patches689: The latter is best illustrated by its 5,545m "out-of-ground effect" hover ceiling (the height at which it can hover without the cushion of air caused by rotor downwash). The next best is the US Apache (3,866m), followed by the Russian Mi-28 and Ka-52 (3,600m); the Franco-German Tiger (3,200m) and the Chinese WZ-10 (2,000m). The Rooivalk also has the highest cruise speed, the best rate of climb and the best range/weapons load performance, and shares with the Tiger the best power to weight ratio, all factors critical in operations and combat. And it is probably better protected than any of those.
omg
Article made my day
We already knew this.
But what is exciting is the mention of the one damaged by power lines years ago getting repaired.
I'm really satisfied with the purchase of this plane by the NAF. It satisfies all NAF requirements and more, the block II is coming with a conformal fuel tank, so it's long range is now further extended.
25 Planes, 6 Trainer versions and 19 single seat versions would be simply perfect.
Best part is..... Countries like Nigeria can now fly good fighter planes that are not sanction prone.
Six trainer versions?
I think this jet is Turkey really. I haven't seen a serious discussion among the Nigeria camp (professionally and Enthusiasts) on wether this is the best offer.
The Chinese J-10 multi-role jet I believe if Nigeria is looking for a single engine fighter would be better. Anyway it isn't an open tender where would know what other countries offer.
jln115: Agree 100%. But i don't think it will happen, the SADF/SANDF are notoriously secretive regarding the full capability of their weapon systems, and for good reason, there have been several attempts from foreign parties to steel blueprints to missile systems,Rooivalk ect ect.
Just an example, the EW suit of the Cheetah is still classified till this day, even after being retired for almost 10 years.
Lastly if you look at the Video, its only filmed from the Pilots cockpit(the rear cockpit) and not the weapons operators cockpit, the Pilots HMD is turned off and the camera is set up in such a way that its only possible to see the basic flight data on the display.
Regarding the Cheetah it's because of the Israeli components.
With 25 planes for a ~30 year life-span you are looking at 75 new engines and 200 engine rebuilds.
Engine rebuilds should not be a problem as with that many it is economical to train your guys to do it... and a rebuild should be realativly inexpensive since you simply take it apart and rebuild it.
But with regards to the engines... India just purchased 20 for $25 million. So assuming its around $1,2 mil per engine you are looking at $90 million over the next 30 years.
I would go for a smaller number of 12 as a "tip of the spear" and focus on getting a large number of secondary jets for the back-bone of the airforce. I think SAAF should have done the same - 12 Grip and 26 Hawks.
Meaning SAAF would have 11 jets ready to deploy?
with maintenance, exercises, internal operations and training that number will be cut again. The air force will only be able to deploy 2 or 3 Gripens.
The 26 we have is small. The RD-93 is just a problem. Remember the Super Mirage with that engine?
bidexiii: The Nigerian army has ambushed the members of the deadly Boko Haram sect that attacked the troops at old Marte on January 20, Wednesday.
Troops of 153 task force base, on Thursday, killed 5 more insurgents during the operation.
The casualty on the part of the Boko Haram sect now reaches 21.
The weapons recovered are 1 MC-H3 tube panhand aml, 90 gun with registration number 0182; 1 36milimeter handset grenade; 7 pieces of 60milemeter bodies and 3 AK47 rifles.
agaugust: Your fellow South African @frumentius started it in December, he posted Chaka C2 here and said this is an SANDF equipment that Nigerian army does not have....you started it. I am NOT retaliating, I am CORRECTING him and others like him. Do not judge other African militaries when you do not have access to all their equipment inventory.
agaugust: SF have evolved from fighting Cuba in Angola behind enemy lines, to fighting the likes of Boko Haram that have NO LINES....NO FRONTLINE....SO THERE IS NOTHING CALLED BEHIND ENEMY LINES.
Mission of SF has seen evolution over the years.
Strategic misssions. Mostly influencing what is to happen inside the battle space.
SF didn't evolve from fighting Cuba in Angola. There were many SF units around the world before the conflict in Angola. So that war isn't where SF units originated.
The war in Nigeria like many took various forms. At some stage the terror..ists held land behaving like a conventional force which needed conventional warfare tactics to hammer or push them out of the territories they held.
Remember to BH your army is the enemy. If one su.icide attac..ker enters territory in control of your government they are behind enemy lines. War is no longer a gentlemen's thing frontlines can be opened anywhere.
agaugust: World War II and Angolan bush war had special forces, are tbose not conventional wars? There is a difference between an unconventional mission/task and an unconventional war. Boko Haram insurgency is an unconventional war. SF do unconventional missions in conventional war, they are majorly trained to operate against a conventional army, but nowadays the sphere is changing, and SF are getting trained to operate against unconventional enemies of mostly Islamic terrorists. Mission Evolution.
Regarding what you describe as "Angolan bush war". The war there advanced and regressed to various forms on all sides (Angola, Portugal, UNITA, South Africa, Namibia and other rebel groups).
agaugust: World War II and Angolan bush war had special forces, are tbose not conventional wars? There is a difference between an unconventional mission/task and an unconventional war. Boko Haram insurgency is an unconventional war. SF do unconventional missions in conventional war, they are majorly trained to operate against a conventional army, but nowadays the sphere is changing, and SF are getting trained to operate against unconventional enemies. Evolution.
SF are a strategic force therefore are used for strategic missions most of the time. To help archive long term political or military goals of the war.
Mostly operating outside the battlefield(Behind enemy lines, among the enemy etc) to influence events inside the battle space and the minds of those in control. Primary tasks are reccon, man hunt etc.
They are not used as a conventional force. And specialise in guerrilla warfare. No evolution there.
Henry240: The 1988 NATO definition reads: Command and control is the exercise of authority and direction by a properly designated [individual] over assigned [resources] in the accomplishment of a [common goal].
The Australian Defence Force definition is similar: C2 is the system empowering designated personnel to exercise lawful authority and direction over assigned forces for the accomplishment of missions and tasks.
So what does the Eagle system do in relation to what NATO and Australia defines as C2?
Henry240: The 1988 NATO definition reads: Command and control is the exercise of authority and direction by a properly designated [individual] over assigned [resources] in the accomplishment of a [common goal].
The Australian Defence Force definition is similar: C2 is the system empowering designated personnel to exercise lawful authority and direction over assigned forces for the accomplishment of missions and tasks.
So what does the Eagle system do in relation to what NATO and Australia defines as C2?
agaugust: The Eagle Mobile Central Command Post is a vehicle mounted with various Information Communication and Technology equipment. This on board equipment gives the Theatre Commander the opportunity to have first hand information of the battle space. From the vehicle the commander has access to both ground troops and air assets within the battle space.
The Eagle Mobile Central Command Post was borne is a mobile Central Command Post that is designed to link up with the troops in the field, as well as the command hierarchy.
With this, the President, Commander-in-Chief, Minister of Defence, Chief of Defence Staff and the Service Chiefs can have real time contact with the troops in the field. Added to this, the Eagle Mobile Central Command Post affords close monitoring of the activities of the troops and passage of real time information from strategic level to operational and tactical levels.
Furthermore, the platform affords the Chief of Air Staff on the move to have a look at the performance of surveillance or reconnaissance aircrafts.
The project is designed as constructed by Major General C T Olukoju of the Nigerian Army.
According to your envious and errornous ranting , the above explained Eagle system that links and manages real time data and visuals of an entire battle space the size of Scotland to a single vehicle command and control centre for coordinating a 30,000 man fully mechanized army plus a 100 aircraft air force is notOkay a net-centric warfare system ?
People like you are the ones destroying Africa with deliberate falsehood. Pity you, just pity you. Africa needs better people so thhat our continent can make progress like India, South Korea, Pakistan, China .
It is clearly defined as a command post.
Do your homework first. Before telling us what Africa needs.
agaugust: SF and SOF mean the same thing all over the world apart from the USA where it is used to mean different types of commandos in different US armed forces. Special Forces and Special Operarion Forces mean the same thing in other countries around the world and SF is the universal language used for these commandos.
What I think the world should be redefinig is SF trained for conventional warfare and SF trained for CT-COIN.
Henry240: 10,000 SF is an appropriate number. The use of highly mobile, highly trained men has proven to be very effective. They simply have to move on to the next objective while the bulk of the Infantry force holds the ground.
Our SF and SOF units have performed very well in this campaign.
Would take Nigeria more than 7 years to have such numbers.
Unless by SF you refer to SOF units not men in the class of the UK SAS, Green berets etc
Wonder why you guys aren't criticizing the composition of your regular battalions.
Henry240: When i said the Nigerian contingent did not learn anything from Amani Africa II it did not previously know, the South-Africans were all up in arms.
agaugust: A South African posted here last month that only their country has modern mobile C2 capability in Africa, and that all the other AU countries who came to AMANI 2015 will learn how to use a C2 mobile command post.
I asked him if he knows all the equipment that other African armies have, or is he the chief of army staff for all African countries?
I think the behaviour and mindset of South Africans is one of the reasons Africa will find it difficult to unite and work together. Its a fact, like it or not, EU and NATO countries dont have that kind of 'WE ARE CITY, THE REST OF YOU ARE JUNGLE' attitude.
The South Africans should see this and learn not to assume things about other African military forces. Talking anyhow as if only them even have rifle and bullets, other AU countries'armies fight with bow and arrows in 2016.
africaken: i want you to do some research on america counter insurgency war especially in Afghanistan .ordinary soldiers were employed in this war as was the special units .you dont need to neglect the involvement of a regular soldier,what is needed is a better trained and well equipped soldier.there are report that most AMISOM troops when deployed to somalia never leave their camps to interact with the locals,also they carry out vehicle patrols not on foot thus not gathering intelligence on whats going on.i hope you have seen alot of news report and documentaries ,NATO troops on foot patrols,searching compounds which force the taliban to employ anti-personnel IED's just to slow them down.AMISOM has a force of 20,000 and still they say thats not enough,now your talking about a force of 2,500 how is that going to be possible! need to watch this documentary
jln115: The reason i feel we should keep the Ratel 90 is for when we deploy abroad in Urban environments where we could possibly encounter a rebel T55/62 but being in a populated Urban area it would be difficult to deploy ATMGs, and having only a 30mm cannon it would be difficult for the Badger to engage the enemy......Obviously it would be better if we could engage them with a Rooikat 105.
But i love your idea of fitting 90mm on the RG35, just not sure if they will fit though, anyway if it is indeed possible, it will also fill the gap left when we retired the Eland(if we fit the turret on the 4x4 RG35), they are also very well armoured!!
The 90mm required multiple strikes to disable a T55/62 tank at close range. The dense Angolan bush was no "tank country" with that said armoured vehicles and tanks fought at close distances at times less 100m away from each other. In open country the ineffectiveness of the 90mm against T55/62 would've been apparent, they'd been destroyed at longer ranges before they got close to return fire.
The 70mm on the Rooikat with APFSDS can be more effective against T55/62.
The 30mm with armour piercing munition can slice open a T55/62. The Ratel 20mm was capable of penetrating the tanks with multiple rounds.
The 90mm guns and 60mm mortars on the Ratels came from the Elands.
I don't foresee any heavy armour fighting in Africa anytime soon. Anyway we did encounter T55/62 in the DRC.
africaken: i believe in a active shooter scenario any ordinary police should be train and equipped to fight off such attackers (this are not the days of hostage taking)also even if a specialized police tactical unit may be required.they need not be held up in the city traffic,so a police air wing with helicopters should be accessible and even an armour vehicle is required for cover(during the garissa university terror attack ,a terrorist sniper was able to shoot security personnel's who had to cross an open space to the building dormitory where students were being massacred).
They can deploy via helicopters in build up areas.
Henry240: Sure....... The only problem i have is with the Purchase of the Super Mushak. Instead of the Super Mushak, we could have gone full throttle for the A-29, while we continue to develop the Farawa light trainer/reconnaissance aircraft.
For Drones, we should just ramp up the numbers of surveillance drones, armed drones do not provide any strategic advantage in my opinion. More day and night all weather surveillance assets. If targets are acquired, assets such as the JF-17 or MB-339 or Artillery can be called in.
I'm cautiously optimistic.
I won't say those militants are avoiding Nigeria, AQIM has never been know to operate in Nigeria. Nigeria should be ready for similar attacks, it would be foolhardy to assume that we are safe.
Am I the only who thinks that Pakistan super what what...... is tras..h compared with the Super Tucano.
which can really be useful with quick reaction forces.
africaken: I remember seeing a photo of SADF soldiers displaying both SA-7 and SA-14 during the bush war,i can't find it at the moment
They were used alongside cannons to protect equipment like artillery and more.
The reason the enemy of that time's air force jets bombing missions were unsuccessful as they had to fly really high to avoid getting hit by them and UNITA's USA supplied MANPADS.
jln115: As far as i know the Badger is only coming out with 60mm breach loading mortar turret, basically replacing the Ratel60 , there is no mention of any variant replacing the Ratel81
The Badger Fire Support variant still uses the 30mm cannon, Upgrading the Ratels 90mm ammunition to a HESH type round, I think would be the best, it will fill the gap between the capabilities of the 30mm and the ATMG variants.....But ideally you would like a 105mm Gun instead of the 90mm gun, but as a stop-gap measure i feel it would be the best for now.
Also love the idea of putting a few 90mm on the RG35!!
The M6 is highly effective and has a longer range. It can be operated as a "conventional mortar". If the 81mm is kept then the mortars should be removed and replaced with the 120mm.
The 90mm can only be effective against light armoured vehicles such as technicals and mine resistant vehicles.
Depending on the mission if the enemy has limited armour capability the Ratels or in future Badgers will be deployed with the Rooikat.
Yes, I'd really support removing and storing the 90mm guns then selling the vehicles. They can be mounted on a lighter vehicle(Project Sepula APC) if needed.
Foreign Affairs › Re: African Militaries/ Security Services Strictly Photos Only And Videos Thread by MikeCZAR: 10:55am On Jan 24, 2016
