Kabe2: You should at the very least have the decency to quote what I actually said. I said PMB has done better for the military than GEJ/Ya'Ardua. This is what I said.
Like I said previously carry out your own research, I don't need to spoon feed you with sources.
It is right in front of your eyes.
I over extended the parameters of comparison with all past regime. But you have rightly asked for it to be kept as GEJ Vs PMB.
To make that deduction you would have to make value and impact comparison of all military procurement made by both of them.
Unfortunately you do nothing of the sort, but like a typical partisan politician. You birth the proposition and then you attempt to legitimise but with absolutely nothing to make that deduction upon.
I question you and you want me too substantiate it for you. You made the proposition, you should by comparison analysis prove it not me.
I do think, this is not particularly helpful. l know how emotive sentiment drives people here to positions of support and you are going into rancourous politics with this approach.
dragon2: The tucano was built from day one as a military aircraft. The first aircraft was called tucano emb 301 and emb 311. The proposal was to the Brazilian AF. There is a reason millitary weapon systems are expensive....tolerance. For e.g. microprocessors on millitary electronics is completely different from commercial chips. Military components and platforms must be able to tolerate high gforce, large temperature swings,pressures,e.m.p. radiation,impact force/ shock. e.t.c. If you use civilian components or platforms they will fail. You don't do 8g's with a civil class plane. That is why millitary tech is more expensive. Inflated budgets is heavily censured in the U.S. what is possible is expensive un-required weapon systems. The South African Nwari is not cheap at baseline $10M (2011) with no known weapon system attached.
As for drones, Which is cheaper? An expensive 50kg missile that has a small blast radius fired from a drone or a cheap 500lb dumb bomb dropped by an experienced pilot with a tremendous blast radius.
Edit. Don't forget, we make our own rockets now?which is as effective as missiles in blast range,can be used by tucanos but not drones.
The Embraer was built as a military training aircraft, absolutely correct. What's the particular point in that❓
There are so many aircraft, indeed the Alpha Jet was instituted as a trainer. Buy today it's probably out most effective and dependable ground attack asset over the decades. Yet it was essentially a training aircraft at inception.
Comparatively the South African Mwari was purpose built as a fighting light single engined turboprop aircraft. The approach has been modular. You said it has no identifiable weapon systems that's not true. It's stupendously adaptable to so many it has 24 hard points, the A29 has 5.
Remind me why the NAF is spending $600 million package.
We already have aircraft that can drop 500 pound bombs. Albeit not very accurately when you rely entirely on pilot ability it's not precision. It is well documented NAF dropping bombs on friendly and or wrong targets. That's not what you pay $600 million for.
The PC- 21 has been developed as a trainer too. The step to make it a fighter is simply academic and a question of choice.
This is not a conventional war , so dropping huge bombs is not the way to win it. The enemy invert fluid and the terrain is not open.
The rockets we make are not precision guided do you know the effective cast range❓ . They are struggling to exceed 1.5 km. That puts the aircraft delivering such munitions in a position of weakness for AA fire.
You made comparison to the UAV I presume the Wing Loong II, that has a 30 + hour endurance and a ceiling in excess of 30,000 ft. The A 29 has a endurance of 5 hours plus. And it can read a cars number plate from unseen high altitude and drop it's munitions right on the enemy person head. That reduces collateral and means you can be a very patient dog waiting for a big bone to chew.
This war will not be won in the air, it will be won by our fighting men on the ground.
Until ground forces are equipped with up to date communication infrastructure, fit for purpose armoured fighting vehicles in the right numbers. We will still be discussing the issue ad infinitum.
Finally, which would you rather have 50 Wing Loong II UAV with complete 24 hr over watch and 2000 fit for purpose assorted MBT, IFV, APC, MRAP, LAV, tracked and wheeled with a good 15% with RWS in the HERE & NOW. Or 12, A29 turboprop aircraft that will be delivered on or before 2024 projected.
TheGoodJoe: All of them paid 100K. From information I got, many of our local players had sponsors. I heard Kanu Nwankwo even paid for a lot of them. I do not know if it has changed now but in the past, they all paid.
There is no underhandedness. A 16 years old player can fail MRI. It is not out of the norm. It just the ratio of failure is high.
There is no need shooting unfounded claims to try to justify your point. The fact is that, failing MRI does not mean overage. If Abuchi was born in Nigeria, you would have been screaming overage. Now he is not you are screaming corruption.
Highlights your misconstrued ideas.
You are now saying that everyone had to pay 100k plus for MRI scan that was the norm. And that the NFF did not take responsibility for that expense.
My goodness you have now done a complete U TURN. So in otherwords the MRI test lacks credibility.
This is not unfounded, his mother made the complaint and asked the NFF for the test results for which they refused to submit for further inspection.
It's is the conduct of the NFF that indict them. It is that conduct and subsequent actions that underpin my deductions.
But you counter act with hearsay, " l heard Kanu paid for a lot of them" Then you say there is no underhandedness.
NFA corruption is well known and now you are trying to dismiss it all. And even question the validity of the MRI scan. You are trying to justify the unjustifiable.
TheGoodJoe: All these are long stories. Ndidi grew up under the watch of people in the barracks. He was not a man playing with children in the barracks. Whether you like it or not. Ndidi was even smaller than his peers when he was playing. He later grew in height and stature after that, which is a clear evidence of a growing boy.
Just like a 16 years old Maduabuchi Obinwa who was clearly captured at birth in the American medical system, Ndidi failing MRI does not mean overage player.
There are huge differentials between Maduabuchi Obinwa and Ndidi cases .
One was born in the USA and you could say led comparative to Ndid led a very privileged life style that includes better health care, nutrition, etc.
However, we are moving into the Nigerian factor, NFF officials took over 100k naira from his mother to carry out a MRI scan, then they said he failed it but refused to present the test results which his mother paid for to be inspected. The whole episode was surrounded in subterfuge and under handed practices.
That is not a comparison that can be used to make any deduction, rather it exposes the NFA for their underhanded and established corrupt practices.
TheGoodJoe: Isaac Success for a large extent has been frozen off the team for a long period of time. There is a big chance it had to do with his attitude off the field not his talent.
When a coach senses poor attitude, they clamp down on it hard. We saw it clearly with Mancini and Tevez.
Guardiola froze Nasri from an ill thought comment from his girlfriend. Note, not Nasri, his girlfriend and Guardiola clamped down hard on him.
Guardiola froze Yaya Toure out of the City team due to ill comments by his agent, Seluk.
These happened in England. Not Nigeria.
Talent not developed stagnates and then dies.
Without diligence, focus, discipline, drive and determination talent will take you nowhere.
You are being overly positive and diplomatic, call a spade a spade, dude is highly undisciplined.
BascoVanVeli: U take how many days to respond and all u can come up with is this? I name checked Pep and Mourinho for crying out loud. Why are you telling me about UK work settings? Don't those two coach in the UK?
U don't know a single thing about football if u can say that falling outs between coach and players is a normal part of the game. It is a normal part of sports in general. Serena Williams has sacked how many coaches sef.
For u to act like this is something that rarely happens I have to openly question ur motive. When Isaac Success was having problems with his coach u didn't sing this silly tune. Instead u came here and gave us the coach's version of what happened.
You should go back to my comments about Isaac Success and the context which they were made, before jumping to whimsical conclusions.
To quote Ian Fleming; Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action.
Now how many managers have reprimanded him and dismissed him as being far from diligent and ill disciplined, that proves the issue is not with managers but the player. At a stage he was even over weight a professional footballer.
Stop being emotive and allowing sentiment to cloud your reasoning.
This one is an unfounded theory, based on assumptions majorly. Anybody can fail MRI.
That being said, I am not speculating on his age, I am fine with the age he says he is
Consider the bold , what you are doing is changing the parameters of measurement and then dismissing them as no longer credible. I really can not remember but i am sure you have been among the many that commended the use of MRI Scans. Without MRI we would still be sending Uncles to U17 it is not perfect but it has revolutionized our football and curtailed largely blatant age cheating..
MRI Scans can not tell you how old you are they give an age range within certain variables by linking bone fusion. However, what it certainly does is state that you are over 17, that means you could be anything from over 17 to over 25. The MRI scan where bone fusion is concerned has near 100% accuracy, so effectively Ndidi was certainly over 17 how old exactly only he knows.
Some teenagers will have bone fusion complete at 19 a reflection of good nutrition with a high protein diet, as well as good medical care and an environment that enhances well being. Children who are malnourished will experience delayed and stunted growth with bone fusion concurring much later in life even up too 22.
safarigirl: if he pass am, he no go sha reach my own age, so, na still small boy.
If e wan old, na 25
Curious assumption.
Ndidi failed an MRI scan in early 2013, not sure when the scan was done.
If he was 17 then ( which he was not) then he would be 25 now. Essentially he can't be 25 and he is probably a lot older than you depending in what is a lot too you.
At that stage of our football development shaving off 5 years was quite acceptable and routine others shaved off 7+ years. I am sure many here know them.
So you can speculate on his age, does it really matter his excellent performances are not tied to his age.
BascoVanVeli: Pep and Jose are great managers who have had beef with players. So ur theory is hog wash.
First of all l did not present any theory.
Furthermore, l did not indict any individual as bring right or wrong. But rather asking for an open mind on these matters.
It's a managers responsibility to man manage his team. And Managers as well as players can have egos.
But many a time people just disagree and or have different preferences that result in disagreement. That is not neccesarily ego and or insubordination.
For someone who has lived a large part of his life in the USA. You seem to lack understanding and appreciation of the socail dynamics, mannerism and etiquette that surrounds interrelationships in these settings in the West.
This sometimes creates big problems in my understanding and experience in the NFA and our Nigerian orientated managers.
I know of one Nigerian ex international who had to call Siasa aside and explain to him that his approach to players management and his disdainful way of talking to players was counter productive and was creating antagonism in the camp.
It's a very common phenomenon when Nigerian are working here they are mostly polite and considerate when talking and relating to people here in the UK.
Just watch as they land MM from Heathrow they just do immediate transformation and become rude and tyrannical.
This was the kind of talent Harry Redknapp dropped on the bench because of attitude. If it was a Nigerian coach, people will say he has collected bribe.
Redknapp is a well known corrupt coach and manager among so many in the UK.
TheGoodJoe: Not true at all. It is actually the opposite. Alex Ferguson disposed Diego Forlan because he did not abide by instructions. Did that mean he was a bad coach? Pep Guardiola cut off the likes of Ronaldinho, Deco and a host of others to promote harmony in his team. Did that mean Guardiola is a poor coach?
What of Harry Redknapp dumping Giovani Dos Santos (despite his immense talent) on the bench because of his play boy attitude. Does that mean Harry Redknapp is a terrible manager?
Mourinho dumped Mikel at a young age because of his unseriousness. An action which left a deep mark on Mikel and turned him into a very serious and disciplined player. Forlan became a coach's favourite with his discipline after leaving Manchester United.
You are using wide scale negative assumption to make overriding deductions on individual players.
It is not that simplistic.
Were you there in the training ground and behind the scenes.
Kabe2: Do your research provide evidence of our military expenditure budget since the inception of the PMB administration.
Right out of the bat you will notice major changes in Defence procurement between PMB and GEJ/Yar'Adua administrations.
PMB does government to government deals, a clear departure from GEJ whose administration relied mainly on contractors and middle men in more than 60% of the latter's procurements.
PMB also pushes mainly at local defence manufacturing, especially for things we can produce.
A clear example is the Nigeria was supposed to receive Varta MRAPS from Ukraine, instead the government rejected that and instead went for Proforce MRAPS.
The military has it's shortcomings but there has been a lot of improvements in many, many areas under PMB.
All this is political rambling without a shred of substance.
You made the claim that by far PMB has been the best for the military against any other HOD.
So how did you come to that conclusion ❓ sentiment based biased preference or by objective measurement. ❓
You cannot throw it back to me you are effectively EVADING the question and proposition you presented.
Kabe2: Accomodation for officers and men of the Nigerian military. It is unprecedented in the history of Nigeria.
Government to Government deals.
For Air Force
12 x MI-35M for the Air Force 12 x Super Tucano " 2 x. MI-17e " 10 x Super Mushak 3 x JF-17 3 x Aerosode UAV 3 x Tsaigumi 10 x Maurader MRAPs 15 x Proforce ICAV 2 x Bell 412 6 x A-109k
- Transfer of 7 x helicopters from the PAF & NEPA reconfigured and reactivated for military use.
Including more I might have missed.
Army
50 Proforce MRAPs 38 Ezugwu MRAPs 177 Typhoon & Streit group LAVs 35 VT-4 Tanks ST-1 Tank Destroyers New artilleries all part of the 150 million dollars China deal. Innoson military vehicles
Including some I might have forgotten.
Navy
1 Damen LST 2 x maritime patrol aircraft 4 x A109 and AW-139 1 x Hydrographic ship
Over 30 new different types of navy platforms.
Over 200 x locally made gun boats
So what has our military expenditure budget been to date since the inception of the PMB regime then compare that to the actual procurements made.
Then we can do a comparison by cost of procurement against each particular regime.
dragon2: The PC21 is a trainer aircraft,it's look and parameters show that is is meant primarily as a fighter trainer not attack.It is not armoured, all its weapon suite are simulated i.e. no weapon system.Its hard points are for smoke(during display) and fuel.
....The PC-21 is equipped with underwing hardpoints, which allow the carriage of external fuel tanks and smoke pods (for aerial displays) but, unlike Embraer or Beechcraft, Pilatus does not support any of the other external stores which would be required to use the aircraft in a light attack role..... ...The embedded simulation and training suite comprises tactical navigation and moving map, stores management, simulated air-to-air and air-to-ground radar and electronic countermeasures (ECM), radar target simulation through data link, air-to-air and air-to-ground weapons parameters simulation, and a no-drop bomb-scoring system (NDBS).... ....The electronic warfare (EW) suite includes simulated radar warning receiver (RWR), chaff and flares..... https://militarysimulation.training/articles/variations-on-the-trainer-theme-pilatus-pc-21/
The aircraft is simply made for flying not fighting.
You miss the point completely, the embraer aircraft in its basic form is simply a turboprop aircraft everything is a retrofit to make it the A29. It was made not as fighter at its initiation. That attribute was added much later.
The pertinent question is what other single engine turboprop aircraft of similar capabilities are available and can be retrofitted that includes up armoured . etc. Then how much will it cost. That includes the PC-21.
Once an air frame moves from civil use and is given military attributes you can essentially make it ten times more expensive, that is why military inflation for its products rises exponentially.
My observation are to challenge us to think more strategically and look at ways to improve and increase capacity and best practice. I really do not see why NAF Engineers some with PHd cannot retrofit a single engine turboprop aircraft for our purposes at a fraction of the cost. If a Chinese Wing Loong 2 UAV costs $1 million, then why cant we procure the components from the individual manufactures again at a fraction of the cost.
The arms race is motivated by extreme profits and the procurement process creates a huge avenue for individuals to get huge payments in thier offshore accounts.
youghs: Can you please explain the reason NA doesn't put a tracker in its vehicles so they can be able to recover or even destroy them when they are captured.
I asked this question years ago.
Most NATO armoured vehicles are not just gps trackable but satellite as well.
Particularly now that gps tracking systems are so much cheaper now and anybody who is computer savvy can install them DIY you can add all kinds of cameras and microphones and monitor what the enemy is saying.
For this reason if any ISIS and the like where able to get a NATO armoured vehicle of value they have essentially picked up a Trojan horse and will find themselves easy targets for a whole range precision weaponry including the gps location US artillery Excalibur 155mm.
I expected or speculated that just like "bait car" some of our gun trucks should intentionally be allowed in battle to be taken by the enemy but not so obviously. That essentially gives you eyes and ears in the enemy camp, you might even be lucky to hear via voice recognition Shekau voice that gives you his exact location, the possibilities are endless.
Why have we not done it , no idea or maybe we are.
Throwback. Backwards. Illogical. Three words used recently to describe an emerging U.S. Air Force initiative to field light attack aircraft of a type not operated by U.S. forces since Vietnam. Aircraft that are compact, lethal, relatively inexpensive and easy to support in the field. Powered by a turboprop engine, looking remarkably like their forebears from the Second World War, they often inspire an emotional reaction that equates the design features negatively with older concepts, now long past.
To some of the combat aviators who have been deeply embroiled in continuous conflict since 9/11, they’re a no-brainer.
This discussion of options for new airplanes is no longer academic. This summer, the Air Force will engage in a light attack experiment at Holloman AFB, which may be followed by a combat demonstration the likes of which has not been carried out by the Air Force since Vietnam.
If you’re prepared to take advice from individuals with no aviation background at all, this should worry you deeply. But if you’re prepared to concede, maybe, that professional aviators with extensive combat experience haven’t suddenly lost their minds, then it should become immediately obvious that there might be some utility in light attack. Certainly it has historical roots – The Navy, Marines and Air Force all used light attack aircraft in Vietnam. But just using the term doesn’t adequately describe the aircraft, or the reasons to consider them. Why a light attack aircraft?
Light attack aircraft were just that – smaller attack aircraft like the A-37 Dragonfly or Navy OV-10, with significant weapons loads but not designed to stand up in the front of the apocalyptic Soviet/NATO battlefield. For the Air Force, the long path to considering a new attack aircraft started in 2008. Faced with increasing airpower demand in Iraq and Afghanistan, the existing fighters were being wrung out. For the kind of air support we were providing for U.S. ground forces, the existing F-16, F-15E and Navy / Marine F-18 were a ridiculous overmatch. Recall that by 2008, the Air Force and Naval aviation had been in continuous combat since January 16, 1991, and a decade and a half later the strain was showing. Meeting airpower demand with expensive, high end aircraft was the only option we had, and we were flying their wings off. We still are.
First, we had to define the aircraft. At Air Combat Command, a handful of aviators wrote the concept for OA-X, OA meaning observation/attack, and X meaning something we didn’t have a number for yet (not meaning experimental, as some have written). We started with historical examples – the aircraft we used to fight an insurgency in the jungles of Vietnam. The first example was the A-1 Skyraider, a hulking behemoth of an airplane with a massive, 18-cylinder radial engine designed as a carrier aircraft and transferred to the Air Force in 1964 after the Navy retired them. Alongside, the OV-10. The OV-10 Bronco, a new-build, twin-turboprop observation aircraft used as a forward air controller by the Air Force and as an attack aircraft by the Navy and Marines. What the authors envisioned with OA-X was a modern turboprop aircraft with advanced sensors and precision weapons just like a modern fast jet. But we also wanted aircraft that could be forward deployed to austere airfields, fueled from 55-gallon drums, and supplied from the back of a pickup truck – none of which a jet can easily do. And we needed it to be relatively cheap to buy and to operate. In short, we envisioned an aircraft that looked like earlier designs, with the weapons and sensors of a modern jet.
These aircraft existed. I had seen the A-29 Super Tucano in Colombia in 2007. Raytheon had a conversion of their T-6 trainer (the AT-6) that included a weapons capability. What we were looking for was off the shelf stuff, not needing a long development period. For combat operations in the Middle East, this seemed like a good match. The aircraft that existed were two-seaters with light armor, good day/night electro-optical sensors, guns, and precision munitions. Unrefeueled, they had twice the loiter time of the fast jets. They sipped fuel – the fuel they burned in an hour of flight approximated the fuel an F-15E used taxiing from parking to the runway. We were looking at traditional attack aircraft – combat aircraft that could be used for a wide array of missions from Close Air Support to interdiction to combat search & rescue. In 2009 these aircraft could have flown from a dozen US-operated airfields in Afghanistan that could not have supported fast jets.
But making the case to an Air Force that had always been able to afford very high-end aircraft took time. The Air National Guard tested the AT-6 from 2010 to 2014 and judged it “operationally suitable and operationally effective.” Ironically, it wasn’t the combat capabilities of the aircraft that made the strongest case – it was the health of the rest of the fighter / attack enterprise. A quarter century of continuous operations was wrecking the force – readiness was the worst ever measured, aircraft sustainment costs were climbing, and the Air Force had long since run out of the cockpits we needed to turn freshly-graduated aviators into seasoned fighter pilots. The F-35, as capable as it is, could only provide a limited number of cockpits, and those not enough to “absorb” the new pilots to keep the force healthy. By 2016 we were short almost a thousand experienced fighter pilots, and the shortage was getting worse. The Air Force was buying fighter aircraft at a rate so slow that it was going to take us 200 years to recapitalize even the shrunken, post-drawdown force. We needed to return to a healthy balance – and that meant buying more aircraft. As the concept moved forward into a planned flying experiment in the summer of 2017, resistance mounted.
Some objections were emotional. Turboprops were old, and suitable only for people too poor to afford jets. The objections to a turboprop were perhaps the most irrational, and the easiest to dispel with data. A modern turboprop is a computer-controlled marvel of engineering, and is the most efficient aircraft powerplant for the performance regime that we needed to operate in. It is easy to maintain and very resistant to ingested debris to be expected at forward airfields. Other objections were financial. Cost is always an issue, and under sequestration, the Air Force already has too much mission and not enough Air Force. But with the possibility of ending this self-destructive budget cap came the opportunity to buy new aircraft without taking the money from some other portion of an under-resourced service. The most pernicious objections came from industry, focused on what companies wanted to sell, rather than what the Air Force was looking for. In a flashback to the bad old days of acquisition, we heard over and over that a light jet was the solution – fuel demand, debris resistance, cost and maintenance requirements be damned. Jets were new, turboprops were old. But no jet had the characteristics we actually needed in a powerplant.
Other resistance relied on a panicked notion of the air defense threat. Suddenly, the widespread proliferation of “wish-you-were-dead” air defense weapons would end the usefulness of light attack aircraft. Except that such a proliferation isn’t happening, and if it did it would spell the end of a worldwide aviation enterprise. Really good air defenses are expensive and have to be sustained, and very few people can afford to buy the radar-guided threats, much less operate them. There really are places and scenarios where airpower is going to have a hard time operating, but those places are not ubiquitous. It’s not reasonable to expect that there will be a sudden surge of radar threats in the places where violent extremists are the most firmly entrenched – unless there are Russian or Chinese units nearby. So you can be assured that light attack aircraft are not intended for a radar threat environment. Not are they intended for an environment dominated by hostile fighters. Because that would be stupid.
That last issue deserves attention. Turboprop light attack aircraft are intended for lightly contested airspace, where the primary threats are guns and shoulder-launched, heat-seeking missiles, commonly known as MANPADS. This is the environment that has dominated the threat airspace over Iraq, Afghanistan, much of Syria, Libya, Yemen, Somalia, and almost the entire African continent. In fact, in the last 25 years, U.S. combat operations have involved 176 days spent in contested airspace – and over 9400 calendar days outside it. Counting simultaneous operations like the no-fly zones as separate events, the total count of permissive days exceeds 17,000. That’s the environment in which we have been using up our highly capable legacy fighter / attack fleet, and it’s not going away.
In the most likely environment, OA-X would have three key survivability advantages over legacy jets.
They are quiet. It may not be obvious, but most gunners in an irregular warfare environment have to hear or see an aircraft to find it. They have no early warning system to feed them information. Our experience with AT-6 and A-29 on our training ranges are that they are very hard to hear. By the time you hear them, you’re in range of their weapons. They are cool. Heat-seeking missiles rely on signatures from exhaust or hot metal, caused by friction with the air they fly through. The exhaust of the A-29s turboprop (the same as the AT-6C) is mixed with a strong propwash, and isn’t even hot enough to boil water by the time it reaches the trailing edge of the wing. The fastest moving part of the aircraft is the prop, which has to have special equipment built in to prevent ice from forming – the exact opposite of a heating problem. Add in the ability to detect missile launches and dispense flares, and the aircraft may well be less susceptible to the heat-seeking threat than any other fighter or attack aircraft in the inventory. They’re small. Worst case, the AT-6 has less than half the exposed area of the A-10 when looking straight up at it. Best case, looking at it nose on, it presents an even smaller target. The A-29 is only a little bit larger that the AT-6 and I can attest that it’s hard to keep sight of your own wingman at distances where the larger jets maintain a visual formation. Small size makes an aircraft much harder to hit with gunfire, particularly with the obsolescent, aimed-by-eye, ex-Soviet antiaircraft guns fielded by insurgent groups worldwide. Joint experience with more than 15 years of warfare against violent extremists shows that fixed-wing aircraft moving faster than a helicopter only rarely get hit by small-arms fire, and they are not downed.
The alarmist among us can postulate about the proliferation of MANPADS but the reality is that comparable aircraft that stand out more in infrared would then be far more vulnerable that OA-X. That kind of air defense proliferation that would render OA-X unusable is extremely unlikely for the same reason that not everybody owns a new Lexus (cost, shortage of dealerships, supply limits, poor credit, etc). Yes, there are plenty of missiles and guns, but gunners able to hit moving targets, maneuvering in three dimensions, with countermeasures – those are hard to find.
The Air Force could make excellent use of light attack aircraft. We are experimenting with them for a reason – because we already wish to confirm that their attributes (precision, firepower, low footprint, low cost of ownership, low logistical burden) are exactly what we need to provide responsive, deployable and effective airpower against violent extremists worldwide – an expectation that the Joint Force continues to have. We need more cockpits to alleviate our shortage of fighter pilots and to improve readiness. There are objections to light attack, the most telling being that the Air Force cannot afford any new aircraft without additional funding from Congress to buy them. Other objections fall by the wayside when we look at the available data, and we intend to capture more, and soon.
Col. Mike “Starbaby” Pietrucha is a serving officer who was an instructor electronic warfare officer in the F-4G Wild Weasel and the F-15E Strike Eagle, amassing 156 combat missions and taking part in 2.5 SAM kills over 10 combat deployments. As an irregular warfare operations officer, Colonel Pietrucha has two additional combat deployments in the company of US Army infantry, combat engineer, and military police units in Iraq and Afghanistan.
That's a very well articulated view by the former USAF Col. from his perspective but as an intellectual document of proven fact it falls short of the mark without substantiation of the assumptions he makes on cost and low altitude flight risk. Further alternative options are not looked at particularly the impact of UAV's in Close Air Support Capability.
But its context is not relevant to the Nigerian situation as the USAF had entirely different cost parameters and air combat strategies to Nigeria, it is really an irrelevance. Nonetheless, maybe we can learn something from the Col. entirely USAF related position and deduction.
This is what i prefer an intellectual approach as opposed to wild assumption birthed from our own prejudices and or preferences.
There is considerable commissioned research the US by the Army Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) and the USAF in this area that is far more substantive than that of a singular USAF colonel. I have read quite a few 40+ page documents many of them.
In some regards it becomes the more you know the less you you understand to make a decision.
Majority is not necessarily right, but what is established beyond all doubt is that light attack turboprop air frames constitute less than 1% of all NATO attack aircraft. That in itself says something.
A key issue is cost, particularly in the context of Nigeria What is high cost and what is low cost how are we coming to that conclusion by assumption or by comparison analysis.
For instance a brand new comparable single engine turboprop aircraft of similar capacity and or even higher performance such as the Swiss PC21 which costs under $4.5 million per unit. Indeed the Spanish air force bought 24 military spec. for under $185 million or thereabouts. Quite shockingly pilots have transited from the PC-21 straight to the F18. What will it cost to retrofit additional weapon systems ISTAR Capabilities not a huge amount IMO.
This is food for thought for those who want to have a solution led approach and a red flag to angry bulls who find questioning and or even appraising NAF procurement decisions an act of high treason. The choice is yours is this best value or not.
So as far as you are concerned you had no issues. Are you surprised you haven’t been in the team since?
Yes. I’m surprised. Because we never had any problems. And if there was any problem, at least they could have told me ‘okay Taye, this is the problem’.
But have you tried to call the coach to find out why he doesn’t want you in the team?
No. I don’t really know why. But as I always say to myself. Even my teammates ask me and I say I don’t know. If you play very well in your club you deserve to be in the national team. If you don’t play very well, you don’t deserve to go. Maybe the coach doesn’t want me in the team because he knows that if he calls me to come and play for Nigeria with his boys, I will never sit on the bench for his boys. So maybe that is why he decided he doesn’t want me to come. Because if I come, I will surely play. So he doesn’t want me to play because he knows that if he calls me, I will not come and sit on the bench for his players. It’s not going to be possible. I don’t have any problem with him but I was really really sad because I did not believe that I would not go to the World Cup with the way I’m playing for my club.
People wonder why Keshi dropped star players. It was a fact, their egos were too big for Keshi. Blatantly disrespecting and refusing to do things his way. Keshi was a man who could make the most of the little he had and snubbed them.
Many might want the glamour of the so called big players but their egos were terrible.
These men should tell us who asked them for money.
I am sorry that is a overwhelmingly generalistic deduction to make.
Unless you were there in person and know the players and observed their interactions you really can not make that kind of assumption.
It also works both ways, the Manager could be a conceited, arrogant, tyrannical bigot with limited personal skills. And unless you worship him you are labelled a trouble maker and having a discussion about tactics is considered a personal attack on his person and authority.
A good manager will know how to manage multiple personalities and create cohesion and team spirit a bad manager will not.
somehow: facts and substance? are these with evidence? evidence nail culprits not emotions or allegations
facts and substance fit to be called evidence are names of the culprits date and place amount collected with receipts or reference audio or video recording adult witness
any of these will nail any corrupt person out there just as it was done to amos adamu., sam aladyce and salisu
same done to stepp blatta and co, evidence nail culprits!
I rest my case guys!
You be oyibo
Somebody is receiving bribe and you are expecting him to give you RECIEPT, Chei were you deh ?
Nigerian nation as it stands is not ready to fight corruption, how long have police been collecting bribe on the highways probably for the past 4/5 decades .
jpphilips: You have an uncanny gift of talking offpoint, poor understanding of clearly stated facts, ridiculous retentive ability, unprecedented inability to unlearn to relearn, a special kinda being you are. Will be great if you volunteer as a test subject for a medical research to under study which part of your brain that convinced you that you are making sense. no offence bro
I am not offended in the least.
To date you have NEVER CONTENDED WITH THE FACTS with anything of substance just name calling. Disagree with me by all means but be methodical, structured, objective and with balanced reasoning. But you do none of these things, I do not know how educated you are if at all you went beyond high school, either way it shows.
You think by vitriolic rhetoric and name calling you present a substansive argument. why do you EVADE the subject completely Maybe you lack that basic skill set to have a discourse based on substance and logical reasoning.
With regards to your comments i suggest you look at the mirror and you will find the test subject you describe looking at you.
Joebie: Are you now playing the role of the investigator? Don’t we have authorities saddled with that responsibility? Shouldn’t the NFF be troubled about these interviews? Use your finger energy to tell the NFF and sports ministry to investigate, not criticizing players that are speaking out.
Bros leave matter for Matthias.
When Amaju collect NFA Presidency you think sa na free and fair. U know that election na area Eéeeeeee take place. Amaju with d help of senior bros Uduagha he arrangee the entire process.
Warri no deh carry Las.
There is not one Nigerian international present and I past that l have met and talked to that not not given me multiple stories about corruption.
seankafor: I Sabi obasi from schalke and hoffeinham.. But what is the reason of blowing whistle if you ain't gonna give us names? Who no know say naija corrupt?
Give us the fvcking culprits or bounce
Nigeria is not serious and has never been serious about fighting corruption.
Our entire government is underpinned by corruption our electoral process is intrinsically corrupt. Has there ever been a free and fair election in Nigeria in the past 25 years.
Politicians don't believe in elections but in selection. And don't give a toss about the people and or public opinion.
In Nigeria exposing corruption leaves you exposed to the revenge of the corrupt. And if you expose names you could be signing your own death warrant.
So Obasi should never tell names and even if does what will happen ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.
GeneralFarouq: Guy, u just have the best opinion from drones, to aircrafts to land warfare strategies to missiles application Our Generals are really ignorant
You really think so ❓
My opinion is that there may be a few but the real issue is that they are being restricted and hampered by internal politics and other issues.
bidexiii: @rka2 don’t waste your time arguing with this guy calling Super Tucano an overpriced turbo-aircraft. When the United States isshiftung from the A10 warthog to the Super Tucano because it’s simply easy to maintain as compared to other aircraft and can deliver most munitions interns of ground attack/strike.
If Indeed what you are saying is TRUE.
We say "the proof is in pudding" What % of USAF assets are A29 Tucano, let's make it easier how many A29 are in the USAF inventory❓ Now compare that to all the other assets F16, F18, F15, F22, etc. There the answer to your question.
I presented a verbatim statement by the head of the USAF. He makes it very clear what the purpose of the A29 is. I am not arguing with you rather you have evaded and denied the facts to pursue a narrative that is simply not true.
The Embraer EMB 314 is a turboprop single engined light aircraft retro fitted with all the avionics, ISTAR and weapon systems to make it what it is the A29.
Is it the fastest most reliable single engined turboprop aircraft❓ No it is not. In that regard any turboprop aircraft can be retrofitted to carry our that role. Most definitely at a fraction of the cost we have paid.
After looking at its associated weaponry in the over priced contract. I noticed there were no ATGM's. But rather guided rockets which probably be the ones made by BAE systems that most NATO allies use.
That's a BIG PROBLEM it really takes away all the unique points of advantage this aircraft has without them.
These rockets have a range of about 2km in my understanding. That means the A29 will have to fly at much lower altitude well below 3000 ft and much closer proximity to the enemy and be in the direct range of Boko AA gun trucks. With its noisy turboprop engines.
Not a good idea IMO.
Finally, how many NATO and USA partners use this aircraft that's is the number one COIN aircraft in the world according too many here.
What is amazing l have been accused of misinformation and disinformation by many here.
rka2: You obviously didn't read it. It isn't the NAF saying it, it is the manufacturers. The Super Tuncano is marketed as a light attack aircraft as well as a basic and advanced trainer. Now move on. The NAF know what they want. It may even double as the Alpha Jet replacement for basic/Advanced training that is in their development plans, hence based in Kainji. Then there is the loiter capability for ISR and lower running costs. All in all, a no brainer.
What you want and what you need are two different things.
You underpinned your statement with a manufacturers promotional marketing script. In any guise that's far from being objective and is not intelligent.
All car manufacturers give self birthed over stated value capability of thier product.
Foreign Affairs › Re: Battle Field Discussion (picture/video) Of African Military . by komekn(m): 9:15pm On May 16, 2020
❓ sentiment based biased preference or by objective measurement. 
