information between similar type platforms ."

http://www.argospress.com/jbt/article_abstracts/14-3-2-abstract.pdf

SANDF Link ZA is an 80% failure, army, navy, air force CANNOT communicate with each other !

Even Gripen CANNOT communicate with Hawk, it can only use the data link Gripen to Gripen.

SAAF cannot use the FAKE tactical data link to send messages to SANDF artillery !

Link ZA ia a failure, South Africa DOES NOT have a functioning fully integrated Tactical Data Link !
.[/size]

AugustineAgain:







[size=14pt]

"Delivery of SDPP’s started in 2005 with frigates and submarines and was followed by LIFT aircraft in 2006, maritime helicopters in 2007 and fighter aircraft in 2009. The impression by many was that Link-ZA compliance by SDPP acquisition projects would imply message exchange inter-operability between all these platforms.

Disappointingly it was found that most platforms could only exchange information between similar type platforms ."

http://www.argospress.com/jbt/article_abstracts/14-3-2-abstract.pdf

SANDF Link ZA is an 80% failure, army, navy, air force CANNOT communicate with each other !

Even Gripen CANNOT communicate with Hawk, it can only use the data link Gripen to Gripen.

SAAF cannot use the FAKE tactical data link to send messages to SANDF artillery !

Link ZA ia a failure, South Africa DOES NOT have a functioning fully integrated Tactical Data Link !
.[/size]

Outdated!!! Considering my 2012 source was also outdated according to you!!

Anyway, if you read the source, you would've noticed that the author was talking about the problems regarding LinkZA in 2005-2008!!
It was still in development phase back then.

It 7 years later and linkza is fully operational, and fully interoperable between all platforms in the SANDF!! Also linkZA standard only stabilized at the end of 2009 so it make sense if they still had glitches before then.

Also it says nothing about it being an 80% failure!!

AugustineAgain:


You NEVER said that you liar, you just kept saying it's 3rd gen and even claimed it was according to me and PAC....you have been provd to be unable to think independently without external help 24/7. Dullaard.

Go read my original post on the other thread retaad!!

AugustineAgain:


Nope....unlike you, we Nigerians are intelligent enough to CHALLENGE any manufacturer in this world, we think independently. If the manufacturer says something contrary to world accepted facts, we challenge it, buy you South Africans lack the intelligence to do that, you can be fed stomach full with sand and gravel, you will still say thank you for the meal.

Hahaha challenge the manufacturer??...so you think you know more about the product than the people who actually built it?? Hahahah!!!

agaugust:


I won't because you South Africans are VERY BIG LIARS and full of ENVY of whatever good thing Nigeria does or gets
.

Nope, you are wrong

AugustineAgain:







[size=14pt]

"Delivery of SDPP’s started in 2005 with frigates and submarines and was followed by LIFT aircraft in 2006, maritime helicopters in 2007 and fighter aircraft in 2009. The impression by many was that Link-ZA compliance by SDPP acquisition projects would imply message exchange inter-operability between all these platforms.

Disappointingly it was found that most platforms could only exchange information between similar type platforms ."

http://www.argospress.com/jbt/article_abstracts/14-3-2-abstract.pdf

SANDF Link ZA is an 80% failure, army, navy, air force CANNOT communicate with each other !

Even Gripen CANNOT communicate with Hawk, it can only use the data link Gripen to Gripen.

SAAF cannot use the FAKE tactical data link to send messages to SANDF artillery !

Link ZA ia a failure, South Africa DOES NOT have a functioning fully integrated Tactical Data Link !
.[/size]

You are 80% failure yourself. You come with a 2011 source, a year after LINK ZA was launched. The system was only still being introduced ZA has been effectively used in lohatlha during exercises and has been a success. It communicates with all systems and IT IS A SUCCESS.

REUTECH IN 2016 SAYS YOU ARE A LIER. THE SYTEM COMMUNICATES WITH ALL PLATFORMS.

http://www.reutechcomms.com/linkza/

LASTLY, NIGERIA DOES NOT HAVE A TDL,.SO WE ARE TECHNOLOGICALLY SUPERIOR THAN YOU.

Henry240:


Sure, a 3rd gen aeroplane with better characteristics than the Gripen C/D.

Tell yourself whatever you need to

Henry240:



Brig Mulaudzi confirmed that the two were not members of
the SSA

www.african-defense.com/defense-news-2/south-africa-makes-arrests-in-state-security-agency-theft/



South-African DSS equivalent dis-armed by 2 club wielding burglars!!


Buhahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha...... Incompetent morons

Again not the DSS equivalent

Again no one was disarmed

Henry240:


So is that why your "highly" trained agents were disarmed by 2 club wielding petty criminals?



Don't be angry with..... Channel your anger to your incompetent agents who let themselves get disarmed by petty hoodlums.

Henry120

Do you really derive joy from a fallacious argument?

It was a theft not a robbery

agaugust:


JF-17 on par with American F-16 C/D....Awesome Thunder !
.

Even Henry admits it's only on par with the block 40 version from the 1980s

agaugust:


Guess why intelligent Nigerians refused to agree with Janes while you South African dullards did agree?

Nigerians think independently, South Africans are enslaved in their thinking, they swallow everything they see written, you cannot query things.

Yes, you are correct

South Africans rely on facts

Nigerians rely on guess work

agaugust:


4.5 Gen fighters do NOT use 20 year old obsolescent Pulse Doppler radar, you fool ! Gripen C is simple 4th Gen, no + or .5 to add. Olodo.

Radar is not the only relevant thing

Stop cherry picking

agaugust:


Nope, it's because as a military researcher who knows 1,000 times more than you do, I knew from day one that a jet with fly-by-wire is 4th Gen, and I told you many times over and over again, buy since you were born m.entally backward, you CANNOT think independently beyond a questionable website comment that you should have queried.

Foolish boy with transplanted Zulu medula oblongata.

Prove you are what you claim to be

AugustineAgain:


Nope....unlike you, we Nigerians are intelligent enough to CHALLENGE any manufacturer in this world, we think independently. If the manufacturer says something contrary to world accepted facts, we challenge it, buy you South Africans lack the intelligence to do that, you can be fed stomach full with sand and gravel, you will still say thank you for the meal.

So you know more thaan the manufacturer?

AugustineAgain:







[size=14pt]

"Delivery of SDPP’s started in 2005 with frigates and submarines and was followed by LIFT aircraft in 2006, maritime helicopters in 2007 and fighter aircraft in 2009. The impression by many was that Link-ZA compliance by SDPP acquisition projects would imply message exchange inter-operability between all these platforms.

Disappointingly it was found that most platforms could only exchange information between similar type platforms ."

http://www.argospress.com/jbt/article_abstracts/14-3-2-abstract.pdf

SANDF Link ZA is an 80% failure, army, navy, air force CANNOT communicate with each other !

Even Gripen CANNOT communicate with Hawk, it can only use the data link Gripen to Gripen.

SAAF cannot use the FAKE tactical data link to send messages to SANDF artillery !

Link ZA ia a failure, South Africa DOES NOT have a functioning fully integrated Tactical Data Link !
.[/size]

Are you being serious??

Patchesagain:

Tell yourself whatever you need to

Sure..... Like the facts.

Patchesagain:


Again not the DSS equivalent
Again no one was disarmed

-They are consistently referred to as Agents, just like the DSS.

- Can you prove your inept agents weren't disarmed?

Patchesagain:


Henry120

Do you really derive joy from a fallacious argument?

It was a theft not a robbery

Not according to Brig Mulaudzi..... Or are you saying Brig Mulaudzi is lying while you are telling the truth?


Your intelligence agency was robbed by 2 burglars. This is a fact.

Patchesagain:


Even Henry admits it's only on par with the block 40 version from the 1980s

Why are you telling lies against my person.


I said they are better than F-16 block 40s, only F-16 Block 50s are better than the JF-17.

Henry240:


Not according to Brig Mulaudzi..... Or are you saying Brig Mulaudzi is lying while you are telling the truth?


Your intelligence agency was robbed by 2 burglars. This is a fact.

What did Brig Mulaudzi said then? He said the man will be charged with theft not robbery dummy. You are worse than a fool.

We live in SA and we are saying the office that was broken into is not a secret agents or Intelligence offices. It was just an admin staff offices who are doing administration for SA secret service and National Intelligence Agency.

Henry240:
"Do these agents look like the sort of men you can disarm?".... Infinitely impossible!

You're confused. We are talking about two different things. We are talking about civilians who do not carry guns. We are as well talking about theft while the journalists have completely dribbled you and make you believe it was a robbery.

Henry240:


Sure..... Like the facts.

Provide them then

Henry240:


-They are consistently referred to as Agents, just like the DSS.


- Can you prove your inept agents weren't disarmed?

- SARS employees are also referred to as agents

- Can you prove they were?

Henry240:


Not according to Brig Mulaudzi..... Or are you saying Brig Mulaudzi is lying while you are telling the truth?


Your intelligence agency was robbed by 2 burglars. This is a fact.

According to him it was a theft

This means that no violence or intimidation was involved in committing the crime

They aren't our intelligence agency - they are the office the administers them

Again, how you derive joy from this is beyond me

Henry240:


Why are you telling lies against my person.


I said they are better than F-16 block 40s, only F-16 Block 50s are better than the JF-17.

So the F16 Block 50 is better?

That platform model entered service in 1991

Gripen entered service in 1997

So you have just told us that the F16 block 50, which is 25 years old... Is better than the JF-17?

Brilliant

The stuppid henry should educate himself about SSA (State Security Agency) and know that it is a civilian intelligence.

http://www.ssa.gov.za/AboutUs.aspx

jln115:

Outdated!!! Considering my 2012 source was also outdated according to you!!

Anyway, if you read the source, you would've noticed that the author was talking about the problems regarding LinkZA in 2005-2008!!
It was still in development phase back then.

It 7 years later and linkza is fully operational, and fully interoperable between all platforms in the SANDF!! Also linkZA standard only stabilized at the end of 2009 so it make sense if they still had glitches before then.

Also it says nothing about it being an 80% failure!!

The final report clearly says DELIVERY began 2005 after development and testing had been done. Ooerational delivery was done and Soweto tactical data link failed 80%, when it CANNOT do the real job of tactical datalink it is an 80% failure because all existibg platforms COULD NOT communicate with each other.

You Southies have been telling lies to us on Nairaland since year 2010.

mzilakazi:


You are 80% failure yourself. You come with a 2011 source, a year after LINK ZA was launched. The system was only still being introduced ZA has been effectively used in lohatlha during exercises and has been a success. It communicates with all systems and IT IS A SUCCESS.

REUTECH IN 2016 SAYS YOU ARE A LIER. THE SYTEM COMMUNICATES WITH ALL PLATFORMS.

http://www.reutechcomms.com/linkza/

LASTLY, NIGERIA DOES NOT HAVE A TDL,.SO WE ARE TECHNOLOGICALLY SUPERIOR THAN YOU.

That report of 2009 was the FINAL result after fully developing, testing, installing, deploying, and operating the LINK ZA on each type of platform that South Africa has, it was used on Gripen, jet, Hawk jet, Valour Frigate, Type 209 Submarine, Rooivalk Helicopter, G-6 Rhino Artillery, Olifant tank and etc.

The operational result was disappointing, as the tactical data-link ONLY worked on same equipment types, e.g Gripen to Gripen, it failed to work from jet aircraft to warship, helicopter to artillery, even Gripen jet and Hawk jet failed to commumicate as the disappointment was all round A to Z.

Now prove to me with credible source that the failure has changed to success as at today 2016, until you prove it the 2009 technical failure conclusive report remains current and final.

Don't post Reutech website for us here, the website information is not stated to be 2016, it has no date, and Reutech has been using that website even before Link ZA was completed, so it is posting old information, and the website does NOT say Link Za communicates across different types of platforms like aircraft to ship, it only says multiple platforms and that is like Gripen to Gripen only as the final report says while explaining the big disaponitment in operational performance of the failed made in Zulu land tactical data link.

South Africa has NO tactical datalink, what you have is an intranet for Gripen to Gripen, Valour to Valour, Rooivalk to Rooivalk type of communication.

http://www.argospress.com/jbt/article_abstracts/14-3-2-abstract.pdf

Case closed
.

AugustineAgain:


That report of 2009 was the FINAL result after fully developing, testing, installing, deploying, and operating the LINK ZA on each type of platform that South Africa has, it was used on Gripen, jet, Hawk jet, Valour Frigate, Type 209 Submarine, Rooivalk Helicopter, G-6 Rhino Artillery, Olifant tank and etc.

The operational result was disappointing, as the tactical data-link ONLY worked on same equipment types, e.g Gripen to Gripen, it failed to work from jet aircraft to warship, helicopter to artillery, even Gripen jet and Hawk jet failed to commumicate as the disappointment was all round A to Z.

Now prove to me with credible source that the failure has changed to success as at today 2016, until you prove it the 2009 technical failure conclusive report remains current and final.

Don't post Reutech website for us here, the website information is not stated to be 2016, it has no date, and Reutech has been using that website even before Link ZA was completed, so it is posting old information, and the website does NOT say Link Za communicates across different types of platforms like aircraft to ship, it only says multiple platforms and that is like Gripen to Gripen only as the final report says while explaining the big disaponitment in operational performance of the failed made in Zulu land tactical data link.

South Africa has NO tactical datalink, what you have is an intranet for Gripen to Gripen, Valour to Valour, Rooivalk to Rooivalk type of communication.

Case closed
.

No - the report says UPON DELIVERY

And it is not even the full report which is an outline of how integration of the platforms was done

Even in 2010 partial integration had been done:

[color=#006600]The ships can transmit their radar-pictures real-time to the Air Force Command Post in Pretoria or to Gripen fighters tasked with intercepting aircraft intruding into these areas using Link ZA. [/color]
http://www.defenceweb.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=7077&catid=111&Itemid=242

Think before you post