₦airaland Forum

agaugust:
[s]Any IFV that cannot combine cannon + AGL + ATGM is an obsolete concept IFV, reason why Russian IFVs are better than NATO stuff, go look at the BMP-3 armament combination....it's like the BTR-4 combo....3 major weapons mixed ON ONE SINGLE VEHICLE....modern dcotrine, an IFV needs a point weapon...30mm cannon, an area weapon....Automatic Grenade Launcher.....an anti-tank weapon....ATGM.

Yes, NATO has some obsolete doctrine equipment in service, why not? They cannot be perfect or are they God? The East beats the West in IFV[/s]
.

So the whole world is wrong, and one is right?

Majority shows - modern doctrine focuses on specificity and not on general usage.

Our role specific Ratels took on heavy armor in Angola and won battle after battle... we intend to do the same in the future.

Henry240:
1 - the JF-17 block II which we are getting is more superior to your Gripen C/D


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


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

1. How is it superior?

2. 3 jets paid for... that is all

3. You mean 14 qualified pilots with 10 more on the way?

agaugust:
Israel sold missile technology to South Africa, and DENEL still has expatriate scientists today, or you think Zulus built Umkhonto SAM ? fOOl

Brazil built A-Darter missile for South Africa.

Citations needed

agaugust:
Fool, it was NOT a direct RPG hit, the Polish Rosomak-Patria has cage armour to stop the RPG from hitting the IFV hull that also has extra armour plates add on.....you are a fool !

Anyway, Badger is NOT Rosomak-Patria, Badger has armour altered and no cage or extra hull armour add on, you have a basic dry land only version called Badger. Stop claiming the specs of other countries IFV as your own...Thief !
.

No, the Rosomak had no cage armor

It is also not amphibious because, like us, they chose armor over the ability to float

Henry240:
Initial start-up haul.... Dummy!


We ordered between 25 - 40 Fighter jets.

No

You ordered 3

These are the facts

Well done

*clap*

agaugust:
Denel A-Darter missile is NOT 100% South African, it is half Brazilian too !
.

Is that the only missile we make?

Henry240:
1- yes......... And I'm telling you that's why we rejected the F-22.


2 - Nigerian BTR-4Es provide protection against RPGs.


3- According to the available specifications your Badger IFV provides as much protection as a Proforce LAPV... LMFAO!

So now you have reached the point where you give up a debate based on good faith and start simply repeating yourself over and over again?

1. No, your BTRS are not protected against RPG's

2. According to the MANUFCATURER it comes STANDARD with 30mm protection on the frontal arc, unlike your BTR

agaugust:
They came with ATGM launchers fitted, missiles can be purchased, and we have not received all BTR-4 yet, we ordered 10 first batch, only 5 or so have been delivered.

So you dont have missiles?

Ok, case closed

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

How old is the project?

Do we buy "off the shelf" like you, or do we redesign equipment?

Clown

agaugust:
Prove it, citation needed for best in the world 30mm cannon that has one of the worst and lowest rate of fire. PROVE ITS THE BEST, proof needed
.

1. Accuracy > RoF (welcome to the 21st century pleb)

2. Most advanced in the world:
DLS designed the GI-30 to fire link-less 30mm x 173 ammunition through a dual feeder – a world-first for this kind of weapon.
http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product4225.html

agaugust:
SANDF rejected the amphibious version, your Badger is the new addition to your list of dry land only vehicles for your dry land only army
.

Can you provide any irrifutable evidence that it is dry land only?

You havent seen any pictures of the APC variant yet

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

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

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

1. So what?

2. Yes, all armored equipment should be able to withstand IED hits... and ours can withstand them as STANDARD

3. IFV job is infantry support and infantry transport... just like an MRAP's job is infantry transport.

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

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

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

South Africa has paid for all 236 Badger IFV's

Nigeria has only been able to buy 10 and cannot afford anymore

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

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

It has taken nigeria 60 years and counting to build a Datalink beacause Igbo-Hausa clowns are in controll

agaugust:
If Gripen is showing Angolan Su-30 jet to G-6 artillery and Type 209 submarine or Rooivalk helicopers, can those other platforms attack the Su-30 jet? Fool. Datalink is NOT a magic tool, it's just a faster and networked communication system.


.

It means:

1. Ground based radar can detect Su-30 and send info about it to the Gripen via the TDL and allow the Gripen to approach and engage with its radar turned off (thus not giving away its location)

2. It allows the Gripen to detect Su-30 and send info about it to GBADS units and allows them to engage it without turning on their radars

3. It allows a ground based radar or Gripen to warn a Rooivalk that Su30's are coming without having to use voice communications

4. It allows a Valour Class in Cape Town and Durban, a mobile Radar in Bloemfontien and Gripen in Nelspruit and Witbank to send all their radar info to one location to provide a nation wide live feed of our airspace.

5. It allows the Commander of a Brigade or Division to know where everysingle unit and vehicle in his formation is 24/7 without having to break radio silence.

6. It prevents Blue-on-Blue as all artillery formations know the exact location of friendly units 24/7

7. It allows extremely high levels of encryption as you now not only have to find our frequiency hopping radios (another thing you dont have) but you have to decrypt the data they are sending... meaning we now have multiple layers of encryption

8. It allows an SF unit on a hill to mark the location of everything he sees without ever having to pick up a radio

Do you want to know more?

agaugust:
Fool, tactical datalink does NOT mean every platform SEES the same target, they just get it's location coordinates. How does Gripen in Pretoria airspace see an enemy jet, and because of datalink, the G-6 artillery units in Cape town are also seeing the enemy jet in the air, is the Gripen showing live videos on internet? Fool !

Fool, the ATR-42 sends the enemy coordinate location to central command center, every other aircraft is linked to the CCC, and the centre sends the same information to all other aircraft. Tactical datalink is just faster, that's all.

Yes, it does mean that everyone who is linked into LinkZA can "see" it... we did that during the World Cup.

The SAAF will be using various sensors throughout the country to compile the radar picture. As the SAAF will be deploying mobile radar units to only the inland soccer venues, the SA Navy will deploy their frigates to the coastal venues, being Cape Town, Durban and Port Elizabeth. Gagiano says that the SAAF will "utilise the radar pictures from the navy ships for the total air picture around the stadiums close to the coast."
"So all those sensors contribute to a recognised air picture and Gripen is one part of it, the ship radar is one part of it, our mobile radars, static radar, all these sensors are part and parcel of the input into one recognised air picture."

You do not have those capabilities... please dont waste my time.

Welive in a time where INFORMATION is the biggest killer on the battle feild.

agaugust:
If all platforms see the enemy at the same time, can they all launch attack on that enemy? Fool.

If Gripen is showing Angolan Su-30 jet to G-6 artillery and Type 209 submarine or Rooivalk helicopers, can those other platforms attack the Su-30 jet? Fool. Datalink is NOT a magic tool, it's just a faster and networked communication system.

Prove that they don't have it. Show us proof. Egypt being silent about it does not mean they don't have tactical data link.

Most countries don't go about boasting of ordinary datalink.

What is the name of Russia's or China's inter-service data link? Or they don't have?

SANDF datalink has failed to show all your patrol troops the presence of all Rhino poachers and weapons smugglers defeating operation Corona in your South African homeland....

Your tactical datalink has not saved you from local SANDF operations at home, how does it save you from Egypt or Nigerian military might ?
.

Well done on a retard.ed example.

We have data-link which means:

Gripen sees Nigerian patrol
Message INSTANTLY SENT to G6 - including live footage (if it has a recce pod), bearing, GPS co-ords and such
G6 fires
Gripen observes fire and INSTANTLY sends info back to the guns.

You simply cannot do that.

Datalink means our arty, for example, can hit moving targets

Datalink means our Hawks, for example, can fire radar guided missiles.

Datalink mean our Gripen, for example, can extend the radar horizon for the Valour class meaning it can scan and search a larger area

Datalink means our Commanders, can command an entire battlefeild from 1000km away... in real time with the position of each and every vehicle available to him on screen

Datalink means our SF, for example, can jump out of a C130 and have a sub waiting for them, in complete radio silence.

SANDF is deployed on border protection only, and has been extremely successful - 80 000 people apprehended in 6 months alone.

You are merely pathetically trying to deflect from the fact that you dont have a datalink and further that you personally do not understand how they work.

agaugust:
Butt Hurt By The Spirit Of Envy...butt hurt South African goon

Nigeria is now getting a 4th Generation jet fighter that matches SAAF Gripen jets.

3 jets initial order, NAF 2014 published evaluation says 25 to 40 JF-17 Thunder jets.

SAAF has only 6 to 9 Gripen pilots and NONE combat qualified.

NAF is having 10 F-7 jets + 3 JF-17 jets for a start, all our pilots are combat qualified, they fly combat sorties everyday
.

1. Junk Fighter 17 is inferior in every single way

2. Only 3 jets ordered

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

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

agaugust:
[s]Fool, the missile Badger carries no 30mm cannon, the Badger variants that are not standard do not carry the major cannon.

Problem of the Badger is that each variant carries only one major weapon, that is obsolete IFV doctrine.

Modern IFVs like the Nigerian BTR-4 carries 3 major weapons ALL AT THE SAME TIME ON ONE STANDARD VEHICLE....30mm cannon, 30mm automatic grenade launcher, and anti-tank missiles.

Badger is obsolete on arrival....18 years ago old concept[/s]
.

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

Notice a trend here?

agaugust:
[size=15pt]

.

Nigeria Buys JF-17 Thunder jets...Confirmed By Federal Government.

http://www.punchng.com/fg-to-spend-n65bn-on-warplanes-weapons-others/

https://i68.tinypic.com/2ijog91.jpg


[/size]

wow

3 jets

So impressive

*clap*

agaugust:
We have seen photos of SANDF Badgers, they have only one major weapon in standard Badger configuration, ONE SINGLE 30 MM CANNON WITH LOW RATE OF FIRE ONLY !

Finland's Patria has no DENEL equipment, or have you changed your boast that DENEL components make up 70% of the Badger? How can you have 70% DENEL components and still claim the Badger is same as the Finland made Patria? You contradict yourself dummy !

The extra protection for the Badger is NOT on the hull/body, it is under chassis for land mine protection. A simple browning machine gun will penetrate the body of SANDF Badger.....fvcking IFV with obsolete configuration, one main gun only in 2015 modern age !

Nigerian BTR-4 is the most advanced IFV in Africa ! FACT !
.

1. The Hull is produced in Finland - so the hull is the exact same as the AMV

2. the rest of the vehicle (70%) is made and designed in RSA

3. Badger comes standard with 30mm protection on the frontal arc.

All modern Western IFV's have only one gun system... so they are obsolete too?

Henry240:
No Evidence = No Bueno


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


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

Manufacturers specs have been provided

Henry240:
Office of the NSA

Le citation PLS

Henry240:
1 - Buhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha......


"That's the exact same reason the Nigerian government rejected the F-22.


2- you chose Armour over the ability to float, yet your Armour can only provide protection against 7.62mm rounds while our's provide protection against RPGs, 30mms and can still swim.

You are led by a bunch of clueless hippis, who call themselves generals.


3. Nope according to all sources provided it only provides protection against 7.62mm. Even Proforce LAPVs provide more protection than badger IFVs.

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

2. No:

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

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

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

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

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

So, in baseline format - Badger is better protected.

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

Henry240:
Be truthful to yourself, the Badger IFV cannot compete with that.

-It only can carry a 30mm or a 12.7mm or anti-tank missiles..... All as separate modules unlike the BTR-4E which provides all of these and more in a single module.


- The Badger doesn't provide any amphibious capabilities.


- The Badger provides protection against IEDs/mines, but an RPG and any caliber abover 7.62mm would defeat it's armour



The BTR-4E simply is a vastly superior system.

1. The AMCIT turret is designed so that it CAN carry ATGM's and a 30mm cannon....
54 missile turrets equipped with the GI30 30 mm gun and Denel Dynamics Ingwe anti-tank missile system
http://www.defenceweb.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=35423:bae-land-systems-to-supply-sights-for-badger-ifv&catid=50:Land&Itemid=105

But the SANDF did not select that option as it does not suit our doctrine - a sentiment echoed by all other Western Nations in their modern wheeled IFV's

2. Because we choose ARMOR over the ability to float. The Badger is more heavily armored than your BTR, which makes it better.

3. Where are you getting this info from? Badger has 30mm protection on the frontal arc as STANDARD.


Your BRT is:

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

Henry240:
Non-biased view



The BTR-4E is a better system.

Protection - the BTR-4E with add-on armour can provide ballistics protection for up to 30mm. With Slat armour, it provides protection against RPGs.


Mobility - the BTR-4E provides up to 600hp of energy, great cross-country capabilities and is fully amphibious. 690km range
.

Armament - the BTR-4E is armed with a basic 30mm(Primary) and a secondary 7.62mm, an AGL and 4 Anti-tank missiles.



It's a no brainer, the BTR-4E is a better vehicle.

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

Mobility - Badger can be amphibious and has 850km range

Armament - Badger IFV has a superior 30mm (most advanced in the world). Your BRT's dont have ATGM's they have AGL's instead

Also, your BTR does not come as a fire support variant (60mm long range mortar) or dedicated ATGM unit.

You also forgot -

Situational awareness - Badger IFV has hunter-killer capabilities, BTR does not. Badger has MATIS thermal imagers, does the BTR?

Yes, it is a no brainer... Badger takes the day!!

Henry240:
Sure!



....... But remember you said, what you actually said. It's bookmarked.

I dont care if its bookmarked... you can quote it all you want.

The only thing it proves is that you cannot detect sarcasm

Henry240:
We ordered 45 in the first haul.

le citation pls?

We ordered 236 in our first haul...

Henry240:
Book-marked for future reference.

BTR v Badger

Tell us your thoughts Henry

Henry240:
Doesn't make your 82years old aircrafts any less obsolete.

So because the aircraft is old it means the equipment inside it is old too?

Great argument, Einstein

agaugust:
Scud missile

FROG missile

Swingfire missile

Ballistic missiles http://fas.org:8080/nuke/guide/egypt/missile/index.html
.

Licence built copies.

Show us 100% Egyptian missiles!!

agaugust:
So whom does its datalink communicate with? ISTAR includes enemy target acquisition for army formations on the ground, that is the meaning of TA in ISTAR.


So, whom does the Beechraft datalink communicate enemy target positions to, it communicates with itself?

Fool of Soweto.

Yes, it does not have the means to fully impliment its ISTAR capabilities.

But that doesnt matter, AS IT IS NOT AN ISTAR PLATFORM