Chief of the Air Staff, Air Marshal Alex Badeh(2nd left)inspects Alpha Jet engines at the AETSL

Chief of the Air Staff, Air Marshal Alex Badeh(2nd left)inspects Alpha Jet engines diligently maintained at the AETSL by NAF engineers and technicians


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.


  1. drag_on says:

    How i wish this was what was going on with a certain group of Jaguar Jets. And to think those Jets are currently one of India’s Front-line Nuclear strike Platforms.Nonetheless, the less money we spend on maintenance abroad the more sophisticated platforms we can aquire. Keep up the Good work NAF.

  2. beegeagle says:

    Some of our Jaguar jets have reportedly not logged up more than 100 flight hours. Yet they are lying there idle. It makes for sober reflection.

  3. AOk says:

    Oga Beegeagle

    Let’s not start 2014 with the Jaguars again. Those, along with the MiGs, are beyond repair. Most of the airframes have been left in the open for over 20 years. The engines are the same as the ones in the Alpha’s except they have afterburners. If anything, the only question is to find out what happened to the Jaguar simulator.
    We are now thankfully developing a maintenance culture, not too late. The MiGs and Jaguars belong in the past and there they should be.

  4. drag_on says:

    I just read your blog’s article about the jaguars and am livid with our air-force.
    Diplomacy is a carrot and stick process, where is our stick?
    More and more African nations are having more sophisticated strike assets
    than we do. The more they have the less they will listen to us. Do our diplomats know this?

    Africa is shrinking as regional fighters jets travel at higher machs.
    All over us are su 25s, 27s, and 30s, as an example Angola has
    25 MiG-21, 26 MiG-23, 6 Su-27, 18 Su-30, 8 Su-22 and 8 Su-25. Why should they listen to us?
    Ethiopia’s arsenal is frightening and Uganda has su-30-mk2 flankers. All a few hours from Abuja.
    Even E.guinea has 4 su-25 for goodness sake. I didn’t even mention the North Africans.

    Our diplomatic clout will keep dying and we will be less capable of determining our destiny and the destiny of the Black race the less willing we are to purchase sophisticated air assets. How can we have Fishbeds as our Lead-in/Frontline assets?. Uganda’s GDP is just 19 Billion dollars and it has FLANKERS.

    Outside Africa,Brazil(Gripens) Korea,japan(f-35), India (200 Rafale),E.U (F-35) China (phased out F-7, inducting J-15, J-20 Su-35) Russia(Su34 & 35) Australia(F-35),
    Israel (F-35,they have the same GDP as us) and U.S. are rearming there airforces.What is the largest black nation doing?

    The West African airspace is probably the least defended in Africa and the World.
    The U.S. is going to cause regional tension with its pivot to Asia,are we prepared?
    Already it is daring Chinese military muscle with it flights over claimed Chinese airspace.
    If there was to be a global conflict how would we fare with our 3rd Gen fighters?
    Who will protect the black race from belligerent racist nations?

    Sorry for starting the New year on such depressing note and derailing the thread.

  5. rka says:

    Oga drag-on, that’s why it was stated recently that the Americans think our top brass don’t know what our requirements are. Says it all.

  6. rka says:

    Oga drag_on, that’s why it was stated recently that the Americans think our top brass don’t know what our requirements are. Says it all.

  7. peccavi says:

    Excellent step, more and more of this and we’re on our way. We need to speak to Cameroun and other users of the Alpha jet and start upgrading their stuff as well

  8. jimmy says:

    Like the mainteanace culture that is being embedded in the thinking of the air-force/ army/ navy.
    As far as getting a 4 th gen FIGHTER@ this stage i leave that to god because” the man” is not listening.

  9. gbash10 says:

    @ Oga AOK,please I mean no dispect here,the Jaguar jets are not in the open, however some of the MiG-21s are parked out. For your information, almost all the NAF Jaguar jets are brand-new, if the NAF retire the Jags now,that would be a big loss to them, the armed forces and the Nigerian nation!
    Please correct me if I am wrong,some of the operational Alpha jets are older than the Jaguar jets. The NAF can refurbish the Jaguar jets if they are not doing so already!

    For the MiGs, we can kiss them good bye.

    • beegeagle says:

      Indeed, Oga Gbash. We received a total of 24 A-Jet. The first set of twelve arrived late in 1983. Comparatively, the first consignment of Jags arrived in 1984.

      @Oga AoK. We are only thinking “force multipliers”. My ideal array for the NAF would be Su-30s (air superiority/deep strike), JF17 Thunder (multirole) and those very fresh Jags. For the Jags, I am thinking ground attack.

      • AOk says:

        Unless my count is wrong, NAF has lost /crashed about 9 of the delivered Alphas.

        I agree with force multipliers but not including the wild cats.

      • beegeagle says:

        Well, I was referring about the total number of A-Jet delivered ab initio…24 units. Ditto L39ZA Albatros.

    • AOk says:

      Chief Gbash

      I stand corrected about the Jaguars, which are hangered in a none climate controlled environment. Obviously NAF knew something which we don’t, which is why the overhaul was never tendered out (more to do with the original purchasing terms and conditions with BAe Aircraft now Systems) as well as allegations of bribery to do with the purchase.

      Without revealing who I am, I volunteer 2 days a week maintaining some RAF retired GR3s at a Midlands base. These aircraft retired in 2007 or thereabouts are routinely started, with ground and taxi runs on a monthly basis.

      NAF ones will not fly again.

      • Are James says:

        I agree with this post entirely.
        Professionally, we call it Preservation Maintenance, based on the science that every item of equipment deteriorates in storage if a thoroughly determined set of degradation mechanisms are not mitigated by certain actions. The air frames may indeed be far from fatgue life but let us kiss the Jaguars goodbye because there are so many other parts that would have rotted away.

  10. gbash10 says:

    Does the FG have any Strategic National Security Project with a time-line for completion?

    Nigeria needs up to 3 aircraft building factories, 3 shipbuilding yards, 2 heavy vehicle factories and Electronics Engineering factories.
    The NAF AERL, the Naval Dockyard in Lagos and Shipyard Port Harcourt, the NA Special Vehicle Pplant in Bauchi, Satellite Integration and Manufacturing Centre Abuja, are some of the Companies and research centres that should be upgraded to full-fledged mass production industries respectively.

    • Deltaman says:

      Oga gbash, let’s start with sorting out the power problem, reviving heavy steel and aluminium plants, sorting out road and rail networks and dredging the Niger to open up a potential industrial heartland. Then the military industrial complex might just work after this.

  11. gbash10 says:

    The Problem we have now is the lack of political vision and will power to thing strategically by our civil and military leadership.
    Honestly,it seems the Finance Minister,is the number one person who is hiddering the development of our defence,security,science and technological capabilities by not releasing fund as at when due!

  12. Are James says:

    I want to see the engines in controlled environment storage i.e dust filtered air conditioned stores. Somebody was making the point at this forum that Nigeria now leads the world in operational experience with the Alpha jet, same way we won many international awards with using the MiG 21.
    Keep it up NAF.

  13. G8T Nigeria says:

    Warfare is a game that reflects the collection of many strings pulled to achieve victory. @ drag on, I do agree we lack good air assets but please most of the country u mentioned plus additional 30 SUs of any category cannot match the might of Nigeria. Our military was neglected for so long but thank God for now, the military innovations going on including rocket defence facility, home refit programmes and all, only tells we are matching on. At this stage, we need to develop the required capacity to maintain and sustain operations of acquired foreign assets then procure on technical balance. I am of the opinion that we are taking the right steps first before any other thing. If we procure SU 35s, without this foundational works currently on going, then be sure they will lie along side the Jags in few years time ( WE HAVE LEARNT OUR LESSON). check around Africa, and you will notice only but few have this capacity or are taking this drive. Don’t forget, the attitude of the Russians towards Nigeria’s treatment of 15 commando sailors nabbed in Lagos only means we will not go their for now. Angola with a small navy will soon acquire a decommissioned Spanish Aircraft Carrier but manning it will take 70 percent of its naval strength. Then I really wonder what is their mission. DONT WORRY, Nigeria will acquire a lot soon but lets develop our capacity first. The NN and NAF is the focus. WATCH OUT

    • peccavi says:

      Oga I think say na gist but apparently you are right Angola is jumping from a brown water Navy to a blue water one!
      First comment- are they insane? A carrier does not sail alone, they need at least 4 frigates/ destroyers to protect it (Naval types no vex I’m just guessing). They do not have enough personnel for the carrier much less all the other ship, much less a Naval aviation capability, there is no indication they have been training up crews or attaching them to other navies to acquire experience so this will be interesting. I would suggest it would take at least 10 years before they can even deploy the thing in a semi reasonable fashion at least.
      However it completely changes the game in the Gulf of Guinea and along the West African coast. With this purchase Nigeria can no longer guarantee (not that it can presently) the security of our littoral waters and EEZ. So now we enter arms race territory.
      Nigeria should use diplomatic and intelligence assets to either prevent these purchases or sabotage them as much as possible. Angola is a game changer as it has the wealth and more importantly a stable non democratic Government with a militarist history. Their landward expansion and projection of power has to be tempered with a need to not develop an over powerful army that can threaten the MPLA government thus projecting force via the sea is their new strategic imperative to not only defend their offshore economic interests, but defend sea lanes and impose their will on the Gulf of Guinea.
      Nigerias response.
      We should be trying to stop this purchase. that should be an intelligence/ diplomatic main effort. If we do not we need to outmatch them and this is an expense we can ill afford
      To maintain control of the Gulf of Guinea we would need at least 2 submarines, a helicopter/ assault ship with 4-6 frigates, a fleet of missile craft say 8-20, Long range maritime surveillance aircraft, at least 2 Squadrons of deep strike aircraft with air to sea missile capability, naval helicopters. Add to this the fuel storage, maintenance yards, operational costs, training and other requirements for an expanded fleet we are looking at a huge bill.
      But it is a strategic imperative that a large, oil producing nation does not dominate the Gulf of Guinea.

      With an expanded fleet they any trade or production dispute can quickly escalate to a Naval stand off. If they blockade our coast or declare our EEZ a maritime exclusion zone, how do we respond? Diplomatically? Because militarily we have no assets that can successfully take on a carrier or a carrier group in the open seas.

      I doubt the Angolans can deploy this carrier effectively anytime soon and if they ever get things up an running, most likely by the time its ready to go dos Santos will be ready to die and then the Angolan military will be dealing with internal issues but these are the kind of strategic threats we need to be focussed on, an it is existential to Nigeria as almost all out income is from sea based trade

    • beegeagle says:

      I have said this before and do not want to sound like a sceptic but I seriously DOUBT that the story about aircraft carrier shall turn out to be true. Until they took delivery of a 903 ton Fisheries Patrol Vessel in 2012-13, Angola’s biggest naval assets were sub-200 ton torpedo boats. They have never even operated a corvette.

      How do you go from that to steering an aircraft carrier? What support structures are on ground to aid seamless operations? Nigeria, on account of owned or incoming ships in the over 1,500 ton category, have gone as far as contracting the Chinese to help expand the docking capacity of the NN Shipyard to 10,000 tons DWT, equalling the capacity of the NN Dockyard? What structures exist in a navy of torpedo boats and patrol craft to support an AIRCRAFT CARRIER?

      • peccavi says:

        I do not disagree. It is a very unconfirmed rumour right now but it is well within the realms of probability for our ‘our problem is not money but how to spend it’ style of African leadership. It also presents us with an interesting problem of what to do if the Gulf of Guinea becomes a contested space.
        If it is true the carrier will most likely never sail much less launch aircraft but if it does it changes the strategic balance

      • jimmy says:

        This is actually in reply to both oga peccavi and beegeagle.
        I want to touch on a historical perspective here with regards to angola.In 1975. MM and obj concluded that out of the MPLA and UNITA the former was the best choice hence we sent them airloads of weapons.Since their independence unlike S/Africa they have shown their gratitude and demonstrated it when the slung henry okah in prison during his gun running days.
        Angola to me does not have a record none whatsoever of being even capable of being a brown let alone a blue navy.moreover the projection of power to me guys is towards the wrong direction I believe you guys should look further south towards S/ africa.

  14. giles says:

    pls i wil jst lik to say, even if we need new craft buying it will cause an arm race in west africa.and most of sister nation’s economy wouldn’t tak it.cos if dey suffer we suffer also

    • igbi says:

      I disagree with that statement 100%.
      An arms race in west africa ? That looks like the title of a science fiction novel.
      So basically we should not improve our defences because our neighbors can’t afford to do the same !? I am dumbfounded by this statement.

    • igbi says:

      Perhaps I should have you reminded we are not playing at the same level with our neighbors and never have. Our neighbors do not have the capacity to defend themselves from any attack, I suggest we improve our defences to avoid becoming that weak.

    • peccavi says:

      It wouldn’t cause an arms race in West Africa, the same way competition between the UK/ France/ Germany doesny cause Belgium, Denmark or the Netherlands to rearm.
      What will happen will be those with an interest will realign.
      Irrespective I completely agree that we don’t necessarily need a precipitous arms race which is why all efforts should be made to prevent or sabotage this purchase. A nation like Angola cannot be allowed to dominate the Gulf of Guinea

      • igbi says:

        Angola is not our enemy, so why sabotage their efforts, rather let us get more serious about our own procurement.

      • CHYDE says:

        Ifiok made mention of theRussio-indian Brahmos,knowing that it is desinged to be Supersonic changes the complexion of events (not suggesting a Nigeria-Angola stand off). While the Angolans do their thing, let’s face ours, every human being has the right to aspire and every human being has the right to deter (not Sabotage). I am not in any way suggesting an arms race

  15. ifiok umoeka says:

    Happy new year brothers, may our security challenges be drastically reduced this year and may we have a more responsible government and a more engaging citizenry. Amen.

  16. ifiok umoeka says:

    @ oga AOK,I don’t think the jags and alphas don’t use the same engines!
    @ Gbash10, that’s what I’ve been saying for a while now!
    As for the Angolans, they are not our trouble, if they want a carrier, good 4 them. A carrier on it own is not a threat (not without it air wing and escorts). I think that if (big IF) acquire it, they would use it as an off shore heliport for extensive coverage of their oil assets. No one will give them harriers (except to kill their economy with maintenance cost, ask the Thais).
    However, instead of going of on a spending spree 2 ‘match’ them (we still need a blue navy though but not with them in mind), I suggest we start by getting the Russian/Indian bramos supersonic ASHM, fixing the Aradu and getting those soon retiring German F122s and a squadron of ATR base MR assets with Israeli sensors and CHECKMATE.

    • igbi says:

      I hear the carrier will need more men than there are in the Angolan navy.

    • peccavi says:

      I doubt they will use it for fixed wing, if they do that adds another 5 years to the operational date. Harriers are not so hard to acquire, nor are other VSTOL aircraft, they have the money. However it will most likely be used for rotary wing.
      You cannot defeat a carrier with surface craft in the open seas. You need to be either above or below the surface. Putting a bunch of frigates against a carrier is ridiculous, even if it has just helicopters they can fire missiles at the attacking ships way before they get into range
      Considering everyone’s arguments for buying every piece of kit on the market is that the Algerians, Moroccans, Egyptians have them and therefore we must, now when we are presented with exactly the scenario where that makes sense it seems strange to fathom.

      Warfare is an extension of policy by other means, policy and warfare need a strategy. Strategy like tactics depends on geography. The execution of policy and strategy requires the means and the motivation. Angola is oil rich with a relatively small population thus they have the means. They have significant off shore and on shore oil facilities that are dependant on clear sea lanes, oil prices depend on demand and supply, you cut the supply and the price goes up. If you cut the supply from rivals such as Nigeria or EG the price goes up. If there is a trade dispute that escalates Saddam Hussein style we will lose. Because we know we will lose we cannot afford to get into confrontations as any actions will lead to the loss of our few platforms to prevent this.
      So to counter this we need to be able to match the Angolan capability. Submarines as that means that they need to dedicate significant resources to ASW and not anti ship strike. Missile craft means if they try to blockade our coast with their carrier group fast boats can destroy them without risking our key assets. A helicopter carrier group with frigates and surveillance craft means we can dominate the area as well

      • Are James says:

        I think with Angola we observing one of the most INNOVATIVE ideas for crafting maritime defence policy for a third world country that might really work. Building an entirely new navy around a refurbished previously decommissioned aircraft carrier IS actually cheaper than acquiring/running a large number of smaller platforms. You get the reach, carrier protection and overall force projection you require by just adding one or two frigates and say two OPVs.
        I don’t think they actually want to be an ongoing blue water navy but they do want to have the agility to proactively engage hostile forces threatening there considerable off shore oil and gas production assets based on quick situational awareness.
        I wish we had a President and defence establishment that can dream this way and act with this audacity.

  17. Agaugust says:

    “The pilot also says the IAF’s MiG-21 Bison aircraft, modified with Israeli radar, active radar missiles and electronic jammers, are nearly “invisible” to the F-15 and F-16’s current mechanically-scanned arrays, allowing the Indian pilots to sneak past the USAF radar screen and engage the F-15s and F-16s in dogfights.

    “The MiG-21 had the ability to get in the scissors with you at 110kts at 60 degrees nose high and go from 10,000 to 20,000 feet,” he said.

    About 12 of South African air forces’ 26 Gripen jets are in long term storage, and the active 12 jets share only about 6 qualified pilots and 25 short range air to air missiles.

    Angolan air force SU-27 jets are loaded with 8 KM short range air to air missiles for a long time, unless they just got BVRAAM.

    Is it all about ego and pride ? My country’s air force flies around in the ‘big name’ jet fighters.

  18. giles says:

    @igbi sori for d comment,der were jst my thought ,cos if we should rearm lik algeria do u tink most africa country will relaxed ?

    • igbi says:

      it doesn’t matter, we have more money than they do and we have more men than they do. So other African nations rearming is no threat to us.

    • drag_on says:

      The Question is,are we as well armed as most African Nations? We can defend our airspace but can we retaliate against combat experienced nations with su27, su30s and su33s?

  19. ifiok umoeka says:

    @ Peccavi, my oga, Harriers are a scarce commodity! Who will sell them, the US who had to glean all available ex RAF harriers, the Indians, Italians or Spanish who are all ‘managing’ their single squadron each till for the later 2 get F35Bs!
    However, if (BIG IF) they can lease 2 or 4 harriers from Spain 2gether with pilots, maintenance crew etc, then they begin to look like a threat!
    As we both agree, I think its off shore helicopter platform they have in mind!
    As per the counter, u only mentioned the frigates (extensively upgraded with latest missile defense/radar preferably Israeli) and forgot the MR/Bramos combo. Remember that this was the thinking behind the Soviet sovremenny and taranatul class DDGs and corvettes and their SS-N-22 sunburn/moskit for anti carrier ops!

  20. rka says:

    There is no way that the carrier, if purchased by Angola, will be used for fixed wing assets. Even to operate the 2 new British 65,000 tonne aircraft carriers (HMS Queen Elizabeth & Prince of Wales) that the RN hope to come on stream from 2020, will take them time to get operationally ready. This is in addition to both RN & RAF personnel with the US Marines/Navy and the French to keep currency on carrier operations.

    It would take the Angolans many years to be fully capable and that is with everything in place. At best, it will be a helicopter carrier and even that is not easy to obtain full operational capability with all that it entails. It indeed doesn’t make sense for the Angolans. They should have started with an LPD or something similar.

    One additional aspect we seem to forget if Nigeria is to get involved in an arms race is the need for auxiliary vessels like fleet replenishment ships (oilers & stores/ammunition/spare parts vessels).

    There is always a logistics chain when it comes to deploying Frigates, Corvettes, Assault Ships/LPDs & Submarines. A very expensive business.

    If you want a continuous sea presence of submarines, you will need 4, maybe you can get away with 3 just to have one at sea continuously. Usually, one is out on patrol, one undergoing refit, one getting the crew ready for the next deployment and also training.

  21. CHYDE says:

    @Peccavi, I don’t see the reason why Nigeria should Sabotage Angola, isn’t this idea similar to what the West is accused of when it comes to arms purchase and arm twisting , Nigeria has what it takes to purchase Military hardware, If Angola has an aircraft carrier and Nigeria has Russian/Chinese Frigates in good numbers and properly armed ,na case? If we had a well equipped airforce or say a good air defence capability, Snow go fall ?

  22. peccavi says:

    @ Oga Are James: I disagree, it is a ridiculous proposition, you cannot go brown water to blue water straight away, you need to bed into it, first up get a coterie of officers and men who have experience manning large ships and then gradually scale them up. Carrier operations are so many notches above Nigerias current capability much less Angola. Without the requisite on shore investment in training and supply chain, that carrier will just be rusting in the docks for 5- 10 years. Its an expensive folly
    @ Oga Ifiok: I agree we would be looking at rotary wing but whatever combination you look at large ocean going platforms will always lose against a carrier task force. The Soviets concede the Atlantic surface to NATO because they couldn’t match the US carrier groups, hence their investment in long range maritime surveillance, subs and bombers. The Argentinians in the Falklands lost a battleship to a sub and withdrew their carrier from the battlespace. When conceivably it could have turned the tide of the air/ sea campaign.
    This is the paradox of high value platforms sometimes they are so precious you cannot afford to let them do their jobs
    @ Oga Chyde: the basic question always ask whenever people start advocating procurement, procurement, procurement is ‘What for?’ The Angolan scenario is exactly the kind of thing that one defines their strategies around. Nigeria is a trading nation, we export a lot and import a lot. Therefore we need to keep our see lanes open. If Angola was simply Liberia or Sierra Leone buying a carrier, we could say good luck to them but they are a maritime oil producing nation, in other words they occupy the same space as us thus we cannot allow them to dominate that space, at worst parity, at best outmatch them. However we cannot afford the cost of a precipitous arms race thus the best option is to prevent them from going down that road. It is nothing to do with West/ East it is what every sane nation does to protect its interests. The US deceived the Soviets that they had a space based missile defence system causing them to spend billions trying to counter a non existent weapon system. Was it not easier to get the USSR to waste time and resources in that manner than to fight them?
    I’m not saying Angola is our enemy or that this purchase will go ahead, its fairly ridiculous but not impossible. But like everything, if they do it what is our response? What do they need a carrier for?

  23. gbash10 says:

    Now things are getting better,Angola to acquire a decommission aircraft-carrier!Hmmm…if this info is true,then I say congrat to the Angolan military and government.@oga Peccavi,it would be wrong for the Nigerian government to sabotage the purchase.
    They are just doing what we are suppose to have done long ago.However this should be a wake-up call for Nigeria.
    Bloody civilians in government only know how to spend our oil/gas money on private ceremonies but do not know that resource which is the life-line our economy need to be protected.
    As at the time Nigeria acquired the NN Aradu F86(Meko 360),please correct me if I am wrong,either Argentina or Chile bought 4-6 Meko 360
    at a time!
    We are suppose to dominate the Gulf of Guinea maritime domain.

    • peccavi says:

      I would not congratulate them unless you see them developing an integrated maritime plan that includes deep sea ports, dry docks, a merchant marine and Naval and maritime training school. Its a massive expensive jump. The first thing is to train enough people to man the ships then get them to man the ships, get them to use the ships as a group or squadrons rather than singly. If not its just another chop money scheme by a silly government with typical lack of planning.
      But my central point is that if this goes ahead it is a strategic threat to Nigeria’s interests. We cannot let another oil producing African power dominate the Gulf of Guinea, period. And we must use whatever means necessary to sabotage this deal, whether fair or foul. This is not bad belle it is simple military logic.
      The converse is that we let them go ahead in the full knowledge the amount of time and money they sink into this with a negligible chance of success will suck up resources they could be using to build a sensible fleet that would dominate the Gulf.
      Naval priorities according to Peccavi
      Dominate our coast, inland waterways and EEZ
      Dominate the Gulf of Guinea: in order to do this we must prevent other navies from surpassing us or match them
      Obtain an expeditionary capability
      We cannot allow Angola to out match us or South Africa to deploy significantly to the West of Africa. We need to keep them focussed on the East and South while we develop the capability to out match them.

      • doziex says:

        HEhe he, Oga peccavi, now you don’t want another African oil producer controlling the gulf of guinea.
        Remember when you vehemently argued against the need for nigerian submarines ?

        Threats have a funny way of emerging, when you least expect.

      • igbi says:

        Oga peccavi, why exactly are you against procurement ?

  24. rka says:

    Unfortunately, Nigeria hasn’t got the clout to influence or block this particular arms purchase. It is not as if we have anything going with the Spanish.
    The best we can hope for is to counter that threat as already stated, either by purchase of long range maritime assets or go down the route of expensive submarine acquisition and maintenance.

    • drag_on says:

      Oga rka you see what i mean? Why should the Angolans listen to or consider us in their purchases with the kind of arsenal their air-force possesses? I trust our Navy though,i like their plan.We are now a very competent brown water Navy ( and we can build the ship we need for patrol,and soon OPV hulls). We are ramping up blue water experience by getting long range cutters,and as you know, we sailed to Brazil,U.K. and Australia with our flagships,(.We need to cross the cold and stormy pacific as well).As for the carrier, it works best in a carrier strike group.of about 2 cruisers,3 frigates;a supply ship and 1-2 subs.They (Angola) have no experience at all with such and will require at least 20-30 yrs,by which time if we follow our Navy plans we should be capable of neutralizing them.We need to put more cordite and sea salt in the faces of our Navy boys.As Gallatin arrives she and thunder need to sail as a pair.Our sailors need to know the worlds oceans like the back of their hands.Lets forget about the Angolans and their lust for a carrier. Nothing can beat experience,logistics and capacity to build ships.How i wish our air-force would learn from the navy.They(air-force) have no flag-ship like Aradu(e.g. su 30).The F-7 maybe able to defend the homeland, but it cant project power in Africa.The army win wars,but it is the air-force that turns the tides of wars.

      • rka says:

        @drag-on, I agree with you and I trust that our navy will in no time be able to project power. What we now need are the LPDs, Air defence Destroyers, Multi Role Frigates, Corvettes and Oilers/re-supply vessels and we will dominate the Gulf of Guinea.

        The air force I am a little bit more worried about because if we plan to deploy our recently setup battalion that is meant to respond to outside emergencies only, what assets are we going to use to carry out CAS bearing in mind some of it may have to be long range CAS missions as we don’t have air to air refuelling platforms or aircrafts.

        It is commendable all the recent refurbishment etc which will stand us in good stead, but we urgently need a day/night multi-role precision strike aircraft in the SU30/35 category.

  25. gbash10 says:

    NN Aradu(Meko360H1) F89 for the Nigerian Navy and Almirante Brown-class(MekoH2),4 units for the Argentine Navy not Chile.
    Note this :
    *ARA Almirante Brown,
    *ARA La Argentina,
    *ARA Heroína and
    *ARA Sarandi .These are the names of the Argentine Meko36H2 model equipped with 2 hanger for ASW helicopters,while the Aradu(Meko360H1) has 1 hanger for ASW helicopter.
    After that procurement with Nigeria in 1982,the Argentines acquired 6 unit of Meko140 frigates to complement the Meko360H2.The 6 units were all built in Argentina!

  26. Makanaky says:

    Angola acquiring a carrier is not just a white elephant project but a ship that is going to rot in the sea, they don’t have the money not even Nigeria or South Africa to embark on such a gigantic project. Do they even have the technical know how ? Aircraft carrier for what ? I will go back to Peccavi write up a while ago, what is Nigeria threat ? What is out immediate military needs, what do we need to defend ourselves internally and against external aggression ? We need to protect our EEZ for now and against BH, that should be our immediate priority and we are not doing that as I write this piece.

  27. Nnamdi says:

    My dear generals,

    First of all, happy new year to you all.

    As per the SWOT analysis of implication of Angola acquiring a carrier, I think the first strategic check move is to (re-)consult Sao Tome & Princippe for situaion of a military base on one of the major Islands. Presently, Nigeria has that large enough clout to get them to do that for us, and the friendly regimes in Equitorial Guinea and Gabon to flow along with he right perks. Deploy is a special amphibious Army brigade there (82 Div comes to mind), add a squadron of fighter jets and attack helicopters, and air surveillance assets, then two frigates, OPVs and SDBs.

    This arrangement is in anticipation that the home bases are fortified themselves, such that the FOB can be used as a launch pad against hostilities from that wing, and also provides support to friendly nations around gulf of Guinea..

    This I believe is a more effective and cheaper alternative to scrambling around for a carrier in a mad rush.

  28. Deltaman says:

    Oga Beeg, just spotted this on a New NA division in the South

    • jimmy says:

      Oga Beegs in reply and because I donot want to derail this thread I most respectfully ask based on this information about a new division in the niger delta for a new thread. T-Mobile. America’s First Nationwide 4G Network

  29. kwame kpeh says:

    In as much as I like reading important topics on this blog, I like to correct some misconceptions about civil or military regimes in Nigeria. Mr Gbash10 “Bloody civilians in government only know how to spend our oil/gas money on private ceremonies but do not know that resource which is the life-line our economy need to be protected”. Mr Gbash10 Sims to have selective amnesia, if not what should warrant this comment knowing fully well that the problem with procurement in Nigeria is a case of chop I chop. Weather civilian or military, the leaders are the same, they are concerned about one thing only, and that is what is my cut? They don’t care about the security of the nation, what they really care about is how much goes into their bank account. The 18 Jags and the Aradu and most of the naval fleet were bought during the Shagari’s era. The Military have been in power for a long time, what did they do either in terms of welfare or equipping the military? They killed the military, the Air force and Navy were made a laughing stock, there was no functional jets except may be 3 A Jets, but there were fleets of Presidential jets ready to fly at any given time. So Mr Gbash10 tell me, what did the military buy for the defense of this Great country apart from legalizing corruption? The Military are part of this society, they have the right to speak up when things is not right. All correct sir! Should stop! Buying inferior military equipment for troops defending this country is a shame. Many young officers and men have died to this rubbish.Please don’t put all the blame on GEJ or Madam Finance alone.

    • Manny Aydel says:

      Dear Kwame, just to provide some additional input to your comments, I wish to affirm that the contract for the construction of NNS Aradu was awarded by General Olusegun Obasanjo’s regime. It was constructed by Blohm and Voss in Hamburg and it took three years to build. The ship was delivered during the regime of President Shehu Shagari. The Murtala / Obasanjo administration actually rebuilt the Nigerian Armed Forces. With General TY Danjuma as CoAS, they brought down the size of the Nigerian Army from 250,000 after the unfortunate Nigerian civil war (up from 9,000 before the war) to 90,000 by the time they handed over power on 1st October 1979. They also mechanised the entire army.The MiG 21 jets were bought by that same administration, while virtually all the new naval platforms-post civil war era- (NNS Dorina and Otobo; Erinmi / Eyinmiri; NNS Lana: a hydrographic ship; Ambe / Ofiong:Landing Ship Tanks; etc were ordered by the same Murtala / Obasanjo administration. While I do not subscribe to the use of such terms as “bloody civilians,” the fact remains that the foundation of the relatively modern military that we have today was laid by the military.

  30. ifiok umoeka says:

    @ kpeh, I totally agree. We only have corrupt polithiefcians whether in or out of uniform.
    @ Peccavi, oga, Angola is not remotely our problem, WE ARE OUR PROBLEM!
    As for the ‘FOBs’ I like the sound but we both know that Gabon will not play ball!
    As for the fleet, Oga Beegz has said again and again what $200mn can get us (though those chinese frigate gives me nightmares but nothing wrong about using them as trainers like the hamiltons till we get what we need). The point is building a navy from the ground up!
    The Angolans are only covering their assets and interest, who tie our hand abi we no get interest. Abeg enough with this sand sand for another man garri!
    As for the Alphas(chei we don derail enough) I do hope that as we are preping hopefully for their replacements, we pay attention to precision munition delivery of both bombs and rockets! That way, we get our targets for less and reduce collateral damage (we don’t hear anything about those hostages again do we!)
    On the maintenance airforce, do keep this up, cheers.

    • peccavi says:

      Oga, I didn’t say Angola was our problem, I’m saying if they get a carrier and eventually figure out how to use it, it changes the balance of power in West Africa. No other nation can afford to sustain a significant Navy (except EG but more on them later) and no other country has the need to.
      So when I keep saying what do we need x for or what do we need y for, this is what I mean. A carrier or a sub changes the game and we must react to it, thus it is important to have our own strategy that other nations react to it.
      Gabon would not give us basing rights but Equitorial Guinea is really just there for the taking. They have a significant Nigerian population, descended from Igbo labourers. a useless and corrupt government as well.
      How we’d achieve it is up for debate but if we got our act together, I would suggest a base in Sierra Leone, with a dry dock and Naval air station and a battalion of mech infantry not only would it be a money spinner servicing Liberian registered ships but 2 or 3 helicopters as well as a squadron of patrol vessels on an illegal fisheries patrol paid for by the Sierra Leoneans would not only allow us to dominate the sea lanes to the Americas but also ensure we have troops pre positioned in case we need to intervene.
      Likewise EG a base with 3 or 4 frigates and a Naval air station allows us to dominate the EEZ, dominate the Camerounian and Angolan coast.
      With if Nigeria has an Amphibious Assault Ship group and these 3 bases then not only would we eliminate piracy but we would ensure that the Gulf of Guinea is dominated by Nigeria and we cannot be blockaded.
      The lessons of Biafra and 1914 Germany are pertinent to Nigeria, they both lost because they were blockaded, however hard they fought on land. Germany countered in WW2 with U boats and pocket battleships, but still couldn’t guarantee their supplies on the open seas so instead contented themselves with attempting to reverse blockade the UK.
      Nigeria cannot allow itself to be vulnerable

      • Deltaman says:

        Agree on SL base possibilities, historical connections with Nigeria but also SLs are truly grateful for NG intervention in the 90s. Illegal fisheries patrol is a good way to start. Heard A Dangote was looking at buying the port at Freetown, not sure if that happened. We need to project military power to protect our economic assets abroad! my mite for the night

  31. beegeagle says:

    Oga Nnamdi, you raised moot points. I also like what Oga Drag-On had to say.

    That said, we are told to believe that the USA have secured the basing rights in Sao Tome. Strategic myopia is killing our country.

    About a decade ago, the President of Sao Tome, which like Cameroon and Equatorial Guinea, is one of our nextdoor maritime neighbours in Central Africa, was toppled from power whilst visiting Abuja. President Obasanjo not only told the putschists to stand down or have their coup reversed by direct military action, he personally accompanied the Sao Tome President back to his country. He had General Ogomudia, then CDS and the Guards Brigade Commander on board to drive home the point.

    The President loved Nigeria to no end and has become a true friend. Like Equato-Guinea, Sao Tome have an Oil Joint Development Zone with Nigeria out in the Gulf of Guinea. The 60:40 Production Sharing Formula in either case is slanted in favour of Nigeria which is saddled with the responsibility of protecting the mutually owned resource.

    Tired of our dawdling and slack ways, Equato-Guinea are now equipping their navy since we won’t show that we have fire in our bellies and equip our navy like they deserve to. We squandered a good measure of goodwill there.

    With Sao Tome, the goodwill was unquantifiable but we failed to make it count – a country created by God to be a giant but which is insistent on shrinking to the size of a midget in a bizarre quest to advertise her innocuous posture. Something has to be wrong with us for real.

    Well, the USA have Regional Maritime Awareness radar arrays in Sao Tome, Seychelles and Liberia and they have basing rights there too. We chose to go empty handed. What else can one say when a minister of the Federal Republic thinks that we should not spend money on national defence?

    Thank God that the FG are now getting tired of buying speedboats, skiffs and dinghies where they ought to have been buying patrol craft, OPVs, corvettes and LPDs for a decade now.

    @MIGHTY YAGZ. Please permit me to respond to youe question on the LPD later and on the appropriate thread

    @ALL. Una don start again for dis New Year… from Day 1 🙂 ? Na wa. This is massive derailment o.

  32. Tope says:

    Hey Guys!

    Happy New year, Let’s take one thing into clear perspective , Gen. Beegeagle has done an analysis and has made a prediction of 20 ships to be Refurbished, Bought or Refitted and Built by the NN this 2014, Going by CNS Ezeoba’s SG-02 a Component of their Medium Term plan it is possible we would see a Strong Blue Navy Emerge let’s not forget SG-01 is 100% Complete this tells us the Navy is Sticking to Plan so we will checkmate Angola if such news occurs, As for the Airforce I think the Focus for Right Now is not on buying Assets but on Maintainenance going by UAV testing and Repairs of Crafts notably the Alpha Jets we also know they signed a partnership with 14 universities for a possibility of production of made in Nigeria crafts which is ongoing, I would also like to know if the rumour of us gettin a “Frogfoot” is true, Also due to how Extremely secretive the Airforce is in its plans we may have to go and ask them during their Airshow in 2014 to at least shed light on this and give reasons why such airframes like the Sukhoi’s are not being looked at even as most East, North and South African Countries are Amassing them, as for the Army their current Focus is on Expansion and Innovation… We all saw what they produced from igirigi to refurbished artillery to moveable kitchens et al, if a new Division is added it would mean more men deployed and more equipments also, so I look forward to how the Military shapes out this year.

    But so far this is the ranking

    1st : Nigerian Navy with 70% Operational Proficiency and Strategic Plans.

    2nd : Nigerian Army with 60% focused on Expansion and Retraining to a Fully Based CT and COIN Unit.

    3rd and Leading from Behind: Nigerian Airforce with 40% their saving grace is da Rocket Project and GULAM Drone we need Assets not Simulators.

  33. Obix says:

    My ogas, i’m not losing sleep over this news about Angola acquiring the “Principe de Asturias” aircraft carrier with another four ships decommissioned from the Spanish fleet .
    Firstly, it’s all rumours with no official confirmation. Even if confirmed the ship would presumably operate helicopters as their are no VTOL fixed wing aircraft currently on the market. Their air force does operate about 70 aging Soviet Hip and Hind choppers as well as some French Alouettes, Dauphins and Gazelles. Then ask yourselves what’s the goal.
    Secondly, let’s not forget that the carrier was sold to Portugal by the US who as usual decides on whom not to transfer the ship to. If at all Angola is set to make the purchase then we should beam our searchlight to the US.
    Thirdly, there’s no millitary or economic sense for Angola to purchase the carrier even as a helicopter That money could purchase them more effective platforms.
    Fourthly, Angola doesn’t have the capabilities to operate such a platform. Like Oga Makanaky said, it’s a white elephant project.
    These acquisitions, if they are truly more than rumors, will expand the Angolan fleet by an order of magnitude and compel the navy to add thousands of new sailors.
    Whether Angola can recruit and train the required personnel is far from certain. It’s equally unclear whether she can afford to operate carrier on more than a token basis. Let’s not forget that In 1997 Thailand commissioned a carrier based on Principe de Asturias’ design but has found it nearly impossible to keep the carrier and her Harriers in front-line service.
    One must learn to walk before you run! Let’s watch !

  34. Spirit says:

    My Ogas,

    Happy new year to you all.

    There is nothing bad in a nation acquiring an aircraft carrier, but the issues are;
    1) How rich is the nation?
    2) What are the threats?
    3) How big is the military?
    4) How competent/well-trained are they?
    5) What does the geo-politics of its sub-region like?
    6) What are the implications of the acquisition?
    I don’t think Angola meets the basic requirement, I don’t see any threat that justifies the acquisition, I don’t see their Navy manning/operating an Aircraft carrier in the next 50 years. For Christ sake, China (2nd largest economy in the world, 4-decade plus nuclear power, permanent member of UNSC has just launched its first!). How many electrical/electronic factories are in Angola? How many Naval/marine/Hydrological research stations? How many Metalugical plants?

    I understand their zeal to develop, but the Angolans should come down to planet Earth and be reasonable.

  35. Spirit says:

    Angola should do it step-by-step so that the proposed carrier doesn’t end up as a “floating Chinese restaurant/tourist attraction’.

    The Nigeria Navy has found the lost book of ‘HOW TO BUILD A NAVY’, and the authorities ae following it line by line.

    Onward together.

  36. gbash10 says:

    The Angolan government is thinking BIG,it is their aspiration to protect their resources before some day in the near future,some criminals would take over the resources.
    The question we should be asking now, should be- what would be the response of the Nigerian government and the military?

  37. Manny Aydel says:

    Dear CyberGenerals, Happy New Year to you all. My intervention is in three areas and I would most gratefully appreciate your reactions/comments. 1. Is it true the entire defence budget for 2014 is 600 million Naira or did I hear wrongly? If true, isn’t this a ‘serious’ joke? 2. What are we doing with Aradu? Can’t we send this ship back to Blohm and Voss and get it tweeked to extend its lifespan? Given the threat perception and our actual requirements at the moment, will Aradu not give us more teeth especially regarding protecting our EEZ? 3. On Angola and having just finished a mission in East Africa, I can tell you that that country has ambitions. True, they are quite friendly with Nigeria but would this not be because our mutual interests have not yet collided? Remember that Angola turned the tide in DRC years ago when it successfully came to the rescue of ZDF forces who had hurriedly jumped in to support Kabila and were almost being routed by Uganda and Rwanda (but for the intervention of Angola). Please note that the ZDF is the toughest army in the whole of southern Africa (and I say with due respect that the SANDF only shines in terms of weapons and technology as its soldiers are soft and its officer corps dominated by affirmative action officers). While I have no direct comment on her desire to secure an aircraft carrier, I aver that we must not operate on the thinking that Angola will always be our friend. Elsewhere, there were comments on the F7 and the fact that some African countries who operate this aircraft type have not suffered the same attrition rate as us but note that many of them do not fly those aircraft with as much frequency as the NAF has been flying theirs. Even the UPDF keeps its Sukhois mostly on the ground…just ask those who live in Entebbe. This is not excusing the accident rate of the F7, but just to add some perspective to the very illuminating discussions here.

  38. gbash10 says:

    The Angolan government is thinking BIG,it is their aspiration to protect their resources before some day in the near future,some criminals would take over the resources.
    The question we should be asking now, should be- what would be the response of the Nigerian government and the military?
    Back to the thread,the Alpha jet is due for retirement and replacement.The NAF in-country maintaince of her platform is commendable,however,they are sleep-walking into the 21st Century in terms of enhancing their role as a modern air force,for all that can be observe about her capabilities,she had been tailored to play a purely supportive tactical support role to the Nigerian Army.
    For the NAF to develop itself to make maximum impact on the military posturing in future,NAF must convince the leadership of Nigeria on how the present scenario necessitate a strategic reach to safeguard our national interests for it to play a strategic role to dominate the skies over Nigeria and the Gulf of Guinea.
    Then the NAF would have to define and refine her requirements,by establishing the optimum balance between capability and numbers,computing the overall spending on maintaining that air combat capability per year over 10 years and the amount to be spent for capability enhancements over the same period
    With that done,approved and implemented judiciously,NAF would become a more dominant and decisive force in the changed nature of warfare!

  39. Number one says:

    we do not need to bankrupt our economy,just invest in anti-access/area denial assets and SA or Angola will think twice before escalating disputes militarily.

  40. peccavi says:

    Oga Doziex go look the thread wey we dey drag the sub issue, My contention is why do we need subs? The premier (and in fact only) argument was the I big pass my neighbour one, Egypt has, South Africa has etc. But non of them are in our sphere of influence or share our trade routes. Procurement is dictated by strategy, strategy is dictated by need and threats. What threat were we countering? If the Angolans get a sub we need to up our ASW capability, that needs a whole set of on shore facilities to support it. So if there is to be a procurement, it must support a strategy which must support a policy which must be supported by the necessary infrastructure. Simple.
    So if the reason we need a 300,000 man Army is because Egypt has one, then sorry but that’s a majorly stupid argument. Why do they have a 300,000 man army and how do they pay for it? If Brazil has a brace of subs must we get them? They also have a space programme, have we invested in the education, power, transport and manufacturing necessary to support it?

    I doubt Angola will do something this silly but what it illustrates is how operating in a policy and strategy bereft environment leaves us vulnerable to the affairs of others. Look at how China is trying to counter the US carrier groups. People are simply saying get area denial weapons. How do you fucking aim them? You get a carrier, it burns fuel, food and supplies etc. How do you supply it without a fleet of fleet auxiliaries? Yet we no longer even have a shipping line.

    The reality is we look at things like kids in a shop window. Threats are easy to predict and plan for. You plan for the worst, best and most likely scenarios and then implement what you can afford.
    As Oga Makanaky asked, what are our threats? That is the first question one asks when talking about tactics or equipment. People want stealth bombers to fight Togo or something. I tire

    • giles says:

      oga peccavi,God bless u.dat has been wot i tried to say earlier let say no to wasteful spend.if a team hav a good striker let d opposite team hit dem wit a very good defender.pls i will lik my country to buy hardwares it can maintain..

    • igbi says:

      1) Nigeria also has a space program
      2) When someone tells you that SA, Egypt has subs, he is not saying that since they have subs, we should also have. He is only pointing out the fact that countries with less money than us could afford it, therefor he is defeating the narratif that we can’t afford it.
      3) The person might also be pointing out the fact that our procurement seems to be napping.
      4) What I don’t understand in the reasoning of those who are against procurement (including yourself) is that you can see the entire world buying heavy military equipment, therefor leaving Nigeria behind, which brings a situation in which Nigeria might not be able to defend itself from any attack (just like our neighbors), yet you don’t consider that as a reason to rearm. Just note that the threat doesn’t necessarily come from your neighbors. Colonization didn’t come from our neighbors neither. With all these irresponsible countries building powerful armies, I think it is only reasonable to try and stay ahead for our own security.
      5) What is the argument not to buy subs ?
      It is not like if our waters weren’t infested with pirates! And the french navy wasn’t busy spying on us with its subs !

    • igbi says:

      One of our threats is france. And as i have said, the threat is not necessary from your neighbors, especially when your neighbors are very week. There was a time south africa was a big security threat to us and there was an other time Libya was a big security threat to us. The french agenda which has been so since Charles De Gaul is to have Nigeria devided into many peaces, and these same french have a powerful military and nuclear subs which are probably patrolling our waters as we speak. More than half of the french economy is made in West Africa and they see Nigeria as a threat to that economy. So as a conclusion, I think you are a little bit short sighted. Humble yourself a little bit, or else you will keep making the same mistakes. You were a soldier, but not a general. There are things you don’t know ! So be humble and learn from the rest as they also learn from you.

  41. ifiok umoeka says:

    Oga Beegz u old fox (I see what ure doing lol). I wasn’t a beegeagle blogger then! My, that was pretty intense.
    @ Peccavi, my Oga, u know that we see eye 2 eye on most things but u said 2 sabotage another man’s asset and that’s sure 2 make an enemy of ur friend! While I’ve never been an anti sub ( I know the worth of a good one) my suggestions would take only weeks or a few months 2 implement as opposed to the years it takes for a meaningful sub! I’ve always believed that 2 prevent war, u prepare for it!
    On that 4 and against sub post, Beegs started a quote ( I believe from Stephen Seagal’s Kmarked for death’)but didn’t end it…’ Careful kills nobody, stupid, but stupid does, maintain that’ while we do something about any perceived threat, we don’t want 2 be dumb, do we? As 4 Angola and the carrier, I’m not losing any sleep, had Spain not been grappling with economic issues, they wouldn’t be looking 2 off load them asset at all cost, perhaps instead of killing the Angolans, we should go 2 de party with our cheque book, maybe we can go home with a few assets too!
    For the records, along with all the stated uses of a sub, one is for realistic and effective ASW training.

    • peccavi says:

      Oga putting sand in another mans gari is basic international affairs 101.
      It is cheaper to prevent Angola getting a carrier than it is to create a counter force.

      • igbi says:

        I guess you think we don’t have enough enemies then !
        Sabotaging another African nation !
        There goes the united states of Africa.
        So there is not enough western sabotage on Africa, we need more sabotage ! This is why it was so easy to colonize Africa.
        Let me break it down to you: since we can afford to procure more than Angola, let us rather do that !

  42. Yagazie says:

    Oga Peccavi, we need an army in the regon of 300,000 men because our geographical size and the current threat we face, plus our external peace enforcement opeations, coupled with our
    population of about 162 million people demands it. The army can be expanded to this number over a period of time – and we can certainly afford it. The reference to the szie of the Eygptian army was relative to its population and so with all due respect to you , I disagree with your view that advocating for an army this size it is a stupid arguement. This is a new year and this blog is read by a lot of people the world over, so pleae lets focus on issues and agree to agree/disagree without being insultive.

    Brazil has a space programme, a brace of subs (with an intention to build a nuclear powered sub), and has just concluded a $4.5 billion deal to purchase about 36 Grippen Jets to replace it’s ageing front line Mirage 2000 fighter jets. YET we all witnessed the unrest/violence that couured duing the recently concluded Confederations Cup as the citizens protested againt the lack of proper infrastructure such as roads, housing and decent public transport.

    With regards to submarines, apart from being force multipliers and can also be used for a variety of missions overt and covert. It is in Nigeria’s interest to have them – nothing to do with the fact that Eygpt, Algeria and South Africa currently have and operate them. All serious navies of note operate submarines- period.

  43. ifiok umoeka says:

    The gripens were chosen rather than the better rafale saving them over $3.5bn. We can have what ever we NEED but we need 2 PLAN 4 it. Vietnam spent an entire defense budget on kilo’s because they needed a deterrence 2 check China. I do agree that we need a sub(rather a flotilla of subs) but we need 2 have our OPVs, FFGs and LPD(H) 1st don’t u think!
    As for Egypt, close 2 $40bn in military aid from Uncle Sam in 30 yrs, that manner no go reach us, we grow our own!
    I don’t think we need a 300,000 strong military population or not, we need 2 properly train and equip the ones we have and do the same for the police as a part if our reasoning for the 300k is aimed @ the military handling police duties. We need 2 double our MOPOL and ready them 2 do their job as ALL THRESE POLICE DUTIES BLUNTS AN ARMY!
    The bishop TD Jakes once said that folks who go around ‘claiming’ other people’s cars in Jesus name should 1st claim the Cheque! Like I said before while we try 2 ‘Match’ these folks militarily, let’s match their defense budget and their economy too!

    • igbi says:

      Actually, Rafale is not better, it is a peace of junk made by dassault and which the french law obliges the french armed forces to buy in mass if it doesn’t sell. And nobody is buying.

    • igbi says:

      Let’s advocate for things which they don’t already have. Indeed they are already very well trained and their training is taken very seriously by the service chiefs. What they don’t have is the equipment and the numerical advantage. In a country of 170 million people with as much resources as Nigeria, having an army of just 100000 is far from being enough, it should be at least 300000, especially given the fact that the same army is deployed almost in every state in the country fighting mercenaries and heavily armed militia and the same army is also deployed abroad for our foreign policy.

  44. bigbrovar says:

    Has anyone taken a look a the the break down of the 2014 Defense budget? It’s pathetic and shameful.. Makes you realize that even an headless chicken has more clue than some of the people will have in government. Beside the 2 OPV coming to the Navy, and 6 Mi Helicopters, nothing there is worth anything that a nations that calls it’s self the giants of Africa should be proud about. It’s little wonder I have seen wet shit that I have liked better than those we have in government.

  45. peccavi says:

    Oga Yagazie, I write the way I speak, take it as a forceful adjective not as an insult. No disrespect was meant.
    But the centrality of the point is that procurement is based on strategy which is based on the threat, geography and dare I say geopolitical reality.
    So lets examine the 2 issues raised a sub and a 300,000 man army. Granted we are just using that as a ball park figure (I hope), but again IT IS AN INCORRECT STATEMENT.
    What is a 300,000 man army made up of? How many battalions, how many brigades? Or do we just have 300,000 men in uniform milling about?
    How are they organised?
    What are they? Armour? Infantry? Engineers? Cooks?
    For every combat troop you need at least 3 service and service support, so if its 25,000 Infantry then you need 75,000 service troops.
    Then you need to pay, train, equip, house, feed and provide medical care to these troops. You need to transport them, you need to pay (in a sane country at least) pensions when they retire.
    These cost never, ever go down, they constantly increase and as people live longer you end up paying pensions for longer. However wealthy you are this is a legacy cost that no nation can afford. The reason for privatisations of public companies in the west were not just for greater efficiencies but to get rid of pension liabilities. Likewise it is one of the biggest costs in most armies.
    So the starting point is define the threat.
    Identify scenarios that the threat can manifest itself
    Identify counters to those threats scenarios
    Identify what you need to resource it
    Identify how much you can actually afford and how
    Keep doing this until you get an answer that you can afford and solves your problems.
    Egypt has a 300,000 man army because historical conflicts with Israel, Sudan and Libya. It also tries to retain an expeditionary capability so it can project military force to underpin its position or claim as an Arab superpowerThe Egyptian Army is subsidised by the US and more importantly it is mainly a CONSCRIPT army. The relationship between the army and the public is not the same as that between the Nigerian public and the Army. The Egyptian public admire and respect the Army as preservers of the Nasserite ideals etc.
    In Nigeria you want a 300,000 man volunteer army? Which country other than the US has an army that large, what is their economy like or industrial base?
    So I make the point again and again. If you want a 300, 000 man army, to do what and how do you pay for it?
    You want subs? To do what and can you keep it going? Ordinary Jaguars dey hard us.
    Oga Ifiok has already more or less answered these questions but let me articulate them again
    1) What are Nigerias threats?
    2) Under what scenarios do we see those threats manifesting?
    3) What are our options for dealing with them?

    • igbi says:

      “For every combat troop you need at least 3 service and service support, so if its 25,000 Infantry then you need 75,000 service troops.”
      I am coming to doubt that you were ever a soldier. That quote is either a deliberate lie or an exaggeration to suit your agenda, or just a result of ignorance. I didn’t read further.

  46. Yagazie says:

    Oga Peccavi- no offence taken. Happy New Year. Yes I see and take on board your well articulated arguements in respect of what is involved in maintaining a volunteer professional army of the size I had suggested. My real concern is not really having an army that size (which was indeed a ball park figure by the way), but that we maintain an army that has the capacity to deal with the current internal security threats (BH insurgency/Nigeri Delta millitancy), future internal security threats as well as retain the ability to meet its external peace enforcement requiremnts, without being unduly streched. If an army of 125,000 – 150,000 well trained men is adequate to do the job, then fine. On the issue of the need for our Navy to purchase/operate submarines, well…..lets simply agree to disagree.

  47. peccavi says:

    Following on from this gist I thought it would be interesting to look at threats to Nigeria, starting with conventional, national army type threats. This is not proper staff work and was done by looking at Google maps. But when we talk about what type of army you need, then first you address the threats and then how to counter them and then how to resource it.

    Nigeria is surrounded by weak poor countries that cannot gather sufficient forces to penetrate deep into Nigerian territory, supply their troops much less defend their own territory from a counter strike.
    Country: to the west is Benin Republic, economy, weak military
    Physical Terrain: low rolling hills orientated north to south, mostly rain forest. Bounded by the River Niger, with major rivers running north to south and tributaries running east to west, swampy delta to the south
    Human Terrain: Francophone, close ethno linguistic links through Yoruba, Hausa and Fulanis
    Natural obstacles: rain forest, further to the west the River Niger, with other large rivers such as the Ogun and Yelwa running north to south. Those running east to west terminate in swampy jungle.
    Military characteristics: Poor armour/ mechanised country, good for light infantry. A conventional attacking force would be restricted to attacking and resupplying by road or air. A light infantry force could move cross country but would need resupply by air or road. The hills and the rivers mean a defending force can easily interdict and destroy and attacking force. These and the rainforests channel an attacker into areas that can be used as killing grounds quite easily with ambushes, air strikes and artillery.
    Key enemy targets would be the population centres and transport infrastructure such as bridges and road junctions. Kainji dam and the food producing areas
    Attackers: would be compelled to use a rapid road advance or a combined air/ road assault to seize key features such as bridges and garrisons. To properly invest the major built up areas would need a large number of troops who can only be deployed by road unless an airport is captured.
    For an attacker to get to their targets they would need air superiority in order to seize key infrastructure by heliborne assault with a simultaneous road move. Air defence assets would be needed to maintain their supply lines as well as light armoured fighting vehicles to spearhead the mounted infantry. Going through roads bounded by jungle and wooded hills means they are vulnerable to ambush, to counter this they need air support on call or artillery and mortars as well as their organic infantry
    Defenders: to defeat a threat from the west requires an infantry force with good mobility (air and vehicle) supported by artillery, engineers for demolitions, river crossings and riverine operations, with attached logistics. Air support in terms of air superiority planes, close support, recce and transport planes and helicopters. By defending key points the enemy will have to disperse forces to deal with each threat bit by bit, leaving them vulnerable to counter attack and air strikes.
    Country: To the north is Niger, Chad to the North East both large, poor mainly Muslim,
    Physical Terrain: The terrain is mainly arid, savannah, intersected with rivers mainly running east to west. The ground gradually rises to form a plateau, with rocky hills
    Human Terrain: common ethno linguistic links with Hausa, Fulani, Kanuri and others
    Natural obstacles: hills, rivers, desert
    Major population centres: Kano, Sokoto, Kaduna
    Military characteristics: the rocky hills form a natural obstacle to massed armour however they have good terrain for mechanised forces and mechanised infantry and armoured forces in the desert and savannah region. These forces would however be forced to used bridges or bridging equipment or operate in the dry season in order to get through the rivers
    Attackers: to break through, an attacking force would need to use their heavy forces such as armour to destroy defenders and then light mechanised forces to either push ahead to secure bridges and junctions or screen their flanks. Operating in the open desert or savannah would require that the force either have air superiority or air parity and strong air defence assets. They would need bridging and engineering assets to get heavy armour across rivers as well as a significant logistics train to support their mechanised forces. By using speed the attackers can concentrate forces and destroy defenders piecemeal before they are able to concentrate
    Defenders: The key targets again would be military bases, the population centres, and transport centres with airports, bridges and important road junctions. Rivers Hadeja, Sokoto and Zamfara run east to west almost the entire length of the North leading a small gap in the Katsina/ Kano area. Thus the defenders would concentrate on preventing the enemy from crossing any of the bridges across the river and use air strikes and artillery on any attempt to break through the Katsina/ Kano gap. Armoured forces would be used to destroy enemy concentrations, rear echelon and others while mobile infantry would be used to defend the Hadeja-Sokoto River line. A force could attempt to move en masse from the North East protecting their flank with the Hadeja River but again they are channelled by the river and high ground.
    To counter a conventional force this the defenders need to be able to detect them early and engage with massed armour and artillery on the savannah or in the desert, enemy columns can be destroyed by air attack
    Country: Cameroun, Francophone, Christian/ Muslim, stable, adequate infrastructure
    Physical Terrain: Heavily wooded mountains up to 1,000m on the SE border, wooded high hills in the centre, sparse savannah leading up to Lake Chad. River Benue, Gongola and others running East to west, others running north to south. Swampy, mangrove delta to the south
    Human Terrain: ethno-linguistic links with Fulani, Kanuri and Hausa ethnic groups
    Natural obstacles: Mandara Mountains, Mangrove swamp, Lake Chad
    Military characteristics: the Mangrove forest and mountain ranges make the area impassable to large mechanised or armoured forces. Mech/ armour can operate to the North between Lake Chad and Gwoza. Forces operating to the north will need to be mechanised, operating to the south is for mobile light infantry
    Key enemy targets would be the population centres and transport infrastructure such as bridges and road junctions.
    Attackers: Attackers would need to use mechanised/ armoured forces to the north supported by artillery. Forces operating in the south would need to move alongside River Benue or the road network. They would be channelled by the roads and mountain passes and would need to use speed, numbers and firepower to break through.
    Defenders: The defenders could seal the Lake Chad-Gwoza Gap with armoured forces and artillery. Infantry with mortars and fire support would be able to easily stop an advance from the centre or south by concentrating their defences on the high ground/ passes in the centre and bridges and road junctions to the south
    Country: Atlantic Ocean, Equatorial Guinea
    Physical Terrain: Mangrove Swamp, Rain forest above that. River Niger 4-5 major rivers runs north to south (Ogun, Osse, Cross, Anambra, Imo, Orashi), minor and major tributaries run east to west
    Human Terrain: Indigenous Nigerian tribes, overlapping to the east and west
    Natural obstacles: Mangrove swamps, rain forests, rivers, large densly populated urban areas
    Military characteristics: the area is completely impassable to major armoured forces. Operations to the south east will be limited to amphibious forces, to the south west, mechanised forces will be able to exploit once beyond the urban/ swamp areas. The swamps can be an asset to both the attackers and defenders although defenders local knowledge should give them an advantage
    Key enemy targets would be oil fields, industrial areas, the major population centres (Lagos, Calabar, Warri and Port Harcourt) and transport infrastructure such as ports, airports, bridges and road junctions.
    Attackers: attackers would need to blockade the coast and neutralise naval forces. Attackers would need to achieve air superiority to defend landing zones. Adequate beach landing areas extend from west from the Owena River, however no roads exist to move from the beaches except in Lagos. Light and mechanised infantry would be needed to secure the west, to the mid west and east amphibious forces would be needed. A large amount of infantry would be needed to secure the Lagos
    Defenders: would need to maintain air superiority in order to destroy any landing forces. The defenders would need to defend offshore and onshore oil installations as well as population centres. Defending Lagos presents an opportunity to suck attackers into a grinding attritional battle but would end up destroying the city. Port Harcourt, Calabar and Warri have more difficult approaches which could channel enemy forces however an amphibious assault, could secure any of those cities. Enemy forces could then be channelled as they attempted to take other oil producing/ population centres by the thivk rain forest.
    Immediate Threats: none of our neighbouring countries presents a threat. Even an alliance of all our neighbours would still leave them with less than 100,000 men (improperly organised and balanced) and other than the North there is nowhere for them to develop a major attack. The cities of the North are such that major battles can be easily fought around them. Enemy coming from the East of west would not be able to concentrate forces without being destroyed by air power or artillery. Even a simultaneous assault that is not immediately stopped can be checked by a series of fighting withdrawals until the enemy is stretched and vulnerable to counter and air attack. With Nigeria’s internal lines it will be possible to stabilise each front and then destroy each piecemeal.
    The most vulnerable flank is to the south. The ocean does not form a natural obstacle, although the mangrove and rain forests will saturate the enemy simply by blockading the coast and turning the largest city and oil producing areas into combat zones the enemy will have an effect.
    Thus for conventional forces on land we need to have armoured forces in the north east, west and centre, supported by mobile artillery, light mobile recce forces.
    To the west and east light infantry supported by artillery and a mobile reserve, with mobile air defence and engineers
    To the south east light marine forces with riverine air defence and fire support assets. Coastal artillery/ missiles in Calabar and Lagos. Air defence assets to defend the Delta both on and offshore.
    Strong Naval forces that that deny
    Nigeria does not have major threats surrounding her. The most vulnerable flanks are north and south. However any concentration of forces to the North are vulnerable to air attack as well as light mechanised forces attacking their flanks and rear areas while the main body is brought into battle. There is also a lack of road, water, fuel and other infrastructure to support an attacking force above our northern border. Nor do the economies of these countries support that kind of investment. The south is most vulnerable as most key enemy targets such as the 4 port cities and the oil fields can be brought under artillery fire immediately.
    Lagos is the most vulnerable; although an enemy risks being sucked into a complete nightmare of a fight it will be a brave or reckless commander that will turn Lagos into a battleground. However it is a complete killing ground for an attacker.
    There are no African countries or alliance of African countries that could mass sufficient forces to attack from the sea. It would take a major alliance to launch and sustain an attack from either of our land borders and those forces would take months to mass all the while vulnerable to spoiling attacks.
    Thus Nigeria can only be threatened conventionally by land forces from beyond the continent.
    The US has the combat power to launch and sustain an attack with limited objectives (i,e capture the oilfields or Lagos) but once they have force landed and are tied to supporting the landing forces they are extremely vulnerable to harassing attacks.
    I do not see any immediate conventional land threat to Nigeria.

    • Obix says:

      @Oga Peccavi, thanks for this analysis. I agree with you totally. I’m sure that our top brass see it that way too, thus why we have the defence policy which i mentioned in my earlier post. I maintain that our immediate threats have been from within (BH, Niger Delta militancy….. and reckless politicians). On procurements, we need to beef up the armed forces for them to meet up to her immediate challenges under this policy. Procurements of sophisticated weapons for power projection will come much later.

      • peccavi says:

        Oga Obix, All our existential threats are within. Thus I believe we need to reorientate defence and security and use the army solely for external enemies and begin developing a dedicated internal security force

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s