c'est cet avion la:

une armée qui impréssionne

On pourrait dire qu'ils ont l'armée la plus moderne d'Afrique avec l'Algérie et l'Egypte et le Maroc?

Rooivalk

d'apres le livre de gorden thomas histoire du mossad l'afrique du sud a l'arme nucleaire (dsl je mettrai une image de la page apres )
es ce que c'est confirmer ??

Je crois qu'ils étaient sur le point de l'avoir mais qu'ils ont dû abandonner je ne sais pas si ils ont la bombe en d'autres termes :?;

Ils avaient, de mémoire, 6 bombes nucléaires qui ont été démantelé.

7 d'après Wikipedia.

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arme_nucl%C3%A9aire#Pays_ayant_d.C3.A9mantel.C3.A9_leurs_installations_atomiques

Normalement ils auraient meme fait un test au pole sud!

c'etait un test Israelien en fait , sur une barge

israelien sous couverture sur africaine?

Se serait pas étonnant, les Israéliens n'ayant pas l'espace pour le faire.

Some bad news for our SA friends

Citation:

SA has no fighter cover as Zimbabwe simmers By: Keith Campbell Published: 18 Jul 08 - 0:00 On April 2, 2008, the South African Air Force (SAAF) formally retired its remaining Denel Cheetah fighters at a colourful ceremony at Air Force Base (AFB) Makhado. In consequence, South Africa now faces the most severe crisis in Southern Africa in some 20 years – the Zimbabwe situation – without any fighter cover. And Zimbabwe has operational fighters and pilots of proven quality and relatively recent combat experience (in the Democratic Republic of Congo). True, the South African Army does have its own anti-aircraft capabilities, but they are both limited in numbers and short in range, and any hostile aircraft flying at 4 000 m or more above ground level would be immune to them. It must be stressed that Engineering News is not irresponsibly revealing a top national secret; there was nothing secret at all about the retirement of the Cheetahs with no immediate replacement. The South African National Defence Force’s own open and unrestricted monthly journal (it’s available on the Internet), South African Soldier, had a full page – with photo – article on the retirement of the Cheetahs. On May 8, respected British aerospace weekly Flight International reported the retirement of the Cheetahs a month earlier, in a story about the SAAF accepting its first (and so far only) Gripen fighter. And the June 2008 edition of the British journal, Air Forces Monthly, also carried a report on the retirement of the Cheetahs, saying that two two-seater Cheetah Ds would be kept operational for trial work at the SAAF’s Flight Test and Development Centre at AFB Overberg, alongside the single Gripen. Originally, the phase-out of the Cheetahs was meant to have begun in 2010 and finished in 2012, by which time all 26 Gripens would be in service – so the Cheetah was fully retired four years early. “The premature retire- ment of the Cheetahs is the result of a com-bination of a funding crunch and a shortage of air crew and ground crew,” reports defence analyst and South African correspondent for Jane’s Defence Weekly Helmoed Heitman. “There was not enough money, nor enough pilots or technicians, to operate the Cheetahs, and the new Hawk lead-in fighter-trainers, and to prepare for the Gripen. The SAAF asked for a threat assessment and intelligence told them there was no threat and it would be safe to retire the Cheetahs. Ultimately, the fault must lie with Cabinet, because they must have approved the decision.” The SAAF’s only currently operational high-performance jets are its 24 Hawks. Other countries (including Zimbabwe) have successfully used Hawks in combat as fighter-bombers and, during the Cold War, both the Royal Air Force and the Finnish Air Force fitted their Hawks with infrared homing air-to-air missiles (AAMs) as backup, ‘point defence’ interceptors for their front-line fighters. But the Hawk is transonic, not supersonic, and has no radar, so it cannot carry long-range radar-guided AAMs. Moreover, the only weapon so far integrated onto the SAAF Hawks is a 30-mm cannon gun pod, and the current weapons integration programme is concerned with air-to-ground weapons, not air-to-air. So the Hawk cannot fill the gap. What does Zimbabwe have? Disregarding Western types, such as the Hawk, likely to be grounded due to arms embargoes, the Air Force of Zimbabwe (AFZ) has Mikoyan MiG-23s, Chengdu F7s (Chinese copies of the MiG-21) and Nanchang K8 jet trainers (which can be armed for the attack role). The numbers in service are uncertain. The number of MiG-23s is between two and six; there could be as many as 18 F7s, or even more, and about 12 K8s. Reportedly, the MiG-23 can carry a payload of 2 000 kg over a radius of 900 km, while the F7 is likely to be able to lift 1 000 kg of external stores over a radius of 560 km, whereas the K8’s capability is a warload of 500 kg over a radius of 600 km. (The MiG-23s and F7s are supersonic, while the K8s are subsonic but could be effective in attacking ground targets, especially if they are escorted by the fighters.) “The F7s and the MiG-23s present a fatal threat to any SAAF aircraft they might encounter,” highlights Heitman. Effectively, there is nothing between the AFZ and South Africa’s industrial and economic heartland of Gauteng. Significantly, Botswana and Zambia, the two Southern African states which have taken the most critical stances regarding the Zimbabwe crisis, are now also the only direct neighbours of that country to have supersonic fighters – MiG-21s and F7s (about 12 of each, but with, perhaps, only half operational) with the Zambian Air Force, and ex-Canadian North American CF-5s with the Botswana Defence Force Air Wing (about 14, with most operational). Is this correlation just a coincidence? Perhaps, it should also be noted that the Botswana Sunday Standard newspaper has reported that the Botswana Defence Force (BDF) has deployed an army brigade (the BDF has three), including artillery, along the border with Zimbabwe, as a precautionary measure. A week earlier, the Botswana Minister of Defence had refused to confirm or deny a military deployment on the border, telling the Sunday Standard that it was “a very sensitive matter”. Military deployments are only sensitive in times of international tension. The phrase “very sensitive” suggests that, in the view of Gaborone, the tension is now at a high level. Unlike Bostwana and Zambia, is South Africa’s position on the Zimbabwe crisis now conditioned by the country’s total vulnerability to air attack from the clearly ruthless regime in Harare?

http://www.engineeringnews.co.za/article.php?a_id=137641