Talk:South African Navy

message: Anyone knows when did these 6 ex-German minesweepers were acquired. (4 are used as training ships and 2 for spare parts). Are they still in commission
City-class Minesweepers (Lindau-class, Type 351 Troika) 
* SAS Kapa, M1123 (FDS Düren, M1079) 
* SAS Mangaung, M1222 (FDS Paderborn, M1076) 
* SAS Thekwini, M1125 (FDS Wolfsburg, M1082) 
* SAS Tshwane, M1073 (FDS Schleswig, M1073) 
* (FDS Konstanz, M1081) 
* (FDS Ulm, M1083)
--Jcw69 10:21, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: All six of the ships arrived in Simonstown on 9 March 2001, and the first two (SAS Kapa and SAS Thekwini) were commissioned on the 5th September of that year. So far as I can tell, these were the only minesweepers of this class to be commissioned. In March this year, SAS Thekwini was observed in storage at Simonstown (though it was operational in November 2004 when it formed part of SAS Mendi's escort). SAS Kapa is still operating, and was most recently seen at the Knysna Oyster Festival last month. Impi 12:10, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: One of them was used as a target and sunk during a live fire excercise by 2 Exocet anti-ship missiles fired from 2 Valour class frigates on 1 November 2007. Unfortunately the SABC television news report did not identify which one it was. Roger 19:05, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  City class Training ships 

message: Please help to complete the section on decommissioned ships, and how they were disposed of.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Socrates2008 (talk • contribs) 14:49, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Started..... but a long way to go!  Farawayman (talk) 22:42, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Decommissioned Ships

message: The Presidents were incorrectly identified as Leanders. The superstructure and stern marks them as either Whitby or Rothesay class ships. I haven't been able to find any documentation to confirm the actual class, but the President Krugers commissioning slots in between the last of the Rothesays and the leadship Leander. If supposition is unacceptable, change the Presidents' class to Type 12 frigate. 61mei31 (talk) 22:20, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have a book by Helmoed Romer-Heitmann somewhere (will have to look for it sometime) that calls them Whitby Class. Roger (talk) 12:30, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Jane's and other sources such as this say says Rothesay.  Anyway, good spot! Socrates2008 (Talk) 12:32, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  President class frigates 

message: I do not think this section (as well as frequent other comments to future procurements or planning) belong in the article.  They should be added only when they actually materialise!  Opinions?  Farawayman (talk) 12:14, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: If its properly sourced it can stay. I took a quick look at that section. It is currently unsourced but I immediately recognised that it came from http://www.defenceweb.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=6479:q&catid=79:fact-files&Itemid=159 Some of those programmes have already been completed and some have been cancelled. It is really important that such sections must be kept up to date. Roger (talk) 12:50, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Consolidated all "future project" information into single section and added "This section needs additional citations for verification." banner.  Farawayman (talk) 21:03, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Future Programs Section

message: I have created a table representing the different Ensigns used by the SA Navy (and its predecessors) since 1922.  However, those available on Wikimedia Commons all have different proportions and different shades of green. It would be super if some Graphics Whiz could update these flags in Commons with PNG's that have the correct proportions and colours! To me, correct and accurate heraldry is essential!  Farawayman (talk) 21:05, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The proportions and colours really did change over the years. I'll try to find a RS for them. Roger (talk) 08:45, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

text: That looks like a great source! Roger (talk) 07:42, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Ensigns

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests October 2011 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 13:15, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:SA-Army-badge.png Nominated for Deletion

message: Another contributor reverted an entry I added to the article's "see also" section.  See also sections are suppoed to link to related article.  Readers might confuse the patrol vessels I linked with the navy's patrol vessels, so the link I added is approprate.  Geo Swan (talk) 19:20, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: That link has a problem. It is a redirect to the Lillian Ngoyi class article, thus it creates the impression that those are the entire Fisheries patrol fleet. There is no article that covers the entire fleet as a single entity. Roger (talk) 14:24, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  explanation 

message: I have added 2 sections that I felt were missing - I used the Royal Navy page as a guide
They are Current Role and Command, Control and Organisation
Units should be moved under Command, Control and Organisation. Thoughts? Comments? Gbawden (talk) 10:25, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Restructuring

message: Does anyone know where I can find biographical info on the Chiefs of the SA Navy who don't yet have pages of their own? Gbawden (talk) 08:18, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Biographical info

message: I see in this article that the Sarah Baartman has been commissioned as the SAS Sarah Bartmaan. This looks like its going to be permanent 
http://www.navy.mil.za/archive/1207/120712_Sarah_Baartman/article.htm Gbawden (talk) 09:03, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The DAFF fisheries patrol boats all had to be commissioned as SAS for legal reasons (licensing, insurance, etc) but they still belong to DAFF. The SAN operates them for DAFF on the basis of being paid monthly for all expences. I believe we may see a proper Coast Guard being formed in the near future. Roger (talk) 06:31, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Sarah Baartmann

message: I asked for the page to be assessed and this was the feedback received:
The article still has lots of unreferenced material, as well as material marked as being out of date. Some photos of ships, sailors, bases, etc, would also be helpful. As such, I think that start class remains appropriate. Given that the SAN doesn't operate all that many ships, it would make sense to identify them in the article rather than direct readers to separate articles. 
I will have a look at the referencing Gbawden (talk) 11:33, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment Feedback

message: The Project Xena boats and portable base equipment entered service several years ago but are not mentioned here - except in the hopelessly outdated "Future Programmes" section. The boats can be seen in False Bay and on Zeekoeivlei fairly regularly. I think we should remove the whole "Future Programmes" section from the article. Cut and Paste it here so that we can follow-up and verify the actual current status of each item in the list. The source list was originally published several years ago and the source (DefenceWeb.co.za) has not kept it up to date. Roger (talk) 07:37, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Great idea! Gbawden (talk) 08:47, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: No mention of the MRS's Project Xena boats and mobile base equipment

message: The South African Navy is at present considering additional acquisitions, although it is not clear when or if they will be funded:
*Project Biro: A programme for the acquisition of multi-purpose vessels as replacements of the current three T-Craft IPV and the three remaining strike craft. It is expected that these ships will be built in South Africa. To run in conjunction with Project Hotel. Replacement for remaining Warrior Class strike craft. Estimated to be between 80 to 85 meters in length and will be capable of carrying a helicopter, although it is unknown if it will be able to house one as well. They are to be armed with a 76 mm gun and light machine guns. No missiles are planned to be fitted at this time. The OPVs will also carry Autonomous Underwater Vehicles (AUV). Replacement for remaining T Craft vessels. Estimated to be between 53 to 55 meters in length. They are to armed with a 30 mm gun and light machine guns. No missiles are planned to be fitted at this time. The March 2012 issue of Jane's Navy International reported that current plans called for the acquisition of eight OPVs and six IPVs.Helmoed Romer-Heitman, 'Neighbourhood watch: South Africa's continental role expands,' Jane's Navy International, March 2012, 23-24 Status: Work is being done at a slow rate - RfI issued in 2011
:According to this article http://www.africanglobe.net/africa/south-africa-has-what-it-takes-to-meet-navys-new-vessel-requirements/ responses will be in by end 2012. And according to this one it has been budgeted for http://www.armsdeal-vpo.co.za/articles15/acquisition.html Gbawden (talk) 12:51, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The original source of the second one you've cited is http://www.defenceweb.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=13953:naval-acquisitions-to-start-in-2013&catid=51:Sea&Itemid=106 so we should rather use it than a "recycling" site. Roger (talk) 13:21, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

text: I've found this article from February 2012 that gives a fairly good overview of the state of some of these projects -  - it should help clear up some of the items. Roger (talk) 13:33, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Future Programmes

message: Why is this currently creeping back into the article when there's a separate article specifically dedicated to this? Socrates2008 (Talk) 11:42, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggested it as part of a B class review. Previously the article had no material at all on the navy's small number of ships, which seemed a significant omission given that it's one of the main topics readers will be interested in (and is covered in roughly comparable articles such as Royal New Zealand Navy). Nick-D (talk) 11:46, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Last time round, this was modelled on United States Navy and Royal Navy.  I think we need some consensus here. Socrates2008 (Talk) 11:50, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough. Given that the SAN only has a small number of ships and the article is pretty small, I think it makes sense to identify them in the main article rather than ask readers to look at a separate article. Leaving the ships out makes sense for large navies, but for small navies it seems unnecessary. Nick-D (talk) 12:16, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Do mean ships or ship classes?  Royal Australian Navy is different again... Socrates2008 (Talk) 12:18, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Either works for me :) (there's also a List of current ships of the Royal New Zealand Navy article). That said, listing classes here and individual ships in the dedicated article is my preference as it allows for fairly sophisticated listings such as List of current ships of the Royal Australian Navy. Nick-D (talk) 12:22, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I prefer the RAN model to the RNZN one. Socrates2008 (Talk) 12:24, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  As the person who added the list of ships (and images) I think it looked good (But then I would say that). I followed what was done on the Royal Australian Navy. There is no one page like ours - I like to think we're using the best ideas of all the other pages. Gbawden (talk) 12:29, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Go ahead then - no more issues from me. Socrates2008 (Talk) 12:39, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of ships 

message: FYI, template:SAS is now available for use with SA naval ships. Socrates2008 (Talk) 12:12, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  SAS ship prefix template 

message: The SAN is the navy of South Africa. It was not "From 1922 to the 1950s the SA Navy was effectively part of the Royal Navy"!Royalcourtier (talk) 07:24, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your suggestion. When you believe an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes.  Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the edit this page link at the top. The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills.  New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). Nick-D (talk) 08:47, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not part of RN 

message: In 1994, when the RSA's national flag was used as the ensign, what was the SAN's jack at this time? – Illegitimate Barrister (talk • contribs), 07:54, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jack in 1994? 

message: What was the SAN's jack before 1994? Was it just the national flag? – Illegitimate Barrister (talk • contribs), 07:42, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Jack pre-1994