AN UPGRADED ALPHA JET OF THE NIGERIAN AIR FORCE SHOWING SIX HARDPOINTS AND ITS PANOPLY OF ARMAMENTS

PHOTO CREDIT: NIGERIAN AIR FORCE

About beegeagle

BEEG EAGLE -perspectives of an opinionated Nigerian male with a keen interest in Geopolitics, Defence and Strategic Studies
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

119 Responses to AN UPGRADED ALPHA JET OF THE NIGERIAN AIR FORCE SHOWING SIX HARDPOINTS AND ITS PANOPLY OF ARMAMENTS

  1. cutievik says:

    Nigeria’s version of a Smooth criminal!!!! Nice.

  2. beegeagle says:

    Well, I guess this is precisely how the A-Jets get outfitted for combat operations in the Northeast. The rocketpods were also mainstay during the ECOMOG years

    Pre-upgradation, they had four hardpoints as do all A-Jet. This Nigerian variant has had its nosecone elongated, suggesting a new fit of avionics and they now feature six hardpoints.

  3. rka says:

    Great photo, although this is why I can only see the addition of the Super Tucano and no other Ground Attack or COIN aircraft.

    Unfortunately, it is just the way it seems to be, but I hope to be proved wrong.

  4. doziex says:

    Since NAF seems to Love the Alpha jet above all else, how about trying to increase the numbers of the type in it’s orbat.

    (1) We can purchase the unserviceable alphas from our neighbours, and bring them back to life.

    Ivory coast(7), Togo (4) and Cameroon(5).

    The germans and the French may have some up for sale too.

    The alpha jet is no SU-30 MKA or is it even the SU-25.

    But 50 alpha jets is definitely more palatable than 12.

    You know, the thing about quantity being a quality of it’s own.

  5. beegeagle says:

    Talking about missiles and rocketry, has anyone heard of this hypersonic Chinese-made missile which they carry on JF17 Thunder jets – a Mach 4+ ballistic nightmare🙂

    READ

    HYPERSONIC MISSILE FOR JF17 THUNDER

    Pakistan has fielded a new very-high-speed long-range air-launched missile that senior officers in the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) have described as “an aircraft carrier killer”.

    The CM-400AKG is a Mach 4 plus-capable air-to-surface weapon developed in China and now in service with JF-17 aircraft of the Pakistan Air Force.

    The weapon,designated CM-400AKG, was designed and developed in China by the China Aerospace Science and Industry Corporation (CASIC) and was revealed at Airshow China 2012, held in Zhuhai from
    13-19 November. The CM-400AKG is now part of the operational weapon set of the PAF’s JF-17 Thunder multirole fighter.

    “This is a mature weapon that has been fully tested. It is not conceptual. It is in service,” Air Commodore Mahmood Khalid, PAF JF-17 Deputy Project Director
    stated. “The CM-400AKG is a very high-speed missile that is very difficult to intercept. It hits the target at Mach 4 or above and its kinetic impact alone is enough to destroy any high-value target, like an aircraft carrier.”

    The CM-400AKG first appeared,briefly, in public at last year’s Dubai Airshow, when a placard for the weapon was placed alongside a PAF JF-17 – and then removed. The weapon itself was not shown. At the time PAF personnel acknowledged it was a new Chinese-built air-to-surface stand-off missile. However, the initial assumption that it was a derivative of the C-802 anti-ship missile has proved to be very wide of the mark.

    The CM-400AKG is a 400 kg solid-rocket-powered weapon that can be fitted with either a penetrator or blast/fragmentation warhead. It is a fire-and-forget precision-guided weapon that can be fitted with several seeker options, which are understood to include an active radar seeker and an imaging infrared seeker with target-recognition (TR) capabilities.

    PAF sources say the missile can be pre-programmed with digital imagery for highly precise attacks against fixed sites in TR mode, but it can also be retargeted in flight by using the radar seeker option. The range of the CM-400AKG is understood to be in the 180-250 km class.

    It is designed for use against fixed or what were described as “slow moving” targets. CASIC data indicates that after launch the CM-400AKG climbs to high altitude and terminates with a high-speed dive on the target. The PAF describes the missile’s impact velocity as “hypersonic”. Both CASIC and the PAF note that the CM-400AKG has been developed as a JF-17 weapon.

  6. beegeagle says:

    Looks like the Thai and Portuguese have snapped up all the decommissioned A-Jet from Germany…and those were mostly, if not all, dedicated attack variants.

  7. ifiok umoeka says:

    Oga, yes they did in the 90s I think. However, I would rather that we concentrate on new HL15 as they German versions are no longer available. As for the French versions (along with franco afros), u know already what I’d say!
    As 4 the CM400, the n0s don’t add up. If its supersonic, it needs space for fuel, the same is applicable for a 250+ range. For it 2 be a carrier killer it need space for a heavy warhead. The supersonic brahmos and subsonic harpoon has a warhead/total weight of 200-300/ 2500-3000kg and. 221/691kg respectively. Except the Chinese and Pakistanis have invented a new type of rocket engine, rocket fuel and explosive, it doesn’t add up. Otherwise, why haven’t we seen even a mug shot of it? That’s unlike the Chinese who would have marketed the living daylight out of the weapon. Is it impossible for them to make a mach 4 missile, 250+km or a carrier killer? No! But a 250+km mach 4 carrier killer weighing 400kg? Except its a nuk, I don’t think the tech is rip yet.

    • Sideways&smilling says:

      Pakistan said (@ the Dubai Air show) that it weighs 910kg + 150kg blast warhead or 200kg penetration warhead. I think its that light because it is Solid Fuel powered unlike BrahMos which is Liquid Fuelled.

  8. tope says:

    ifiok…..ur talking of a secret weapon here do you think they will give the fine details to others in the West to replicate, if its me i would keep mum only the element of surprise or a youtube video will suffice and get the US howling…

  9. doziex says:

    NAF should think long and hard, before acquiring these Chinese jets.

    TRUST BUT VERIFY

    The Pakistanis, still prefer the F-16C/Ds to any of the FC-1 or J-10B variants.

    The Chinese would only field a hundred or so J-10Bs, while they still load up on Russian and Chinese SUKHOIS.

    For friendship purposes, we could buy proven Chinese ships and say some pakistani Al Khalid MBTs . But we need to hold off on these SINO/PAK jets, till we see them tested by others.

    These Jets DO NOT solve the long range and heavy payload issues. Capabilities NAF MUST have, to be effective over the great expanses of this continent.

  10. WachanGuy says:

    hammer and sickle*. Chai, old age

  11. beegeagle says:

    Wachan Guy, Ndjamena is located no more than 200 km to the east of Maiduguri. 1000kms? If you move that far east from our border town of Gamboru-Ngala in Borno, you would be inside Darfur in Sudan.

    Mubi is probably situated 250km to the southeast of Damaturu.

    Interesting perspectives on tactics though. Well done.

    • oje says:

      People forget the ocean is an awefuly very big expanse of open sea. So many places a Carrier can be one hour before a missile hits. Its own thing testing a missile on a fixed land target in some remote Chinese desert, its quite different all the same hitting a 100,000 ton Aircraft carrier with unmatched navtronics and electronic systems and the best misile defense systems and sorrounded by Aegeis Ships, Destroyers and Electronic jamming devices straight from Star wars.

      • beegeagle says:

        Don’t bet on it, Oga Oje, lest one unwittingly encourages complacency. A Chinese Song-class submarine has previously surprised an entire carrier group.

        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-492804/The-uninvited-guest-Chinese-sub-pops-middle-U-S-Navy-exercise-leaving-military-chiefs-red-faced.html

      • oje says:

        That’s peace time. A South African sub once penetrated a NATO defense line in a Naval exercise. In war time with tensions high like China doing now setting up Air Defence Zones in disputed territory more factors come into play overwelmingly in favour of the better advanced.

      • beegeagle says:

        Do you believe that to be an excuse for getting caught out so flat-footed? Carrier groups by concept should be impregnable. As you can see, that gaffe caused many blushes because it did not quite go according to plan.

        I suspect that many of us are either not showing enough respect or are unwilling to accept how fast the Chinese are moving. But even they might enjoy being under-rated.

        We might recall that the Soviet Union practically went into WW II on horseback while Germany had the most advanced hardware systems on paper? Remind me, which army did the most to obliterate the German menace? Marshal Zhukov’s Red Army it was..

        That is why I am paying close attention. When Turkey, NATO’s second biggest army suddenly appear to prefer Chinese area defence missiles, perhaps sobriety has taken root somewhere.

      • ifiok umoeka says:

        I’d think that Turkey’s choice has more to do with control, geopolitics and cost than technical superiority. Otherwise why would the Chinese be interested in the Russian S400?

      • CHYDE says:

        @ Ifiok, While i agree with you that the Turkish interest in Chinese Defence Missiles has something to do with Control and geopolitics, lets NOT write off the Chinese, these dudes Shot down a Satellite some time back, i hope you are aware of the 052D Destroyer . http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1353164/WikiLeaks-US-threatened-military-action-China-space-arms-race.html

      • beegeagle says:

        Chyde, the reason why they did that was because after it emerged that some Chinese ICBMs could hit U.S cities, those in denial switched to defensive mode, claiming that they did not possess the accurate targeting systems to make them A-class missile threats.

        So how best to demostrate precision guidance than to shoot down a satellite from a cluster.

      • oje says:

        One ohio class SSBN in the pacfic is armed with over 120 nuclear warheads, enough to wipe out 120 of Chinese Cities on the East coast. Its easy to over estmate the power of the Chinese military. Look at the air defense zone its created in disbuted territory. Unarmed B-52 bombers are flying unharrased.

      • beegeagle says:

        And China do not own nuclear weapons or cannot deliver same to US cities?

        Personally, I do not subscribe to this Command-and-Conquer theory. The tide of the Korean War of 1950-53 and what the Chinese entry into the fray did, barely a year after Communists took power and with what was dismissed as a primitive military establishment, to halt the northward advance of the South Korean-American alliance should make it abundantly clear that wars are fought in the field and not on paper. China are not Korea or Vietnam and B52s and aircraft carriers deployed for the Vietnam War.

        Whatever edge one side enjoys in terms of technology, quantity is represents a quality of its own and just like the Soviets, much cheaper and labor-intensive production can and will churn out such stupefying numbers of hardware systems as to significantly erode the perceived qualitative edge which the other side possibly enjoys.

        Every reason bar snow which prevented the Germans from defeating the Soviets will count in a conflict between China and the USA. Only that this time, China are more advanced, much more numerous and far richer than the Soviet Union was. Yet, they are no less nationalistic or ideologically driven.

        For the avoidance of doubt, neither Russia nor America can defeat the Chinese in a full-blown war. Sans showboating, the Chinese have had nukes for over half-a-century and SSBNs are just another delivery platform for which a nation as highly ingenious and brimming with self-belief as China are, is bound to have answers to whether we know it or not.

        It is easy to quote figures from the Free World, how about places where they do not have the liberty to do so?

        For all the much-vaunted qualitative edge, won’t the likes of the UK and France also flatten China? If not, why not? Brother, perish the thought.

        I am willing to bet on the possibility that the last two countries the powerful Yankees want to cross in any battlefield are RUSSIA and CHINA…not least because of their capacity to dig veeery deep.

        Let’s keep it real, gentlemen. It did not happen in 1950-53 when the technological gap was wider (China did not even have nukes then yet they fought with gusto) and it is not going to happen now that they have nukes, advanced naval platforms, ICBMs, stealthy subs and decent jets (J10, J11 etc). Perish the thought.

      • oje says:

        China lost 300,000 men in Korea, another 300,000 in Vietname. Thje ability to bring the war to your own backyard and win is what the U.S military was built for. Mind you the Soviet Union at its peak was far more powerful conventionally than todays China. Unlike the Japanese the Chinese are not a warrior nation. A war in the pacific will be an air and naval war. China’s brown water Navy is no match and missiles aint gonna compensate enough. While the Chinese are fielding carrier killer concept American Carriers are being uquiped with Unmanned Bomber Drones, they can take off far from Chinese surface forces and bomb targets deep inside Chinese territory. Chinese commanders do not know the where abouts of American hunter subs, same subs that for over three decades patroled the shores of the Soviet Union.

      • oje says:

        The Nigerian Navy is set to have the highest number of Corvettes/ in Sub Saharan Africa by mid 2014.

      • beegeagle says:

        Amen🙂

        You have my email address to send snippets to.

        So you could actually be in the Navy then! Here I was thinking that you work at the US Embassy’s Public Affairs Unit🙂

      • beegeagle says:

        Not willing to bet on any closely-guarded secret being sacrosanct. How many times have topmost-level secrets been compromised by Chinese hackers already? Neither do I see this military walkover happening anywhere. I doubt that any of us know the strong points of the American military juggernaut more than their Chinese and Russian rivals and it would be simplistic to imagine that they are not daily taking steps to counter them. Mind you, I also believe that China are also unlikely to roll over America on the battlefield.

        What I find to be a tad
        amusing is this belief that China will be pulverised in the event of an all-out war with America. It is not going to happen. You only need hark back to the gutsy display of supposedly inferior Vietnamese MiG pilots against their USAF adversaries for a template on unexpected outcomes. The Vietnamese generation which fought against the French and the Americans were, like the Chinese, PATRIOTIC and not militaristic like the pre-pacifist era Japan and Germany were.

        The Russo-Chinese orbit has never been heavy on disclosure or exploits, so I really dunno why you are so sure that the hunter-killer subs have left no footprint anywhere.

        On paper, the brownwater fleet might be no match but nobody gave the Vietnamese any chance against the overwhelming superiority of France or the USA. It panned out differently.

        At the peak of its power, the Soviet Union was more powerful than China are today but the USA did not square off against them either.

        You offered statistics concerning Korea and China did believe in the human wave tactics. They still do and they can afford to do so. But they pushed the attackers back and to the south of the 38th Parallel. Comparatively, that was a very rudimentary force.

        If China do not possess the militaristic antecedents of Japan, they more than make up for that with a fiercely nationalistic streak that runs through their entire society…and that has spurred them on to do great things on the global stage. They have upset every form book and are the second biggest economy today not as a result of the prescriptions of Bretton-Woods institutions but on account of their own homegrown economic model. We see it in the sports as well, in infrastructural development and you bet, secretive as they are, the same touch permeates their military endeavours without prejudice to the put-downs they get from naysayers.

        The same fiercely nationalistic instinct was the undercurrent which spurred the Soviets on in the Great Patriotic War and ensured that they dented German morale more than any other army and exacted the heaviest number of casualties from their troops to boot.

        If 300,000 Korean casualties be the case, the Soviets reportedly lost 20 million people in that war. Remind me, who won the war?

      • ocelot2006 says:

        Keep in mind that the satellite in question was one in geosynchronous orbit, farther away than the LEO satellite destroyed by a US Aegis destroyer in an earlier excercise.

    • WachanGuy says:

      Your praise is much appreciated Gen. Beegz. I must have misread the map I looked at. I really feel sad for our military. We(Beegz Blog) literally do the shopping for MoD’s Procurement Office with all the in depth comparisons and analysis about platforms being made here. Implement now, no. Even if MoD and our “super minister” decide to be tight-fisted, its not like there’s no money to fund a $750 million annual “black budget” run solely on the President’s order specifically to fund arsenal and firepower upgrades needed to deal with threats like BH and AQIM. After all, $billions go missing in the same country annually. May competing demands between critical platforms like the Su30 MKI and VIP bizjets like the Falcon 7X not bring about our nation’s downfall.

      • oje says:

        Who won the war ? Russia? I think not. Without American lend lease aid of tanks and jets and opening a second front against Hitlers army Russia and Britain was all but defeated. Britain cut off and starved to surrender, Russia obiterated. Yes such were the power of the Germanic Japanese alliance of the Axis. Read your history. Stalin was providing Hitler with Steel and irone ore while he invaded Poland. It took America wadding in again to clear up Europes mess. China is no where near the Soviet Union. Human waves while good on the battlefield is of no use in a pacific war. War with China wil not be like massed armies on the ground. Its gonna be over the pacifoic, on sea and in the air. America holds the ace, technology, experience, numbers and a powerful alliance. Can China take Taiwan today? No.

      • beegeagle says:

        Oje, the totality of the materiel which came in through the lend-lease program mainly served to stabilize an initially-jolted Russia.

        When the War really wore on, the staggering production levels which emanated from the Soviet lines infinitely dwarfed anything which came through the Lend-Lease program..both in terms of numbers and military significance. We are talking tanks, artillery and aircraft..not lorries ala the lend-lease program.

        On the balance, the casualty figures and scale of battles suggests that Russia did the most to end the Nazi menace. Even the most hardened revisionist would be hard-pressed to suggest anything to the contrary. Or does the scale and fury of the fighting in the Battle of the Bulge and in North Africa put together replicate the Battle of Stalingrad alone for instance?

        If Taiwan are that powerful, they would not still be clustered on the island where they retreated to in 1949 after a comprehensive military defeat. What is so grand about them – Patriot missiles, F16s or what? Those are available in numbers so consequential as to blunt an all-out Chinese attack? The same Chinese who even as mere guerrillas they could not hold back with the Nationalist Army of All China?

        Even tiny Gambia know that Taiwan are a played-out trick and have just jettisoned them. They shall not be around for much longer as a sovereign entity. Mark my words.

        I have internalised your projections towards a likely theatre of air and sea battles. Come the day. Nobody gave the Vietnamese a chance in the air war since they were naïve and flew ‘inferior’ MiG 17 and MiG 21s against F4s and B52s. Sometimes, that is just what it is on paper.

        Come the day.

      • oje says:

        No. Taiwan is an American aircraft Carrier, China woudnt dare strike. China is effectively sorrounded by U.S military. Bases in Japan, Korea, Australia, the Philipines and soon Vietname noot to mention the Islands of Diego Garcia. China does not have the amphibious resources to support her sabre ratling, the recent air defense zone incident is proof of that. Is America capable of invading China? Hell no.continental scale Land invasions are becoming extint. Does the U.S militaru have the capability to cripple Chinese Naval and Air assets in the pacific, an absolute yes to that.

      • beegeagle says:

        So if they are incapable of invading China, what do the Chinese have to fear? You sounded like a “bend your will” invasion ala Kuwait or Iraq was on the cards. That is not going to happen. The Chinese are insular while the gregarious Americans want to be everywhere – to each, his own.

        The Chinese interest in the Pacific scarcely transcends contested island possessions with the Japanese and the multi-layered contention with a myriad of countries over the Spratlys.

      • oje says:

        Myriad of countries? China is disputing territories with the Philipines,Vietnam, Cambodia, India, Japan, South Korea, and as far as Brunei, claiming its shores as Chinese territory. The U.S Navy is effectively what’s keeping the sea lanes free for global commerce. China is not gonna negate a 50 year head start the US has with a couple of missiles. China’s bullying and aggressive posturing will come with serious consequences, espoocially if Japan feels threatened enough to re arm disregarding America’s military unbrella.

      • beegeagle says:

        They are in dispute over Diaoyu with Japan and the Spratlys with Taiwan, Malaysia, The Philippines and Vietnam. These are all maritime neighbours.
        The picture of an abrasive and belligerent China is what I am not too keen on. Territorial disputes are common in statecraft and it is not a particular Chinese pastime. At least, more than two of the claimants in the Spratlys dispute necessarily have to be telling lies since one patch of territory cannot belong to all five claimants simultaneously. How are they better than China…because they threaten no egos? I do not see the need to have China singled out.

        Since 2008, disputed territories between Nigeria, Cameroon, Niger and Benin have been gained or lost to the nextdoor republic. Does that also make us a regional security nuisance?

      • oje says:

        We are not in territorial disputes with 14 countries over piece of real estate 500 miles from our homeland. You really are downplaying China’s bully and increasing assertiveness.

      • beegeagle says:

        Lol…I am wondering how that impacts Nigeria’s diplomacy. America have been far more widely accused of bullying across the globe as well…and that exceeds 500 miles from the USA. How come that sits well with you? Why are you shutting your eyes to that reality?

        So what is the matter for angst therein – that the circle of alleged bullies is about to become widened and the victim-bully ratio, smaller?

      • ifiok umoeka says:

        Who won the war? Oh, the US, British commonwealth, russia and then the rest of the free army from France to Greece, they all won the war and that the Russians paid the steepest price doesn’t mean they did the greatest, it means that they were clobbered the most. We all know that for a couple of different decisions that the war would have gone the other way. Again, this doesn’t take away the bravery of the Russians. Again I remember that little Finland brutalize them 2wice and had they been on the allied side, they would have had that chunk of their territory in Russian hands.
        As for the Viets and the migs, u make it sound as if they didn’t have help! The Russians prep and led them and we all know of the ‘bomb here and not there so we don’t hurt the Russian’ tactics that ended up costing hundreds of American aviators lives. The viets were good, even great up until 69 when topgun (and later redflag) grads started having them 4 lunch, u know that. Then again, vietnam was a long time ago, Iraq is closer and we all know that the Americans of the early 70s are different from those if the early 90s. 20yrs later, are they closer 2 the 50s,70s or the 90s, u tell me.

      • ifiok umoeka says:

        China 2day have a better standard of living, you want 2 tell him to catch a shell with his chest? Good luck with that. That human wave doesn’t work again 2day, not after US and friends killed over 80,000 Iraqis in days and ended up with a conscience. Other wise why the Chinese change of heart. If u invest in ur troops, u’ll see how difficult it is to replace them and how that plays with morals (except they all convert to the religion we all know). The Taiwanese are not that powerful, but they can take care of themselves. Their play is not to attack China, its to exert so steep a price that the Chinese will think 2wice b4 attacking (porcupine) while they buy time for reinforcement from the US. If u ask me, I’d say that they have succeeded thus. China 2day is a product of the US (it was better investment) that explains why they are not in the Japanese, Korean league (as before)!
        Chinese interest hardly transcends… Haba, my oga, I’ll pretend that u didn’t say that. Like Oje said, we are not in dispute with 14 countries 500miles away from our coast

      • beegeagle says:

        Oga Ifiok, you are arguing towards intended outcomes and not according to what the indices say. Without any convoluted attempts at revision, the grandest-scale, most vicious and protracted fighting anywhere during World War II took place inside the Soviet Union. We have gone from what transpired to what would have happened if the war lasted a bit longer or the alliances were stacked differently?

        There really is no point subjecting the given and obvious to personal interpretation anf if you say that they got clobbered the most, they also did more of the clobbering than anyone else and rolled the Germans right back into Germany. They committed more troops to the war and had the most men and materiel thrown at them, so why not the heaviest casualties. “The bigger the head, the bigger the headache”. They also killed more Nazi troops than anyone else.

        Yes, the Allies played their roles towards ending the war but by the law of averages, the scale of fighting and the decimation of German ranks, the Soviets did the most. There are statistics for men and materiel deployed to fronts and casualties sustained in battle. Look that up dispassionately and come tell me it ain’t so. Lol..are the casualty figures for a battle fought with sticks and another fought with knives and sabres supposed to be the same?

        And when I asked “who won the war”, I was talking about the fighting between the qualitatively superlative Germans and the result-oriented Soviets.

      • oje says:

        Oga beeg. The Soviet Union share a land border with Germany, the Germans raped and destroyed %70 of the Soviet Union, even stoping at the gates of Moscow. Stalins helicopter was fueld and ready too abdicate, until Hitler ordered his generals to turn towards Ukraine and secure the oil wells. Costly mistake as history later reminds us. Its common sense to expect the Russians to exact the most revenge on the Germans foot by foot, they are closer. That said British bombers and USAF bombers bombed the living day light out of Berlin on a daily basis, this no doubt sapped German morale and necessitaed the pull out of many troops and resources from the front to defend the homeland. You know how Churchil begged roosevelt to come into the war. Without America Hitler and the Japanese empire would have been unstopable. You think Stalin stood a chance against Hitler?

      • beegeagle says:

        WHO eventually WON after the monumental altercations between the Soviet and the Germans sans convoluted revision, my brother Oga Oje? “They nearly fled” “Stalin was on the verge of running away”, “it could have been”. He did not run and the “could have” did not happen. Why not leave out the permutations about what could have been and reckon with what actually happened? There are no laurels for having had the most attempts on goal in a football match or for looking good on the ball. People want to know who won the game or who lifted the trophy.

        Haba, Oga…all these attempts at a repudiation of the obvious just to avoid giving credit where it is due?

        The Germans destroyed much of the Soviet Union (70% sure amounts to serious exaggeration,not when Vladivostok lies all of 10,000kms to the east of Moscow near Japan) but were eventually defeated, sent into unrequited retreat and had their own capital of Berlin flattened by Soviet troops.

        Let us deal with the existent, not the plausible since none of the “what ifs” and “nearlys” eventually happened in the event.

        Did Germany end up on the victorious side? Battle of Moscow – Russia won; Battle of Stalingrad – Russia won; Battle of the Kursk Salient – Russia won AND for good measure pushed the Germans right back to Berlin. Let us give credit where it is due since snuffing out another man’s candle never made anyone else’s burn brighter.

        Let’s not detract from documented history. Everywhere I quoted Western sources, not Russian sources. Those were the biggest tank battles and combined arms ground battles recorded in history. No other country’s troops ever came under such grand-scale, barbaric and furious attacks anywhere on the planet. To have come out on top of all of that was no cakewalk. It might be difficult to accept that since the bragging rights do not belong to any of the apparently much-fancied NATO armies. The heroism of the Russian people should be recognised for what it is, not wilfully and subjectively miniaturised pursuant to the attainment some unclear objective mired in revision.

        Really I cannot afford to see us launching off into another potentially long-winded discussion about what could have been or analysing “what ifs” which will not impact our quest for knowledge whereas I have not uploaded new content to the blog today, my friend🙂

        THE SCORECARD (that which actually transpired rather than what could have happened)

        – First major defeat handed to the Germans – Battle of Moscow

        – Biggest and most important battle of the war – Battle of Stalingrad

        – Biggest tank battle in history – Battle of the Kursk Salient

        – German Army sent into permanent retreat until Russian soldiers stormed into Berlin.

        If it be all about being nextdoor to Germany, why did France and Poland not similarly rise from defeat on the doorsteps of Germany and replicate the heroic Soviet feat? The Soviets were simply imperious in their epic response to the German menace and smashed the myth of Nazi German invincibility.

        Let us deal with that fact and not engage in dead-ended argumentation which leads us nowhere, my friend.

        There are chronicles pertaining to men and materiel deployed, the casualty figures, outcomes and strategic impact of all the major battles of WW II available online. Check them out for yourself just to be sure that you are handling real data here rather than reading my own subjective opinion.

      • giles says:

        oga beeg d only land we lost was to cameroun and all lands we gained were from chad niger etc and we all know why dat happened.pls leav dat civil war wound alone

      • CHYDE says:

        Talking about Destruction of Naval Assets may be you should chexk out China’s DF-21D ASBM

      • beegeagle says:

        Will do, Chyde.

        Expecting a photo of a Nigerian Navy big ship which I want to upload here today.

      • oje says:

        By mid-1940, the United States had produced 80,000 landing craft, 100,000 tanks and armored cars, 300,000 airplanes, fifteen million guns, and forty-one billion rounds of ammunition. The bulk of this went to Europe, to British, Russian, and French forces. The Economics of scale was the typing point in the second world war, Americans were churning out Tanks like Chocolate candy bars in factories.

      • beegeagle says:

        We have gone from 70% of Russia destroyed to this nebulous and open-ended assertion yet again? What were the precise numbers delivered to Russia and what did that amount to in percentage terms relative to the armoured vehicles of the Red Army?

        So American tanks were what the Soviets featured in the Battle of the Kursk Salient or used in chasing out the Germans from Stalingrad? Is this an attempt at glory hunting through the backdoor? You have probably heard of the T34 tank. Where did it have its battle essence defined – in Alaska or Puerto Rico? Well, it cut its teeth in the mammoth Eastern Front.

        READ THIS:

        Quote

        “The Red Army is widely credited with being the decisive land force in the Allied victory in the European Theatre of World War II.

        During operations on the Eastern Front, it engaged and defeated about 75%–80% of the German armies (Wehrmacht and Waffen-SS) deployed in the war”

        End of Quote

        Yeah, three-quarters of German troops were deployed against Russia alone. That was why Russia’s defeat of the Germans quickly led to the end of hostilities in Europe. When 75-80% of the Nazi troops had been mashed up in the Russian front, what else was there to fight on for?

        MOVING ON, the M-3 and Valentine tanks which got through to Russia were light tanks. The mainstay tanks and SP arty which the Russians used were

        1. T34

        2. KV-1/KV-2

        3. IS-2

        4. SU-76 SP guns

        5. BM-13 MRLs

        READ

        “The Soviet Union began and ended the war with more tanks than the rest of the world combined (18,000-22,000)…..by October 1942 Life magazine wrote, “The best tanks in the world today are probably the Russian tanks…”. The T-34 effectively made all German tanks produced to that date obsolete. In fact, at its height the T-34 was deemed so successful, and so capable in every role, that production of all other tanks except the IS-2 was stopped to allow all available resources to be used exclusively for this tank.

        The T-34 forced the Germans to adopt new, heavier designs such as the Panther and Tiger, which in turn forced upgrades to the Soviet, United States and British tank fleets.”

        READ

        ” Later in the war the light tank role was increasingly filled by Lend-Lease supplies of United States M-3 light tanks and British and Canadian-built Valentine tanks.

        Ironically, the T-34 was as fast or faster than many of the light tanks that were supposed to scout for it…”🙂

        END

        No snatching the glory from them Soviets. As you can see, the star performer of the entire war was the T34 TANK and not any insignificant numbers of recce vehicles such as the M3 or Valentine leased from allied nations.

        Let’s give it a rest already, brother. The attempt at snatching the thunder from the Red Army is not going to fly.

      • oje says:

        The best Tanks in the world today are the M1 Abrams, The Leopards and Challengers. All outstrips what ever Russia has to offer.

      • beegeagle says:

        Lol…this is rapidly becoming a disjointed exchange, Oga Oje. Consider taking a break for tea, if you will.

        How do those come into reckoning in a discussion on WW 2-vintage tanks? The M1 or Leopard tanks were in service as of 1941-45? I really cannot understand this, buddy.

      • oje says:

        The M1 Abram is America’s frontline tank in service today. What are you talking about WW2 Tanks?

      • beegeagle says:

        Burn out has indeed come, my friend🙂. How did we go from LEND-LEASE in one post to Abrams M1 tank in the very next one? What is the connection between them? Was the Abrams M1 tank in service during the Lend-Lease Program or did it feature anywhere during the WW 2?

      • beegeagle says:

        BREAKING NEWS: The COAS did say during the RSM Convention last month that new stocks of military hardware have been acquired.

        I just received an alert at 5:44pm stating that fresh stocks of military APCs for the Army are right now being offloaded at an airport somewhere outside southern Nigeria. Details withheld for security reasons.

        So we have new APCs to look forward to in no time at all.

      • jimmy says:

        aha!!!! we bloggers were right please go back to our posts where we speculated…….. is this the end of the” thin skinned hilux toyota carry me go vans” o se o se baba ( thank you father.
        This is a day of days i could dance at work on my desk top, this is good feeling to have that someone is actually taking not just this blog serious but the real lives our our soldiers who are shedding their blood serious.

      • ocelot2006 says:

        MRAPs possibly?

      • beegeagle says:

        That is what I think as well, Oga Ocelot2006. The chap who alerted me was on the spot but could not take photographs. You know what the permissible limits are.

      • Are James says:

        My guess is that they are Oshokosh MRAPs

      • ifiok umoeka says:

        Oga, pls just permit me this final salvo and I’m done till next time.
        The Pak nuke was no secret, remember that they were aided by the west from the beginning. Maybe the sys failed, maybe they turned it off! Howbeit, damage control was unparalleled for such a small vessel and I’m sure they’ve moved on and upgraded. The R29 and more lethal AT;5,13,14 aren’t Hezbollah, but Russian LOL! After the 50 damage tank count how many tankers lost their lives? (15). Among the ‘lost’ tanks, how many were mk III and how many were mk IV? How many tanks were written off (5) and how many were repaired and returned to service? 1000 ATGMs launched minus IEDs and Mines, 50 hits, 21 amour penetrations (15 ATGM, 7 IEDs/Mines). Haba Oga, the tanks (even the earlier versions) worked more than advertised, the emphasis is on crew protection, u know that.
        Final questn, in 2008/09 Gaza war, Hamas had r29s et al, how many merkavas were destroyed again?
        Aha…aha!
        Like I said earlier, the Russians ( they were Russians then and most of the baltic nations were independent or even Axis) were great, so were the Americans, Brits, Germans, Japs and all other Free armies (the Italians are not in my list). U keep mentioning Russian victories but never cite a defeat? Yes the won in the east (the 70/80% loss were of the eastern front not the entire Europe!) yet they took a heavy drubbing from the Germans and the Finns! I choose to mention the Siberians because, they specifically (winter – subzero – warrior) were decisive in walking all over the Germans when winter came!
        Oh, doesn’t the Italian and French invasions count when it forced the Germans not to press in the east anymore ( and giving the Russian a breather) but to concentrate in the west (with Germany a few hundred miles from the southern coast of France?). What of the devastation by Allied(west) airforce and navy on German industry and ability to get raw material and the effect these had on replenishment and fielding of some of the most advance weapons of the war already developed?
        Moreover, the west capture more of Germany than the Russians!
        I have never tried to dim anyone’s light, for crying out loud, I’m Nigerian, remember! But that’s what u are doing by saying that Russia’s was the most significant! All my post has been to show that what happened was interwoven and not isolated, that east is far from west, yet, what happens here affect there! I didn’t fight in WWII (grandpa did) but I know my history.
        Finally, I remember that we got here arguing for and against quality and quantity. Its instructive that u ended with that tribute to the T34 which we all know was the best (not the most powerful but a well balanced tank with proper amour, mobility and firepower) tank of the war. Incidentally, that tanks design origin is western LOL.
        As an aside, don’t crucify Oje, to his credit, he said… ‘the best tank in the world 2day…’. I don’t agree with him on that( discus for another day) but I don’t think that he was referring to the Abrams and Leopards as WWII tanks. Perhaps he overleaped from the mid 40s to 2013! LOL.
        As for the christmas presents, I’ll sing HALE… I complete it when I see it. Maybe, the Christmas will be merry after all!

      • doziex says:

        I was saying Amen to @wachaguys 12:08 am comment.

        I will leave the WW2 debate alone for now.

        I am simply too preoccupied by what Nigeria would or wouldn’t do.

    • giles says:

      pls gen beeg forgive me for dis my stupid question,since our mig’s (21 n 17) are already decommissioned y can d army engineers integrate der cannons in a good n strong APC to give d army a good support vechile against dose islamist militant.cos some once said nothing in a house is useless apart from disease

  12. ifiok umoeka says:

    @ Doz, I agree with you totally, its just that our choices are limited.
    @ Tope, I don’t think that the Chinese have made these incredible breakthroughs. For one, these breakthroughs – in ultra lightweight heat resistant composites, miniaturized highly efficient scramjet perhaps, next generation solid fuel, miniaturized light weight multiple guidance sys and super compact new generation non nuclear warhead with more power than TNT and co all on their own. Haba, if the others had it, I would agree but for the Chinese to R&D all these stuff on their own, that’s inconsistent with what we all know about our Chinese brothers. The steal, buy or reverse engineer.
    2ndly, these tech are applicable in other areas, why don’t we see them in say AAM and SAM, UAV etc
    My verdict is that for now, we are limited by technology. Perhaps in no distant future, we would have a CM400 class CARRIER KILLER.
    3rdly, remember that the kinetic energy from the 400kg missile is advertised as being capable of killing the carrier. One must consider that after traveling a distance, the weight will be reduced as the fuel is burnt up so what hits the carrier is definitely not 400kg anymore.
    Finally, is it a 100,000tn or an 18,000tn carrier that we are talking about? Brothers, I have my doubts

    • Number one says:

      The cm-400akg missile is based on a conceptual Soviet missile of the ’80’s.so the tech is not something new.

  13. gbash10 says:

    The FC-1/JF-17 Thunder is a second- best fighter jet that should supplement the Su-30/35 Flanker in the NAF inventory in the near future!The jet does not have an electro-optical system to see other aircrafts in combat.Check all modern Russian,US,EU and Chinese fighter jets have this device in front of the cockpit like an eye.It is used instead of the radar to search for other aircraft by pilots so that its aircraft position could not be revealed in air combat,whereas,the radar reveals an aircraft’s position and may serve as a beacon for HARMs(High-speed Anti-Radiation Missiles) to homing.
    Secondly,its missile-load is not enough,2 WVR missiles on the wing-tip and 4 BVR missiles under-wings is not good at all gentlemen.

  14. gbash10 says:

    I salute you all,for the Alpha jets,it has reached the end of its service life already.Now that we know there is no order for the Hongdu L-15 Falcon jet trainer,the NAF should go for the Yakolev Yak-130 jet trainer.Its avionics have open architecture!
    The payload of the Yak-130 is fabulous,please do check it out.The wings of the Yak-130 is built to carry more load than the JF-17 Thunder,or any other jet trainer in service any where on the globe.

  15. gbash10 says:

    @Ifiok, the Pentagon and the US Navy in particular are worried about a certain carrier-killer cruise missile developed by either China or North Korea.I know the Chinese have a land-based highly mobile ballistic missile meant to kill aircraft-carriers,the DH-10 o DF-10,but for the CM-400AKG cruise missile being a carrier-killer,hmmm…however,the Chinese are making head-ways in advanced weapon technologies, we should not just doubt this capability.

  16. gbash10 says:

    The attack at NAF Base Maiduguri by BH started some time around 3:15am till 8:00am,now if the NAF had the Su-30/35S Flanker fighter jets,and they were scrambled from Makurdi and Yola to Maiduguri at the begining of that attack,it would have taken them less time to reach the battle space and had more loitre time over the base than the Alpha jets did,pending when attack choppers would arrive to carry out the final mopping up operations less casualty could have been recorded,the fight could not have reached that 8:00am.Ask former Biafran Army commanders how they felt by the appearance of the NAF MiG-17 jets in support of Federal troop,then you will get my point here very clear.
    All we are saying,FG of Nigeria,buy the Su-30MKI variant or the Su-35S Flanker multirole fighter jets,Mi-28NE Havoc and Mi-171 Terminator, attack and transport helicopters respectively for the NAF,Nigeria is not a poor country ooo!
    Patriotism should not remain in Abuja only,it should move from the Presidency,NASS,Min of Finance,MoD Abuja,Defence HQs and service HQs of the NA,NN and the NAF to our gallant warriors putting their live in harm-way in the NE and the ND by giving them the needed weapons and equipments to do their job.
    God bless Nigeria!

    • peccavi says:

      Fast jets such as the Su or JFs are unsuitable for close support particularly in a built up area. Without laser designation and a JDAM kit you are tossing an iron bomb blind at night or firing rockets at a small target mixed up with civilians and own troops in your own cities.
      We need something like the Tucano, more attack helicopters not just large tank killers like the MI but small nimble ones like the little bird, Gazelle or MB variants.
      the Sus are useful for deep strike missions or air superiority but for close support they are too fast

      • AOk says:

        I agree entirely. The Su’s etc would not have been much use during last week’s attack other than for noise. There would have had to be a forward air controller on the ground to direct the attacks lest high non combatant casualities.
        The Alphas with extra hardpoints are great except for the drag created which when fully loaded, its range would be less than 400 kms with a slower dash speed. in the 1980’s NAF were experimenting using highways as alternate forward bases like the Swedes and Germans did during the cold war.

  17. beegeagle says:

    WachanGuy, I like the idea of extra-budgetary acquisitions via oil-for-arms barter deals and through drawdowns on the Forex Reserves and Excess Crude Acct.

    While our chestnut burns in the guise “competing demands” and “saving for the rainy day”, we have been saving for a decade and that rainy day is still not forthcoming.

    If the FG forked out a billion dollars from the US$55bn Forex Reserves/Excess Crude Account to have the military retooled, it would recoup that in TWO WEEKS max judging from trends that date back to 2006. When are we going to have the courage to do the needful – losing more in lives and materiel than is justifiable whereas better provisioning would leave some of these terror-loving retards out of their depths?

    We need to get off the high-minded idealism intended for tomorrow of our dreamy-eyed financial minders – Okonjo-Iweala and Sanusi – and do what is expedient so that many more Nigerians shall live through this day.

  18. Spirit says:

    @ my very Oga Oje.

    Unless the defending Carrier group is well able to take out the all platforms from which the “carrier killers” are being launched (pretty difficult to do to a a country like China) OR it has unlimited Anti-missile munitions (bullets, lasers?), if the attacker has the economic might to manufacture the missiles in sufficient numbers, and the political will to destroy 5000+ men on an Aircraft carrier in one swoop, any aircraft carrier can be ‘killed’ by saturation attack.
    Remember the Chinese also have ‘eyes’ in the sky monitoring all US carriers battle group, and they know the exact number of Aegis Air Defense ships guarding each carrier (6 per carrier?). Each Aegeis has a limited number of Standard missiles (say 20?), total Anti-missile missile will be equal to about 120. If the Chinese launch a volley of say 140 or more (from different platforms i.e air, sea and land), designed to simultaneously arrived at the target (TOT tactic) from different angles (sea skimmers aiming for the hull and and vertical descent on the runway, there is a high probability that a few of them will be able to penetrate the Aegeis/Standard missile shield that the Phallanx CIWS will not be able to bring down.
    All it takes is for just 2 or 3 missiles to penetrate.

    I think the world’s 2nd largest economy will be able to do just that if and when necessary without resorting to the use of nuclear warheads.

    But I pray that day doesn’t come because the US will be very angry.

  19. ifiok umoeka says:

    Yes it did surprise a carrier group by showing up within it inner defence circle. Since the end of the cold war, the USN has blunted it hunterkiller ability under water. They realized this and had 2 relearn it (we are paying the same price across every spectrum of our defense) by leasing a swedish gotland sub I think to practice against it (that too was after the said sub ‘killed’ a US carrier and a long list of other ships including a USN and French navy SSN) before this Chinese ‘killing’. I’d just say they are definitely re learning with all these ROKN/USN and JSDFN/USN exercise (u didn’t think it was about little kim alone did u?) but are not there yet like say in the late 80s when they and the Brits where the standard.
    On the other hand, the question is if a surprise carrier strike were 2 be successful, what would be the US response? In my opinion, the PLAN will become a coast guard.
    B
    I think those Burke class DDGs carry over a hundred standards/ESSM ans RAMs in it different variations and a carrier group with FFGs included carry well over 1000 SAM in anti aircraft/cruise missile and ABM configurations. However, who’s to say that Chinese don’t have tens of thousands of these weapons!

  20. ifiok umoeka says:

    The song either crawled under battery power within torpedo/ASHM range or it had been there earlier and the strike force unknowingly came upon it, either way, the Americans didn’t dictate it and in a conflict situation over 4500 men and women would have been at risk of getting wet!
    However, while its foolishness to underestimate ur opponent, the same goes for over estimating him. What gets me more confused is when in playing up China’s growth in strength, we seem to suggest that others are static or worse, getting weak. We all know that that’s not true. I’m not an American fan (hate their politics et al) but I’m a realist and I try to factor in both side of the spectrum.
    As for Russo/German slugging in WWII, we all know that the Germans bite more than they could chew taking on the world. That said, what do u think it would have been if it was just between the two? Yes, Stalin’s Russia would have gone down, winter or no winter, Siberian or no Siberians, the T34 or no T34 and we both know it. Sir.

  21. Spirit says:

    “Quantity, in itself, is quality” if not so, the USA has no no businesses stockpiling 15,000+ nukes ( a mere 400 are enough to render Russia uninhabitable for decades. But the US SAC knows that a lot of the Pershing II, Minutemen, Trident will be sabotaged by ‘sleepers’, somewill be brought down during the ‘boost’ phase, some will be brought down by the ABM guys at Sari Shegan , some by Mig 31 Backfire pilots, some by dedicated AA batteries scattered in countless locations all over Russia (before and after MIRV) fact is that not all missiles launched against a niche enemy will reach the target, no matter how accurate they are as the enemy too is almost as advance as the attacker in Technology. Hence, you saturate the enemies with the hope that sufficient number of munition will penetrate the enemies defensive screen. Same reason soldiers fire long burst at each other when a single bullet could do the job.

    Personally, I believe the Russians are better at missile technology ( maybe because they got to Penumunde first and shipped entire missiles laboratories, scientists etc back to the ‘motherland’). Remember Sputnik, SS-18 Satan and the terrible Brahmos/Moskit. My opinion though.

  22. beegeagle says:

    Oga Ifiok, would the Turks have reached for it if it were not up to scratch is the question to be asked, geopolitical considerations aside? Or the Turks sacrificed technical considerations on the altar of geopolitical calculations?

    I dunno about you but every other battle in Europe was a footnote when compared to what took place in the Eastern Front where the biggest battles in human history bar none took place. Where I come from, the tail does not wag the dog..it is the other way round. So it would be wrong to suggest that in the actual battles, the Russian victories were aided by anyone else to any consequential degree. Beyond the Lend-Lease Program of the early years, how many Allied Forces fought or were stationed in the Soviet Union? You might want to compare that to what sufficed in Western Europe?

    For good measure, Marshal Zhukov’s men were the first troops who set foot in Berlin on the back of a 4,000 artillery gun barrage which rained down one million shells within the first 3 days.

    Nobody has suggested that anyone else is static but did you say that the Chinese sub had positioned itself out there before the carrier group arrived? That strange explanation just to downplay the obvious? The alarm which it caused in the Pentagon suggests that someone was wowed by the stealthy attributes of the Song submarine and alarmed by the real threat which it poses.

    Well, the truth is that it shadowed the group and the diesel electric sub, not to mention the construction material used, has such a low acoustic signature that it is extremely difficult to detect. The carrier group was outwitted on the strength of the sub’s technical qualities – not that it was there before they arrived or some other anecdotal hypothesis.

    READ THESE though

    “..the Chinese offer to co-produce the missiles with Turkey involved high-technology transfer to the Turkish defense industry, which played a role in Turkey’s choice.”

    http://www.todayszaman.com/news-327582-turkish-selection-of-chinese-missile-system-angers-us.html

    Chinese sub STALKED – not lay in wait for – US Carrier Group

    http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread233746/pg1

    Before the America-related episode, another Chinese sub had breached Japanese naval defences in 2004..lol. My people say that “when the same disease takes down two relatives, it could rightly get mistaken for an afflition of the kindred”

    READ

    “In late 2004, China dispatched a Han-class submarine to waters near Guam, Taiwan and Japan. Japan’s military went on emergency alert after the submarine surfaced in Japanese waters.”

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2006/nov/13/20061113-121539-3317r/?page=all

  23. ifiok umoeka says:

    My oga Beegs, I never said nor suggested that Russian efforts in the war was secondary. However, the ques was, if they were not committed in France, Yugoslavia, Greece and Africa etc and had channeled all their resources against Russia… after all Russia didn’t face any other power (the Japs were more American and Chinese focused)… how would they have fared?
    Yes, tech transfer was big in deciding and if I remember, the Russians were ahead but the Chinese’ was a better deal. Moreso, the Chinese sys was a morph of the Russian sys ( and we all know that the Russian sys is good!) So, yes, the sys is good and like I said, its foolish to underestimate.
    As for the song class SSK, from what I know, it doesn’t have AIP (at least not then) and that should limit it range especially when its on battery power. Diesel/electrics are very quiet but without air, the diesel engine can’t work (why the best they can do is run @ snorkel dept). However with electric power, they are as quiet as silence but their Achilles is endurance. A carrier strike force moves @ at least 25kn so that the carrier can launch. How long do u think that the song’s battery would last ( I think it was submerged)? That leaves us with 2 possibilities, that the song and the strike for were converging or it was lying in wait (after all, she was closer to home and knew the waters well. Having said that, I’m only speculating logically and wasn’t there. But I remember how a certain USAF/IAF exercise btw F15s and SU30MKIs were spawn in an effort to keep funding for more F22s! Were the flankers good yes, but I remember that the eagles had to go without their traditional assets like AWACS and jammer/weasels which in a real conflict situation is impossible!
    How does that apply here, we all know that the USN had abandon sub based anti sub warfare and depended on orions and now posiedons,( their seawolfs were cut and a less capable Virginia class were built), who’s to say that this wasn’t another spin (over exaggeration) to turn a disadvantage (reduce funding for hunter killer drills and deployments) to an advantage (more funding reverse the decline)?
    This doesn’t take anything away from the song captain and crew who did a good job maneuvering their sub to a place where they could have done damage if they were so ordered. I can’t take anything away from the PLAN, they’ve come a long way!

  24. ifiok umoeka says:

    Oga Chyde, I agree with u, write off China at ur own detriment! And yes, I’m aware of the 52D. Most are either under construction or fitting while one is on sea trail.
    I also think that the Chinese had the ability to strike the US since about 10-12yrs ago. Those who doubt will always doubt!

  25. ifiok umoeka says:

    After the 50-53, I believe that there was a not so small conflict meant to teach someone a lesson, whether the student didn’t want to learn or the teacher couldn’t impart the lesson but we all know that that lesson wasn’t learned. I hope we remember the cost to the Chinese. Thinking that the Chinese can afford to pay that price 2day is wishful thinking.
    If there were 2 be a conflict in say the strait of Taiwan, I think the Chinese will have an upper hand but if that conflict were to proceed to an invasion of Taiwan, then I’m afraid that the Chinese will pay dearly (all things being equal and the Taiwanese defense elect to fight). Crossing that 100+mile will be a long one.
    What about with Japan say over those islands, if the USN joined (and they would), it would be over fairly quickly for China. Japan is not Philippines, Vietnam or Taiwan.
    As for a nuke trade off, the quesn is how many nuke can reach each other’s mainland? +US. What defense do they have?+US. What price are they willing to pay?+China (but they are not suicidal) I’m sorry boss, China hasn’t reach MAD standing vis the Americans, if it should happen, they will come out under. Of course, the price would be steep for the Americans too but China would be unsalvageable.

    • beegeagle says:

      I am still a bit amused by the end-game projections I am reading here. How much do the Free World really imagine that they know about Chinese strategic assets if an ‘open’ Pakistan could spring the surprise that was a nuclear bomb right under everyone’s noses?

      A simple C802 missile – even an Iranian variant thereof – tore through an Israeli warship and we heard the lullaby that was “radar was switched off”. Sorry, that sounds more like navtronics and countermeasures failed?

      How many ‘indestructible’ Merkava tanks did Hezbollah RPG-29s claim in the same war? 50?

      Personally, I do not see this one-way traffic which many of us allude to. Surely, that is not backed by contemporary trends.

      Anyway and beyond posturing, America are not likely to get in on either side in any war between China and Taiwan. Posturing aside, Taiwan’s fate was sealed as long ago as 1971 when China replaced Taiwan as the veto-wielding member of the UNSC. You better ask somebody.

      Economically, diplomatically or otherwise, the cost-benefit analysis of it would show clearly that America have too much to lose by siding with Taiwan. It is possibly no more than a giant staging post for intelligence gathering operations but with 53,000 American companies already registered to do business in China as of 2008, there is really no choice to be made between China and a globally isolated Taiwan.

  26. ifiok umoeka says:

    Of course quantity has a quality of it own, (we should remember that they plan to field theirs in hundreds and the quality is the quantity when we pick a squadron of Chinese birds) but while we glut about 38 parallel and vietnam, we should 4get 1990/91. That was what jolted the Chinese into modernization.
    My oga, u didn’t honestly equate an ohio with the xia/jin mix, what’s next lincoln with lifan, LOL. But seriously, the Chinese SSBN are just too few (easier to track), noisy, carry less and troublesome load to be a real scare. The real scare are the 30-50 deng fangs.
    I doubt if the US will ever Meet the Chinese on land again. If it in the air or/and sea, the Americans have a clear lead, I doubt if they will just roll over and play dead!

  27. ifiok umoeka says:

    @ Oje, I’m not sure if I should dance naked for joy, isn’t it the 2 P18s coming our way or is it something else. Not that I’m not grateful, but we both know that we need @ least 8 more to police ours and our neibors’. But then, I like surprises, good ones though!

    • Number one says:

      according to defenceweb we have an option for 10 more.

      • beegeagle says:

        I hope they hold on to that large-hearted vision. Too many token gestures or outright inaction over the years has held our military back in the quest to be the best that they can be.

        For a similar or possibly a slightly lower sum yet to achieve an all-round impact on account of various classes of ships delivered, I would acquire the following

        – three new Type 056 stealth corvettes

        – two new Type 056 (P18N) stealth OPVs

        – a new Makassar-class LPD from Daewoo

        – a new Gen.Besson-class LSV from America

        – two used F122A frigates from Germany

        – refit the NNS Aradu

        – acquire six Shaldag Mk.II Fast Patrol Craft

        We shall then own three MEKO 360/F122A frigates, three Type 056 corvettes, a LPD, a LSV, four P18N OPVs and two Hamilton-class patrol frigates as capital assets. The six P18Ns and Hamilton oceangoing platforms would be our oceanic patrol leaders (assisted by four Cat class 1,041 ton patrol/logistics ships) while the six frigates+corvettes would be our main fighting ships.

        Four Abeking+Rasmussen and Brooke Marine 31-33 metre vessels, eleven 25 metre Shaldag Mk.IIs, six 58 metre Combattante III+Lurssen, three 24 metre OCEA FPB 72 Mk.IIs, three 31-32 metre Andoni-class/OCEA FPB 98 Mk.IIs, eight 20 metre Raidco Marine/Swiftships/P2000 Watercraft, seven 35 metre Sentinel Fast Patrol Vessels, two reconfigured 50 metre Lerici patrol ships, three 38 metre vessels – for a total of 48 patrol craft in the 20-58 metre category – would be the NN’s coastal, fisheries protection and midshore patrol asset base.

        Going forward and to support the suggested six frigates/light frigates, we should consider the option of building nine 31metre/38 metre patrol craft and having them armed with Israeli/Singaporean/Chinese anti-ship missiles. Those would be deployed in triads to the three fleet commands and they would serve as fast missile boats, working alongside capital ships up to midshore precincts.

        Egypt operate 27 metre missile boats and the Israelis even operate smaller and faster missile boats.

  28. giles says:

    oga d american are jst playing smart compared to d chiness who is d real bully.grabing islands etc cos it tinks it’s military is now strong.being large is no = being strong

  29. beegeagle says:

    Giles, Nigeria did not lose any villages to any other country except Cameroon? Are you telling us your belief or stating what has been happening since the border redemarcation commenced in the wake of the 2002 Green Tree Agreement?

    Some research would do sometimes

    7 VILLAGES LOST TO BENIN

    http://www.nigeriavillagesquare.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-1321.html

  30. beegeagle says:

    The strategic impact of the war on the Eastern Front towards the eventual destruction of the Nazi juggernaut is a simple fact known even by the dispassionate learner in the Free World. “Na only we Nigerians go dey argue d indefensible and carry d mata for head🙂 ”

    QUOTE

    “The Battle of Stalingrad is considered by many historians to have been the TURNING POINT in World War Two in Europe. The battle at Stalingrad bled the German army dry in Russia and after this defeat, the Germany Army was in full retreat.”

    end of quote

    http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/battle_of_stalingrad.htm

    THE MAN WHO REALLY BEAT HITLER

    http://www.news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3003939.stm

    Hopefully, we can stop subjecting gazetted truths to personal interpretation merely for the sake of argumentation.

  31. beegeagle says:

    Some more elementary appraisals and street-level knowledge. Note the frontal impact on the GERMAN ARMY which Russian exertion had – not to mention the scale thereof and we expected casualties fit for a punch-up to emanate therefrom?

    1. Fall of France 1940 – Hitler becomes the master of Europe

    2. Battle of Britain 1940 – British manage to stay in the war

    3. Battle for Moscow 1941 – First major
    defeat of German army on the ground. End of Nazi Blitz victories

    4. Pearl Harbor 1941 – Japan advances in Pacific. US joins the war

    5. Battle of Midway 1942 – Turning point of the war in Pacific

    6. Stalingrad 1942-43 – Great defeat of Germans in Russia, the turning point of World War II

    7. Battle of Kursk Salient 1943 – The
    biggest tank battle of the war starts Russian general offensive

    8. D-Day 1944 – Allies open Second Front against Germany in Europe

    9. Operation Bagration 1944 – Russian “blitz” offensive destroys German Army Group Center

    10. Fall of Berlin 1945 – Russians take Berlin ending war with Germany

    Whether it be the scale of the fighting, the intensity and the direct strategic impact of their efforts on the decimation of the German war machine, I repeat and without fear of contradiction that the Russians absolutely did the most in battle to bring Germany to its knees.

    MORE STRAIGHTFORWARD ANSWERS FROM THE FREE WORLD

    * What was the most important battle of WW II?

    answer

    “the Battle of Stalingrad is widely
    considered to be the most important battle of World War II. After this battle, Nazi Germany lost control of the Eastern Front and was never able to fully recover. By the autumn of 1943, they were in full retreat back to Berlin. The battle also boosted the Soviet Union’s morale and shattered the German Army’s image as an invincible fighting force.”

    http://www.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090414194057AAdEguK

    Period..end of story

  32. ifiok umoeka says:

    But u asked as if it were a Russo/German war alone! Are u saying that the rolling back of the Germans from North Africa and Greece (and the resulting control of the mediterranean), the liberation of France, Italy and Yugoslavia etc were a walk in the park? Or that the blockade of Germany and the decimation of their industrial base were not decisive? That’s why I asked the question, had the Germans squared off against the Russians alone how would have ended? Had they not been fighting everyone else, what would have been the verdict?
    Like I keep saying, no one can take the Russian due from them, they transformed from a losing army to a victorious one and at a heavy price, but that doesn’t erase the western due either!
    On the other hand, figures like 25mn dead Russians are thrown around, how much were the German dead by Russian hand (including those who died of weather and diseases)?

    • beegeagle says:

      You should ask how many of those Russians fell to the antics of German war criminals – indiscriminate shelling and carpet bombings from the air by the Germans of miles and miles of areas clearly bereft of military targets?

      Would that be anything unfathomable for a Nazi Germany which exterminated 6 million Jewish non-combatants?

      Nowhere have I said that the rest of the Allies did not fight. I am saying that by far the most consequential military engagements took place between Russia and Germany. It is as simple as that. Reason why I said “by the law of averages”

      Even as Nigeria were not the only ECOMOG troop contributors, you probably know why it sometimes feels like it was the Nigerian Armed Forces alone vs the enemy.

      Good morning, my friend. I hope you had a restful night.

      • ifiok umoeka says:

        Sir, are u familiar with operation Babarossa? Oh, the Russians were saints right, eh, I don’t think so, they were as brutal to the Germans as the Germans were to them. We all know about German war crimes and cruelty, but from all indications, the Germans took prisoners, loads of them and those who died, did more from the elements, diseases and hunger than from German cruelty. The Russians paid that price (a little under 9m military losses, 65% of all allied loss) because they had a brutish clown as leader who would rather have yes men as commanders than competent men. Like I said, the Germans took more than they could handle and were over stretched. It was a logistics nightmare! Couple with the slow war loss replacement as a result of allied air and sea onslaught (which the Russians hardly contributed). We all know that the Siberians won them the war after Stalin was convinced that the Japs weren’t going to attack! Add to that the rain and snow and its obvious why they lost.
        Finally, the 1st Russian decisive defeat of the Germans was in 1944 in operation Bagration. Here an incredibly larger and nor powerful Russian force defeated the Germans (surprising themselves) resulting in the uprising of occupied eastern Europe. Again the Russian were great but it was a collective action and left to themselves, the result would have been different!

  33. Obix says:

    My Ogas, you have woken me up with this Soviet Union/ Germany/World War II issue. Too sad i’m on a journey now and it’s not comfortable for me to contribute much on this issue. Moreover Beag has already done justice with a whole lot of information.

    Fellows, please read carefully Beag’s underlined points on the turning points of the war:

    “- First major defeat handed to the Germans – Battle of Moscow

    – Biggest and most important battle of the war – Battle of Stalingrad

    – Biggest tank battle in history – Battle of the Kursk Salient

    Please search online for their details.It was after these defeats like Beag wrote, that “the German Army was sent into permanent retreat until Soviet soldiers stormed into Berlin. ”
    Unfortunately most of us only read and heard about the details of contributions made by the US and allied forces. The western propaganda kept low the Soviet contributions. I never knew the details till i arriveed to the Soviet Union myself!

    I want to underline some things here:
    Germany never destroy %70 of Soviet Union.
    Yes, 75-80% of the Nazi troops were mashed up in the Soviet front when their initial blitz match was halted by the Red Army. This even made it easier for the allied forces to make gains against the Germans.

    Today the official figure of Soviet millitary and civillian losses is about 20. million lives. Earler, the official figure was reduced for propaganda sake.

  34. Obix says:

    Oga Beag, no break yet cos i’m here. He he he! My Ogas, you have woken me up with this Soviet Union/ Germany/World War II issue. Too sad i’m on a journey now and it’s not comfortable for me to contribute much on this issue. Moreover Beag has already justice with a whole lot of information. Fellows, please read carefully Beag’s underlined points on the turning points of the war:
    “- First major defeat handed to the Germans – Battle of Moscow

    – Biggest and most important battle of the war – Battle of Stalingrad

    – Biggest tank battle in history – Battle of the Kursk Salient

    Please search online for their details.
    It was after these defeats like Beag wrote, that “the German Army was sent into permanent retreat until Soviet soldiers stormed into Berlin. ”
    Unfortunately most of us only read and heard about the details of contributions made by the US and allied forces. Due to the close door policy of the Soviet Union then,we didin’t read much about thier WWII efforts. Till today most people use the word Russia as referring to Soviets (It was a country with over 200 nationalities with Russians as majority, it sounded funny and insultive as well when a brother here said it was mostly the Siberians that fought the war. Who are the Siberians?🙂 ) The western propaganda kept low the Soviet contributions. I never knew the details till i arrived to the Soviet Union myself!
    I want to underline some things here:
    Germany never destroy %70 of Soviet Union. (check the map of the former Soviet Union and see the sheer size)
    Yes, 75-80% of the Nazi troops were mashed up in the Soviet front when their initial blitz match was halted by the Red Army. This even made it easier for the allied forces to make gains against the Germans.
    Today the official figure of Soviet millitary and civillian losses is about 20million lives. Earler, the official figure was reduced for propaganda sake.

  35. rka says:

    Oga beeg, just concentrate on uploading the picture you mentioned and other postings if available jare.

  36. beegeagle says:

    Hehehehe..Oga RKA. Okay, I am waiting for our man’s comeback and then, it shall be done.

  37. giles says:

    dis good news,hop dere are also get mrap’s

  38. giles says:

    fresh Air at last.boko haram will die forever soon.

  39. eniola says:

    More gud defense news

    • beegeagle says:

      About time, please. If we are in the middle of combat operations, let it be reflected in a flurry of training and procurement activities. We have seen the training, we need to see procurement taking place. Less talk about what needs to be made available. Let the provisioning commence in a blitz.

      Our Ogas need to stop waiting to see trouble go away and prepare to force an outcome. In September, we marked the third year of a full-blown insurgency. Not even the ruinous Civil War lasted that long. What is the big idea behind the lack of urgency? The sooner those terror-loving knuckleheads get forced into terminal decline, the longer our compatriots in the conflict areas stand to live. We can see BH preying on them with wicked abandon in the farthest reaches of the distant Northeast. No serious government should allow that to continue for any length of time. It is clear that nimble and armed scout helics for swift interdiction, in addition to Mi-17 transport helics to move SF chaps around in are lacking and we need to plug the gaps but acquiring those in a cascade.

      We need to see some urgency along those lines and if anybody is disturbing the flow of funds for the prosecution of this War on Terror, they should get shunted to one side for real. It does not matter who the hell it is.

      Enough of the cut-throat frugal economics. We are not impressed. National security is the priority for now. About time we faced the issue head on.

  40. rka says:

    Any guesses as to the type of APCs Oga Beeg. I’m sure the alert must have contained some intel na.

  41. Franky says:

    Oga Beeg, I think Oje is a die-hard U.S fan, we all know Abram tanks never featured in WW2. About the APCs? It’s quite a wonderful acquisition for the Army at this trying times. Just wondering if humvees can’t be acquired instead of this hilux vans we endanger our soldiers with?

    • beegeagle says:

      Uparmoured Humvees were always a good idea, Oga Franky, and a cascade of those came through Iraq as surplus stocks. We did not deem it fit to acquire any of those neither did our US partners offer them as far as I know.

  42. cutievik says:

    my able General Beeg,this is more than a gift for the season,we thank God this is coming at a tym when the services of dis APC’s are highly needed.
    a question popped into my head,why weren’t they brought in through our northern frontiers and immedately transport to the frontlines?

  43. cutievik says:

    i do pray they are MRAP’s!!!! God know say i go give testimony for my online forums!!!!! Gen Beeg abeg more intel to ur earz,more vitamin A to ur eyes!!! Na u too much.

  44. Oje says:

    M1 ABRAM TANK (Country U.S.A)
    ”Further combat was seen during 2003 when U.S. forces invaded Iraq and deposed Ba’athist Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein in the Iraq War’s Operation Iraqi Freedom. As of March 2005, approximately 80 Abrams tanks were forced out of action by enemy attacks.[20]
    The most lopsided achievement of the M1A1s was the destruction of seven T-72s in a point-blank skirmish (less than 50 yards (46 m)) near Mahmoudiyah, about 18 miles (29 km) south of Baghdad, with no losses for the American side.[21] In addition to the Abrams’ already heavy armament, some crews were also issued M136 AT4 shoulder-fired anti-tank weapons under the assumption that they might have to engage heavy armor in tight urban areas where the main gun could not be brought to bear.”

    CHALLENGER 2 (Britain)

    ”Challenger 2 had already been used in peacekeeping missions and exercises before but its first combat use came in March 2003 during the invasion of Iraq. 7th Armoured Brigade, part of 1st Armoured Division, was in action with 120 Challenger 2s around Basra. The tanks saw extensive use during the siege of Basra, providing fire support to the British forces. The tank’s availability was excellent and the problems that were identified during the large Saif Sareea II exercise, which took place eighteen months earlier, were solved by the issuing of Urgent Operational Requirements for equipment such as sand filters.
    During the 2003 invasion of Iraq the Challenger 2 tanks suffered no tank losses to enemy fire, although one was penetrated by an IED. This was at the time unprotected by “Dorchester” armour. ”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s