"It was clear that the rebels didn't expect us" -- SANDF pilot 

You Are F*cking Right!!!

i could not be a pilot. Anxiety/fear of crashing would make me crash

Correction we did not lose 30 troops we lost 13 in CAR and another 2 died while being treated at 1Mil. We would have lost a lot more had our troops not stood down. we were outgunned and a massive disparity in numbers plus the financial and political implication was too onerous, and wile I personally have no confidence in the treacherous "commander in chief".... zuma it was probably the right decision

if Zuma had sent the troops and equipment requested they would not have had to stand down. situation would have been a lot different, we only had around 180 combat troops, with no artillery or air support. the request for 200 extra troops had been approved but never sent. air support had been denied and heavy weapons we meant to have arrived but never did. regardless of what Zuma and the rest of the criminal in government the troops on the ground did well very well, with the little they had

@@Ghoulza if i am correct zuma authorised 4 gripens that were later station on uganda.. the was opposition in parliament as to why we were there in the first place. DA made noise about sa troops there to protect mines of zumas friends.. also france denied sa acces to the airport. It should be noted also the governing body of that region didnt not support sa plants to topple the seleka rebells which were clearly supported by Chad. This issue was cleary discussed in public.. Also seleka sent a representative to petoria to apologies. We could have easly delt with them.. biggest mistake thou of which we learned the hard way, was not to have air support there regardless of the mission we had.. that is something i see goverment has corrected. I say this based on the fact in DRc when UN wanted to withdraw rooivalk sa said it would would withdraw its troops..

@@lelethugani6757 no gripens where ever slated to be sent there.... no support or logistics where there for them, they would have sent rooivalk before they sent grippens as rooivalk are better suited, grippen would not have been suited to that enviroment.... Zuma was propping up his pals, and securing their interests.... he sent troops to train their soldiers. some of the soldiers we trained fought against us.... there was no real reason for us being there at all other than to help Zuma get money. as to the troops there, Zuma was told they need 200 extra soldiers and more ammo and support. he said no... the troops where slated to go there, but he blocked them.... yes we could have been the rebels easily but we ran out of ammo... had no support no helicopters and our intelligence was hideous.... basically no intel support.... this was all Zuma's fault... no one else can be blamed for this. it was his pals we where helping... he blocked extra troops and support and then when we needed air transport, SA airforce had to beg for transport planes,.... yet Zuma had a private jet ordered for himself.....you can't try put blame on this on anyone other than ANC and it's idiot leader ZUma

@@Ghoulza www.defenceweb.co.za/sa-defence/sa-defence-sa-defence/rooivalks-gripens-and-additional-troops-were-sent-to-the-car/

I think the question: "why the white paint scheme" is one you should ask to the geniuses in charge of the UN peacekeeping missions. Our jets use the BK 27 27mm Cannon, IRIS-T air-to-air missile, the GBU-12 Paveway II (laser guided bomb), 120 kg Fragmentation Bombs, 120 kg Low-Drag Bombs, 145 kg Bombs and Mk82 460 kg Bombs. I'm also about 60% sure that the

Oh yeah and if there was an emergency we can procure weapons like the AGM-65 Maverick ATGM, RBS15F anti-ship missile, AIM-120 Long range air-to-air missile, AIM-9, etc. as the Gripen is already integrated with most of these missiles.

danieb52 thnx :)

+Llewellyn Coetzer Actually, from the ground, a camouflaged (dark) helicopter is much easier to spot than a white painted aircraft that blends in better with the sky. So in this case, being painted white is actually an advantage. It would only be a disadvantage if they were fighting against a force that has fighter aircraft that could then easily spot the white helicopters flying below.

wigon Yeah and the fact that its almost always raining or cloudy over the Congo means that the white would be even harder to spot from the ground

That's rubbish If you don't know or don't have information ask Don't spread shit n paint President with lies

@@dumisanizuma2348 so the truth of the matter is commander on the group asked for 200 more soldiers and air support, Zuma said he would send them but then didnt... had he sent them commander would not have had to sand down... Zuma is chieft of military and it was his fault

Ryan Pluke Yes, if you visit MONUSCO's photostream on Flickr you can see the occasional SA soldier/helicopter. www.flickr.com/photos/67163702@N07/

UN rules.

Jan Visser It's actually to indicate that the equipment is used for peacekeeping missions. You don't need to be part of the UN to support peacekeeping.

All UN vehicles seem to be painted white , including the planes and cars . That Helicopter is definatly not for show .

Why

@@lungstaonline6963 it's name is Rooivalk not valt. Quite a versatile helicopter for the bush.

yeah Russians fighting the rebels, probably US funded. DRC is resource rich.

nien

'n Ware cringe oomblik