GLOBAL DEVELOPING POWERS-2003!!!

RE: GLOBAL DEVELOPING POWERS-2003!!!

Geforce, why else would Mbeki be so supportive of Mugabe?

He has already caused a lot of concern amongst financial institutions, MNCs and so on because of his stance. He is clearly not too bothered about it!

RE: GLOBAL DEVELOPING POWERS-2003!!!

I don’t think Mbeki is up to a land-reform plan. In SA, not only farmers form the white population, but also many people in international companies, financial institutions, press …

The new ‘black’ leaders of SA are all educated people, who see the importance of letting the white population stay.

RE: GLOBAL DEVELOPING POWERS-2003!!!

>Same argument for the Red Hawks. No one is going to be able
>to mount a concerted attack against SA from more than one
>front. So all the Rooivalks could realistically be used
>along a single front. 15 or 20 of these things will scare
>away virtually anything!

My main concern is mobile surface-air missile systems, in particular MANPAD systems such as Matra-Mistral, SA-18 Igla , SA-16 Gimlet etc. These are always the biggest attrition risk for the SA armed forces aircraft.

>
>Incidentally, my favourite blend of tea is “Rooibosch” which
>means Red Bush. How many other types of hot drink have a
>name in common with an attack helicopter?!

I’m gonna give you 2 points just for this comment. Highly amusing.

Twi.

RE: GLOBAL DEVELOPING POWERS-2003!!!

Lancer! SA still use the DC-3!! I have to say I’d love to see one of their Turbo Dakotas though. Those things never die, do they!

The Gripen is more than good enough. Realistically, they are NOT going to be up against Flankers or Mirages. How many airworthy Flankers do African nations have within strike distance of SA? Very, very few I’d say. How many well trained fighter pilots do potential agressors have? Very, very few!

Same argument for the Red Hawks. No one is going to be able to mount a concerted attack against SA from more than one front. So all the Rooivalks could realistically be used along a single front. 15 or 20 of these things will scare away virtually anything!

I remember seeing the Rooivalk on trial for the British Army, alongside the AH-1, AH-64 and Eurocopter Tiger. A lot of the press were saying Rooivalk would win the order but in the end the Generals went for the AH-64D.

Incidentally, my favourite blend of tea is “Rooibosch” which means Red Bush. How many other types of hot drink have a name in common with an attack helicopter?!

RE: GLOBAL DEVELOPING POWERS-2003!!!

Okay. I am a fan of South African military. But I do have some major criticsm, which I feel is important, because 10-15 years down the line, the world could be a very different place from what it is now, and the African continent is a big place for lots of conflict.

1. ROOIVALKS

South Africa, to my knowledge is drawing back its original requirement for Rooivalks, meaning there will be less than 20 for the entire armed forces.
This, I feel, is silly. I would have at least 40-45 Rooivalk aircraft in deployment to provide cover for myground forces, which in the event of prolonged war are certainly going to be large and widespread.

2. GRIPENS

Nice, all round multirole aircraft but lacks range and has only a moderate strike capability. On the African continent, SA has more to fear from enemy fground forces than it does from aircraft (though one could assume a good lilihood of running into Flankers, Fulcrums or older Soviet models, or perhaps Mirages).

To this effect, I am generally happy with the Gripen, but given the choice I would have taken the F-16C Falcon Block-52+. This aircraft offers enhanced performance in all areas of combat, and has a wider adaptability for ordinance types.

3. Long-Range Strike Capability.

None ground, naval or air based.

This in my opinion, is not really an urgent requirement, but it would certainly be very useful for knocking the c##p out of any neighbour who decides to get hostile.

Best options?

The European MEADS SCALP-EG / Storm Shadow is a possible option for the Gripen, though I am not 100% on this. This missile (depending on type) is capable of ranges up to 600km. Very accurate, but obviously requires good intel and good targetting to achieve full potential.

Ground-based options include SCUD or SMERCH land-based ballistic missiles, of which the evolved verison are capable of 200-450km ranges. Accuracy depends on type and guidance support.

Then of course theres the B-1B Lancer! I heard the USAF is retiring another batch of them. Might be worth picking up the telephone…

RE: GLOBAL DEVELOPING POWERS-2003!!!

I’m not sure about SA influence over Zimbabwe. My take on the Mugabe situation is that SA will soon implement their own “land reform” programme. That is why Mbeki has been so supportive of Mugabe, because he wants to prepare the whites living in SA for a similar thing.

I’ve discussed it with some South Africans, and some agree but most disagree. But I had lunch with a stockbroker last week, and it seems the markets have already placed a “land instability” premium on the South African market. That is, relative values of SA companies have fallen. Mbeki’s support of Mugabe has already cost SA hundreds of millions in unrealised gains and subsequently, investment and job creation will suffer.

RE: GLOBAL DEVELOPING POWERS-2003!!!

also, i think that SA doesnt need to invest too much in it military as it pretty much can insure no agression is shown to them by means of political and economical deterents.

for example, SA provides zimbabway with its electricity, if zimbabway attacks SA, then it would be like attacking themselves. also SA has a strong enough economy nd industrial infastructure to make sure it can produce a very large and well equiped armed forces in a very short time. much like the way japan is. it doesnt have a very large standing army, but it can quickly make itself into one of the more potent armed forces in the reagon when needed.

RE: GLOBAL DEVELOPING POWERS-2003!!!

Back to the original comment about “power” meaning more than pure military assets: SA has the strongest local economy by a country mile. Other western nations also have more interest vested in SA than elsewhere.

The industrial and economic advantage SA has over the rest of Africa is substantially more pronounced than the Brazilian advantage over the rest of Latin America!

RE: GLOBAL DEVELOPING POWERS-2003!!!

>South Africa.
>
SA is truly the African
>superpower and this is a big continent, much overlooked.

Mongu, I really do appreciate love for a country, but South Africa is not really what I would call a superpower, even in the African context.

Perhaps if South Africa had some continental IRBM’s (SMERCH, SCUD) or cruise-missiles (SCALP-EG / ONYX) tipped with minaturised nukes, then I might agree with you.

South Africa has made a big mistake not heavily investing in the excellent Rooivalk attack helicopter. Having less than 20 of these aircraft is not an effective deterrent against a determined land-based adversary spread over a wide area.

Secondly, South Africa lacks a long-range strike platform, and equipped with Gripens, the SAAF must quickly acquire new tanker assets to support them.

RE: GLOBAL DEVELOPING POWERS-2003!!!

mongu- South Africa hasnt got their gripens yet have they? I dont think theyre supposed to get them till 2007. Most all of their current fighter jets are not servicable. Even their armys doesnt have much of any servicable equipement. Basically all they have is a very large standing army that is very undertrained and equiped which isnt much different than any other african nation.

RE: GLOBAL DEVELOPING POWERS-2003!!!

Brazil

Despite the fact it has no longer the biggest Latin American economy (now Mexico has), Brazil economy doesnt seem to being suffering much with Argentina´s crisis. Brazilian market is instable thanks to presidential elections in October what made Real (local money) gets underated, but this must be temporary.
The decision about the next fighter seems to be delayed until the next president is known what gives M2K a very big advantage once the 2 favorite candidates says they´re gonna cancel the program in order to favor Embraer/Dassault´s offer. Although Brazilian AF is not much better than others Latin American Air Forces, Brazilian Army and Navy have no equivalents in Latin American context.

Regards,
Primer55

RE: GLOBAL DEVELOPING POWERS-2003!!!

South Africa.

Despite a big decline in the strength of the SA economy, other African countries have slid by a lot more. Relatively, SA has the biggest advantage over the rest of Africa that there has ever been.

Recent committment to the Saab Gripen enlarges the gap between SA and it’s neighbours. SA is truly the African superpower and this is a big continent, much overlooked.

RE: GLOBAL DEVELOPING POWERS-2003!!!

GLOBAL DEVELOPING POWERS – Twilight’s coffee time.

Cyprus (Republic Of)

Serious attempt to equip with S-300’s and Tombstone radars. Retains a new fleet of Mi-35E attack helicopters, and is regualrly upgrading its equipment (with mainly Russian equipment). Will recieve 2 Super-Vitae-III missile boats and 18 MM-40 Exocets by 2005. Currently has no warplanes, and an active armed forces of just 13500. Plans to commit to future Euro-Army with two unmanned spy planes and 4 SAR helicopters.

Money / Expenditure rate – ****
Servicability – ****
Training / Equiping – ***
Size – *

Sudan

Recently acquired 12 Mig-29 Fulcrums by my understanding, though I have no idea how many they already have, and how they intend to support them.

Money / Expenditure rate – **
Servicability – **
Training / Equiping – *
Size – **

Iraq

Severly beaten up over a decade of conflict with the west, but reatins a 350 000-strong army (mainly civil popular army with the minor portion forming the more elite Republican Guard). Has a fairly large supply of older Russian / Soviet tanks such as T-55’s, T-60’s, T-62’s, T-72’s and a few T-80’s. Many were destroyed in the Gulf War. The country also retains about 80-90 functional attack helicopters, almost all made up of Mi-24 Hinds and SA-342 Gazelles.
Any capacity Iraq once had to project nuclear or chemical firepower over long-distances has been well suppressed, but Iraq is suspected of retaining significant stocks of components for both.
Iraq’s air force retains a fleet of maybe 120 warplanes, though I am not sure how many are serviceable and all are mostly ageing types.

Money / Expenditure rate – **
Servicability – ***
Training / Equiping – ***
Size – ****