Talk:South African Army

message: Who says this:  "reinforced by the Afrikaners' historical distrust of large standing armies"?  Evidence please!  Paul Beardsell 09:28, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the impression I get from that site is that they're just issuing a disclaimer for their use of second-hand info, and directing any queries to the authors of the LoC Country Studies and CIA:WF material. It doesn't however say anywhere that the material from both those sources is unreliable.... Impi 22:33, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Distrust of large standing armies

message: I find it quite hard to believe that over 1500 ratel varients are operated by South Africa, is this figure true? 23 Jan 2005 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.186.83.53 (talk • contribs) 
:You're right, there's actually around 1,200 of them in service, as per the following article (in Afrikaans) Denel, EADS se Opvolger vir Ratel Oor 3 Jaar Gereed. Impi 15:41, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ratel variants 

message: I'm currently working on a project to create graphics of the structure of some Armies. i.e. France. I want to make also a graphic of the South African Army, but the information at this point is not sufficient, as on the official homepage of the Army under the link “Structure” nothing can be found!
Does anyone have information how the South African Army is structured?
Thanks
noclador Noclador 02:52, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Graphic of the Army Structure

message: Hoefyster was the name of the procurement project for the new vehicles, not the vehicle name. Instead, the SA Army will give the new vehicle the name of Badger, following on from the Ratel (which means Honey Badger in Afrikaans). All SANDF equipment procurement projects receive a name (for eg, the Valour-class frigates were procured under Project Sitron), but it's never retained. Impi 15:22, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Badger IFV 

message: According to a PDF I have of the Defence Review 1998, 8 SAI were motorised, the only mechanised units were 61 Mech and 1 SAI.
Full listing SA Infantry Formation (Full Time force)-
61 Mech Inf Bn Group (gone?)
1 SAI Bn - Tempe
4 SAI Bn - Middelburg
6 SAI Bn - Grahamstown
5 SAI Bn - Ladysmith
7 SAI Bn - Phalaborwa
8 SAI Bn - Upington
9 SAI Bn - Wynberg/Youngsfield
10 SAI Bn - Mmabatho
14 SAI Bn - Umtata
115 SAI Bn - Wonderboom/Wallmanstad
116 SAI Bn - Messina
118 SAI Bn - Ellisras
121 SAI Bn- Mtubatuba
I'm not sure if this is 100% accurate, it is based on that Defence Review, some issues of SA Soldier, and other stuff on the net. 3 SAI are not listed because they are now the army's basic training unit for all non-leader group personnel (leader group does basics at the SA Army Gymnasium). I've not listed the Parabats either. 61 Mech apparently was disbanded last year, 12 SAI (specialist infantry-motorcycles, horses, dog handlers, trackers) went a while back too. 1 SAI are mech infantry, the rest light or motorised.
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=64954&page=27—Preceding unsigned comment added by Buckshot06 (talk • contribs) 
:8 SAI was converted to a mech unit sometime after the Def Review, but sometime during 2006/2007 it was merged with 61 Mech and lost its old identity. Thus the SA Army currently has two Mech units, 1 SAI and 61 Mech. Impi 22:20, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just a note to prevent confusion: During the merger between 61 Mech and 8 SAI it was 61 Mech that lost its identity and not 8 SAI, which remains active. — Impi (talk) 17:19, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Sandbox

message: Hello everybody! I just complete the above article and was wondering if South African Army is still fielding the Soltam M-65 120mm mortar as of today or has it been relegated to storage or other duties? Thanks and appreciate if anybody with that information can help me with the above-mentioned article. --Dave1185 (talk) 16:33, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Soltam M-65]]

message: Can somebody include the rank structure? And does SAA use Eng or Afrikaans rank IDs?  TREKphiler hit me ♠  11:46, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: RHIP?

message: Hi, can someone kindly attribute the projects to a source? The list looks much like the list I compiled from SA DoD annual reports and Parliamentary qustions and published at   http://www.defenceweb.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=419&Itemid=320
You may also want to post a list of chiefs of the Army, here. Available at  http://www.defenceweb.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=667&Itemid=362
Oh,the SA army rank structure is available on the Army website at http://www.army.mil.za/aboutus/uniform/rankinsignia.htm 
````  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zerbet (talk • contribs) 11:33, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm afraid you're right, the Projects section is a direct copy of the content from your site and should have been sourced. I have gone ahead and added a reference to the original DefenceWeb page as an interim solution until we can figure out what to do with the section. However, before we decide on what to do with it, I need to ask if you, as the Editor of DefenceWeb.co.za, are ok with your content being included in Wikipedia articles on the SANDF. If not, I'd be happy to remove the content and replace it with a more generalised and watered-down version referencing the content on DefenceWeb. But as the content is under copyright, we cannot continue to feature it without your explicit permission. — Impi (talk) 16:49, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

text: Leon Englebrecht has since passed away. From discussions I had with him before he died,  he would be quite happy for what he wrote in the fact files to be used. BoonDock (talk) 10:20, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Projects

message: The text "From the early 1990s (after 1992) to 1 April 1997, the SA Army maintained three small divisions, the 7th, 8th and 9th......." refers.  I never knew there were "large" and "small" divisions!  Always thought a division consisted of three brigades plus division troops, making it the first formation level which is equipped to operate autonomously?  Perhaps the text "under-strength divisions" would be better?
Farawayman (talk) 06:24, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Were they 'under-strength', or were they intended to be small? It's not set in stone that divisions need to comprise three brigades with nine maneuverer battalions, support units, etc. Nick-D (talk) 07:54, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Writing that text from my notes on the original JDW article, I used the term 'small' because they indeed had six rather than nine/ten ish manoeuvre battalions. Remember that both the Brits used 'five battalion' divisions in BAOR in the 1970s, from the 60s to the 90s the French used four-to-five battalion divisions, and the Pentomic organisation had five oversized battalions (much like the Brits later). I don't think the term 'understength' would be correct, because they were designed to be that size. Should we put small in commas ('small') with a footnote explaining that generally, divs have three/four bdes/regts and roughly 9-16 (16 being yon Sov MRD/TD) battalions? My information indicated that the 7th was regular or virtually all regular, and the 8th and 9th were comprised of reserve units. Cheers Buckshot06(prof) 11:43, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The Australian Army's divisions also only had five manoeuvre battalions (plus an armoured regiment) under the Pentropic organisation. In this instance, why not explain what the South African divisions' structure was? Nick-D (talk) 00:31, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I included a detailed list of component units in the main article. Is it not clear? Buckshot06(prof) 12:58, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: "Small Divisions"

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) 12:49, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:SA-Army-badge.png Nominated for Deletion

message: Referring to the request below i need some input on how you'd like the Post 1994 ranks to be portrayed
I see 2 ways of doing this - having all 3 branches on one page (which I have worked on)
or duplicating the army component onto this page which will make the page considerably longer
(I have put in some Warrant Officer ranks so you can see what I mean)
Your comments? Gbawden (talk) 13:20, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ranks 

message: At the top of the page is a box stating:
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (January 2008)
Its been there since Jan 08 - can we remove it? I am assuming someone forgot to remove it after tidying up Gbawden (talk) 11:13, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation box 

message: I have updated the page South African military ranks with the new army rank insignia. Should we use the rank tables on this page or simply link to the page? your comments? Gbawden (talk) 10:59, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Ranks - include?

message: Technically the SA Armoured Corps is now the SA Army Armour Formation. Should we create a new page for the Formation or modify the SAAC page?
Gbawden (talk) 08:04, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: SA Armoured Corps

message: From Facebook: "..During the November / December 1993, and January 1994 period, our Regiment Hillcrest also completed a 4 month border duty at Group 29, Ellisras and SMG, Messina with 2 full Battalions. Regiment Hillcrest were then part of 73 Brigade, and 73 part of Far North Command, Pietersburg." Buckshot06 (talk) 05:41, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Regiment Hillcrest

message: * Can we Please get concensus on the structure/choice between References, Bibliography, Notes and Further Reading'? This has changed more than once in the last while. I did a bunch of cleanup on the references recently but it's just irritating to have these sections change all the time. Thanks BoonDock (talk) 14:19, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  References etc 

message: Here is the ORBAT as far as I can extract it from Col Lionel Crook's book 71 Motorised Brigade
* Units assigned to 71 Motorised Brigade ()
** Cape Field Artillery
** Cape Town Highlanders
** Regiment Westerlike Provincie
** Prince Alfred's Guard
** Regiment Oranjerivier
** 3 Field Engineer Regiment
** 71 Signal Unit
** 4 Maintenance Unit
** 30 Field Workshop
** Cape Town Rifles (Dukes)
** Regiment Boland
* Units Attached To 71 Motorised Brigade Prior to Redesignation On 2 January 1992 As 9 S.A. Division
** Vrystaatse Artillerie Regiment
** Regiment Simonsberg
** Cape Garrison Artillery
** 51 Heavy Anti-Aircraft Battery, S.A.C.M.
** 7th Light Anti-Aircraft Regiment SAA
** Regiment Groot Karoo
** Regiment President Steyn
** Regiment Vrystaat
** 9 Provost Company
Feel free to use this BoonDock (talk) 12:09, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  ORBAT 71 Motorised Brigade 

message: * DefenceWeb has what looks like a "proposed" ORBAT for [8 DIV]. Some units, for example 84 Signals Unit, still carry those names. BoonDock (talk) 19:32, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  8 SA Division 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on South African Army. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20101203105324/http://www.defpro.com:80/news/details/20176/tohttp://www.defpro.com/news/details/20176/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:18, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified