₦airaland Forum

Algerian1:
They have air refueling capacity , they can use Sudan bases or libyan skies and nigeria neighbours skies are no mans land ( cameroun , south tchad , center africa , niger ) no good radars capacity , no air defense , no jets to stop them , they can refuel in many close skies to nigeria , no one will see them ( maybe only french radars in this countries ) , with their AWACS they can get a safe control of the skies temporarily . and refuel over cameroun or south niger or republic center africa

Egyptian air force with their Rafale, F16 , AWACS , can strike easily in 48h all your major air foce bases , all your navy bases destroy all your Navy and for economy if they strike oil gas fields and facilities , here Nigeria will have a big problem not only to sustain a war but to maintain its economy .

Of course if this unlikely scenario happens it would only be limited to aerial strikes, with air superiority for Egypt , given the distance no ground attack is possible without hudge loses



thats why I find it strange that a big country like nigeria has no modern Air defense capacity ,

What tankers? Egypt trains with USA tankers and does not have any of there own. So yeah you still need a base close to Nigeria other wise you wl be forced to fly at a altuided to conserve fuel and that means high, aka lots of warning. Sorry Egypt ain't going to hit every Nigerian base in one day. Just because Israel pulled it off on them does not mean they can replicate it over 3000km away. Best chance is a few air raids. But Egypt won't knock NAF out with out at least o E of Nigeria's neibours giving you access to there air bases.


Why does Nigeria need a modern air defence system. You just mentioned all the countries you would over fly In this attack and pointed out they don't have much air force.

ActivateKruger:
You're obviously kidding...


In 2 weeks, Egypt would build-up battalions in a neighbouring country they would want to attack. They can instantly drop 2 battalions by sea with heavy armour and AHs. Then followed by a dozen battalions by air days later.... So when would Nigeria buy weapons? Also keep in mind Nigeria is a divided country, they have more conflicts than the Boko Haram's insurgency so an invading army would have to side with any of the separatists who'll take joy in the fall of Abuja in hope of some sovereignty after the invasion.

Almost same with South Africa, if they could manage to sneak in a SAM system overnight to a neighbouring country then our chances of a preemptive strike would be reduced, then we would heavily really on the SF to try to search and destroy the SAM system. If we fail, we would watch them build a massive military at our doorstep... All they'll need to do is to endure 26 Gripens then the sky is theirs.

This very thing was brought up before only it was Nigeria VS South Africa. I will point out the flaws once again.


Yes Egypt in theroy could deploy the force but it will not be able to sustain it. Amutuers plan stray experts plan logistcs

barineh:
You clearly have no clue that wars are not won by Assets. They're won by money. Can Egypt's economy sustain a war against Africa's two biggest Economies? Egypt survives because of the large aid it receives.

I doubt there economy could sustain a long war nor could there people. They have a lot of internal problems and a prolonged war would really weaken them. The size of Nigeria's population alone means that Egypt can't win. It could at best not loose. A short war is there only hope. Get it blow stuff up and get out and claim victory.

ssaengine:
You clearly have no clue as to the scale of Egypt's military. South Africa and Nigeria's assets combined would be swallowed up by them.

On paper the suadi Arabian countries should crush Yemen they even have friends like UAE. But they Arab armies so more money than Brian.

barineh:
Superior power? It's impossible for Egypt to gain air superiority over Nigeria in 48 hours. Won't those jets refuel. what about bases for it. Cameroon and Chad combine does not have the assets to maintain enough aircraft to gain air superiority over Nigeria. Remember Invading Nigeria means every west African Nation would go to war with you

Air supremacy is a position in war where a side holds complete control of air warfare and air power over opposing forces. It is defined by NATO and the United States Department of Defense as the "degree of air superiority wherein the opposing air force is incapable of effective interference."[1][2][3]



Air superiority is the second level, where a side is in a more favorable position than the opponent. It is defined in the NATO glossary as the "degree of dominance in [an] air battle ... that permits the conduct of operations by [one side] and its related land, sea and air forces at a given time and place without prohibitive interference by opposing air forces."[2]



This is from Wikipedia but it gets the point across. Egypt does not need to have hundreds of air craft over Nigeria 24/7. They just need to ensure that NAF can not intervien or interfere with operation by there milltary with your air force. That they could easily achieve. All this does not take in to account they can attack your runways with little to no risk. Of course this requires use of a freindly air basses close to Nigeria.

61mech:
It looked cool and I thought the Israelis couldn't possibly f@(k up a rifle.
Never handled a worse gun in my life.

I find most things that look cool only look cool.

kikuyu1:
Btw,you Saffers are wayyyy to casual with your gun security! I know for many of you gun ownership is civic responsibility but secure your guns,goddammit! You leave your Glocks,Brownings and Ceskas forgotten on sofas,glove compartments and drawers. You have the same attitude with shotties and rifles.
Here in Kenya you lose your ishyt to a dude like this and you may be jailed for carelessness;at the very least blacklisted from gun ownership.

if those a live shot gun rounds that safe is in violating of the law. all so

jakeporeshenko:
Why are Rooivalk helicopters deployed to DRC? Do M23 revels possess any form of armor or AA?

At least we know BHTs field haven’t any aircraft guns, why are sophisticated attack helos being used by SAAF to chase hoodlums and ragamuffins in DRC.

What do we have. transport helicopters and a rooivalk.

frumentius:
No pissing contest please. Let's stick to the merits of the issue.

wasbnot a pissing contest. just pointing out Nigeria does not a new attack helicopter. they have Mi24s and they would be better of with more actually helicopters and you can buy a light gazzel for far less than a Mi28 or Rooivalk. I have all ways wanted SAAF to look in to converting the A109 in to a light attack helicopter. In a COIN and Peace keeping/enforcement they could do a lot of missions the rooivalk currently do like recon, convoy escort, escorting transports extra extra leaving the high end stuff for the dangerous missions

frumentius:
So, I read something today on Beegeagle's Blog which to be charitable, I can only describe as an ignoramus' regurgitation of Turkish/Mangusta propaganda.
1) The Rooivalk does not cost $40m per unit: that figure was derived from some malcontents in Turkey taking the development cost and dividing it by number of units produced - hopefully we shall all shun such pronuoncements here now this innumeracy has been explained;

2)More egregious: "Rooivalk is a costly and finicky bird to maintain and support out in the field!!!"
This evidence-free lie really riles me: SAAF 16 Squadron has 10 helicopters in Bloemfontein (2 at TFDC- 1 for ongoing tests, and 1 damaged and on long-term storage) of which 3 are permanently in the DRC. Readiness Ratio (RR) is around 70-80% (global peacetime for AH is 65%), which translates to 4 Rooivalks ready and available locally to rotate. Which we do every 6 months to the DRC, for aircrafts, flight crew and technicians.

Every 6-month rotation, we deploy 15 ground technicians, 3 Rooivalke, and (6- 10: OPSEC) flight crew.
15 technicians for 3 Attack helicopters in a spartan 3rd world environment!!! And our AH is finicky!!! Never mind it was built for such and I've yet to peruse contradictory records?

3 Ukrainian Hinds have 45 ground technicians.
Even with those numbers they struggle to meet the UN Field Deployment RR of 90% availabality for air assets.

3 German Tiger in Mali require 60 ground technicians.

3 Dutch Apache in Mali had 90!

And some idiot says the Rooivalk - an AH developed specifically for African conditions, is finicky, costly and high-maintainance.
Evidence to the contrary will be most welcome.

Most South African gear even the gear we import are meant to be easy to maintain in terms of cost, man power and resources. Though the rooivalk is high maintaince if compared to say a gazelle with gun pods on the side. I mean does Nigeria even need a a attack helicopter. BH has no real Armour and no real Anti Air. More light armed recon helicopters would do them better. And the gazelle, A10, lynx, extra can carry rocket pods, gun pods and passengers. Cheap to run and if Nigeria has a real war you can all ways carry Hot 2 ATGMs on a gazelle, ingwen ATGMs on a A10, extra and there are the few mi24s all ready in serves

frumentius:
Personally, I think there's a place for both 5.56 and 7.62 rounds.
The 5.56 for FIBUA, to minimise civilian collateral damage; and 7.62 out in the bush.
Incidentally, been thinking about a replacement for the R-series (cos we'll have to replace it at some point):
1) Most logical is a licence-produced Galil ACE in both 5.56 and 7.62 NATO - out obviously because politics;
2) And I keep circling back to the CZ Bren 2, in both 5.56 and 7.62 NATO.

Licence-produced of course, and achieving economies of scale through equipping both SANDF and SAPS.

why dont we just go 6.5mm with a galil frame. reduce the time needed to train on a new rifle, with 6.5mm we get some thing close to 7.6mm, but with far better velocity and energy at long range. meaning better penetration at long range. Any case with new body armour that russia and and the west are making we need a round that can punch through a lot of protection, 6.5mm could do the job. As for cost, we all ready make all our own ammo so it will only be a high cost at start but 6,5mm could become popular

patches689:
Pic above has gotten me thinking, why hasnt the SANDF transitioned to a carbine like the R5?

The shorter barrel doesnt effect it much because you only drop from 3,215 ft/s to 3,018.4 ft/s.

Remember the m4 comes in at 2,970 ft/s the brit SA80A2 comes in at 3,084 ft/s and the new froggie AR clone (the HK416F) gets a paltry 2585.3 ft/s.

muzzle velocity is higher with full length rifle

ArtanK:
I don't understand why Africans still buy these outdated pieces of scrap. They're really inaccurate and hella cheap for a reason..

BM21 still gets the job done and for what it is usex for accuracy is not nearly as critcal as one thinks

Xbee007:
No matter how we try to put it, the fact simply is no soldier should allow any form of rust on his weapon. Moreover, there could be rust not just outside the gun but inside too. It is any soldier worst nightmare for his/her gun to break down in the heat of battle.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kU0XCVey_U

I am not to worried about surface rust on the barrel but when i saw the full weapon it is scary. That thing could jam or worse have a catastrophic malfunction.

Henry240:
Instead of going round in circles, let us agree to disagree.

Sorry that gun is rusted baddly. The gun crew is not doing there job.

61mech:
"We have a situation where there is a gradual erosion of the cathodic material used in preserving the gun"
What on gods green earth are you talking about ?
I work in the marine industry. Cathodes are used UNDER the waterline as sacrificial material for corrosion. Doesn't work in air.

Old doesnt mean anything if a gun is well looked after. That's a CIS50 from Singapore produced in the late 80's. We still used 12.7 and 1919 browning receivers from WW2 in the SADF ! We used Vickers guns on the range at times. Those guns made it through WW2 and we still had them in inventory in the 90's. They looked like museum pieces, because they were looked after meticulously for decades.

Have another look at the pic. Look closely at the ammo bin holder on the mount. It actually has pitting in the metal. They tried to cover it up with paint. The only time I've ever seen a MG look like that it came from a cash that was buried in mud for God knows how long.

I still don't understand your argument about the salt air. How is that preventing him from cleaning it ? That boat doesn't enough carry fuel to patrol out for days.
As for the barrel, I suspect that they only remove it for cleaning as it's easier to do. That's why it looks in better shape than the receiver. Barrels are also made from different blends of steel, for obvious reasons, that makes them last longer.

I can only speak for the SADF/SANDF,but I would get brought up on orders if I or anyone I commanded returned a weapon in that state. Zero excuses.
No different than anyone who damages expensive equipment because of negligence.

Anyone who's served in any military would tell you that the state of a units gear is a good indicator of its leadership,training and morale. No matter how old it is. Hell I could tell you if a Bn. has its sh!t squared away by looking at the state of the guard gate.

Yeah that weapon is needs returen to the work shop.



What i dont know is why they do t use the browning 12.7. That weapon never fails, i mean it one of the most dependable weapons out there.


But i still think it is a ship issue not a fleet issue.


I all so think they dont keep the guns coverd when not useing them. That would explain the rust.

Henry240:
It is not even a boat issue, it is one gun, which is old and has no evidence of rust. I have provided enough evidence to support my argument that what we see isn't rust.

I stand by my argument until there is evidence to the contrary.

Look at the barrel of this gun. We have a situation where there is a gradual erosion of the cathodic material used in preserving the gun. That's all there is to it.

Looks like surface rust. But i would say that gun can fire. As long as the rust is just surface rust. As i said i have seen worse.

61mech:
For some reason you seem to think I'm trying to insult the Nigerian Navy. I'm not.
A am concerned about the guy and his boat crew. I'm a fellow African x-soldier and I don't want to see that guy get killed protecting his country , because he wasn't given the tools or the training to do his job properly.

That weapon is NOT going to function properly. If it looks like that from the outside the inside WILL be worse. I've inspected hundreds of machine guns and cannons and I can tell you a weapon should never get to that state even in the worst of circumstances. If you don't believe me ask any of the vets in this forum or anywhere else for that matter.

That's a CIS 50MG heavy machine gun it's not a AK. It has a complex dual feed system and any heavy MG needs to be tuned just right to work without having to re-cock it every 3 rounds. If his crew gets ambushed on a river and it doesn't function they are dead. River ambushes are no joke.

HMG's are designed to be field maintainable. Being out on a long patrol is no excuse. Rust does not appear overnight. All you need is a drum and some diesel to get the worst out of it. Then it's just a question of routine lubing.

It will neex to be replaced and sent to the worshops. But ships can rust fast. I mean hell they could of run out of needed supplies to maintain them. But iam not to worried about training and leader ship over 1 boat. If it was a common sight it would be a issue. But one just means either that boat has a issue or its crew not tge fleet.

kenpaul0:
That's not an excuse Henry. Someone didn't do his job here and that someone's CO also didn't do his job.

Boats on operastion accumulate rust fast. I am not making a big deal about it since i have seen worse from 1st world countries.

ActivateKruger:
https://thaimilitaryandasianregion./2015/11/26/valour-class-frigate-south-african-navy/comment-page-1/

Don't comment any further, I'm pulling an Augububu here

They menation it has those tubes not that was san frigats tubes

ActivateKruger:
The SAN firing a torpedo.

mmmmm dont think so. That not a valour class.

newafricaken254:
correct, thats a kenya army british L7A2 7.62x61mm belt-fed general purpose machine gun gpmg, which is a license produced Belgian FN MAG.its mounted on a tripod,the buttstock is removed and also has a C2 optical sight .its used in the SF (Sustained Fire)

So it is a FNmag.

kikuyu2:
My own info is that he's more of a bogeyman to justify M7 regional depradations. Kony might not even exist;if he does like Shekau he has several avatars proving his role as actor for proxy forces.

He is real. But the LRA is not a threat any more. Just common bandits these days.

ActivateKruger:
Frumentius, ssaengine, MikeCZA, Patches.. Does anyone know anything about this unit on black Ford Focus ST's. I have been pulled off twice already for searches, they seem to be traffic control related.

Could be ghost squad

patches689:
The M2A3 and above are fantastic war-fighters,

Killed more tanks than any other... infact, it killed more tanks than the Abrams did in the Gulfwar

And it not the JOB of a IFV. What you have with a bradly is something that is trying to be a Anti Tank vehicle, recon vechile and IFV. it may be a good Tank hunter and recon vic but it not a good IFV. I would take a CVR90 over a Bradly any time. All so I would not trust what wikpedia says. It claimed 30mm all round protection was disproven in combat when Russian HMGs pened them and BMP1. I am not say it a bad just not that good. There are far better IFVs out there.



rember the job of a IFV is not to kill tanks, it to transport the infantry to the front, provide local fire support and that's it.

lionel4power:
Don't make the mistake of CONFUSING field recon/Scout with HUMINT. Totally different.

scouts are human and gather intelligence

humint
/ˈh(j)uːmɪnt/
noun
noun: Humint; noun: humint
covert intelligence-gathering by agents or others.

patches689:
Origional as planned for the project

It was heavily modified after live-fire real-world conditions test during the development process.

Bradly is a fine peice of equipment

all the short comings where known but recommendations where ignored. Those modification could of been implement from the start


All so the Bradly as a IFV is not that good

Fidha254:
Ha! Too funny!!!!!
I usually download videos and watch them later... I watched it this morning..I have never laughed so hard ! By the time I was done watching I had caught a flu my eyes teary and my head just behind my ears felt like was about to pop (does that happen to everyone when you laugh constantly for long or is it just me?) from too much laughter...
Is this like an old tv show ? I would like to get the rest of it.. OMG!

it is from a move that is based on a book. In short the Bradley is crap at it's job.

lionel4power:
Noticed that the general said and i quote 'you don't need scout you have radars, air-recons and satelites... Nobody does scout anymore'. Well i think its based on personal requirement. To me i think the role of south has been made obsolete?? patches689:

Scouts sre very much needed. It been a long issue that US intelligence lacks the needed humint element. Radar and satlits cant for example tell you what the state of moral the enemy is in, what there discipline, extra extra.

MikeCZA:
How has the VBCI IFV performed in Mali? A vehicle similar to the Badger.

there older shit was easier to maintain like one can expect but in terms of performance the VBCI did ok. There was only 36 of them though


http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR700/RR770/RAND_RR770.pdf

Hrmnn:
Ratel ZT3.

While I always liked the Ingwe missile, its usefulness (like all ATGMs) is limited when fighting in thick bush.

In Angola, for instance the Ratel ZT3s were only able to engage the Angolan T-55s when they briefly came out into the open on a flat flood plain. They would've destroyed a hell of a lot more tanks than those initial three otherwise.

The inefficiency of long range ATGMs in this terrain, as well as the relatively close quarters of engagement, mean that RPG type weapons or direct fire from cannon are practically the only way for ground forces to kill tanks in the particular environment type.

Lots of places in south Africa and nambia, Botswana and Zimbabwe where they could be used properly