Thai PM defends submarine purchase and explains causes of huge public debt

[Morch]

3 hours ago, Orton Rd said:

You cannot defend the indefensible, you can try though ????

 

That exactly the defense needs alluded to, and why the submarines are needed. The indefensible must be defended!

[Morch]

1 hour ago, jvs said:

Looking at the map of Thailand it would be virtually impossible to move from the Gulf to the Andaman sea?

Maybe not so during peace but when at war certain canals would be blocked.

So you need two,one for each side.

Very safe,they can never run into each other.

You see with a little explanation you can fool many people.

 

You raise a good question. And there's a rather obvious answer to it - buy more submarines and establish the Andaman Fleet. 

[Mr Meeseeks]

2 hours ago, Stocky said:

I'm sure the Chinese will have hidden tracking devices on them anyway, so the regions main competitor for 'maritime interests' will always know where they are.

They will be able to see them from their massive naval base over in Cambodia on the other side of the Gulf.

[Dogmatix]

A long serving submariner from a Western navy who is very familiar with Thailand and the region told me that there is no way he would want to go to war in any of the waters around Thailand because they are simply not deep enough for a sub to hide since they lack the varying degrees of temperature that deflect sonars as well as depth.  You could outrun an enemy surface ship but would be a sitting duck with no place to hide, if hunted from the air. So how can such useless Chinese junk be any use for defence or in the public interests?  

[scammed]

2 hours ago, HappyinNE said:

I spent several years in the US Navy in an Squadron that one of our main responsibilities was Anti-Submarine Warfare.  The systems we used are now outdated but I would love to have been deployed to take out these Subs.  With their capabilities and where they will operate I would expect to be able to take out one a day.  On a lucky day I would get two.

 

What a waste of money!  And useless here! 

 

you got it 180 degree wrong, subs is your best bet against a carrier strike group

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/war-games-swedish-stealth-submarine-sank-us-aircraft-carrier-116216

Edited February 18, 2021 by scammed

[scammed]

1 hour ago, Dogmatix said:

A long serving submariner from a Western navy who is very familiar with Thailand and the region told me that there is no way he would want to go to war in any of the waters around Thailand because they are simply not deep enough for a sub to hide since they lack the varying degrees of temperature that deflect sonars as well as depth.  You could outrun an enemy surface ship but would be a sitting duck with no place to hide, if hunted from the air. So how can such useless Chinese junk be any use for defence or in the public interests?  

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/war-games-swedish-stealth-submarine-sank-us-aircraft-carrier-116216

[Patong2021]

On 2/17/2021 at 11:32 AM, Morch said:

 

That's a fair enough comment. I think Thailand's defense budget is about 1.5% of the GDP, putting it nowhere near the big spenders.

 

And yes, many of the items make sense - night vision gear, drones, helicopters, etc. More in line with Thailand's actual defense needs and issues. The submarines, however, are both a huge investment, and quite obviously not necessary, or at best, low priority.

How do you propose that Thailand police its foreign fishing fleet and protect its substantial volume of cargo essential to national security?

It is not sufficient to  say to illegal activity people, behave, stop. EU imposed big cost on Thailand.

Submarine offers one of the most effective methods of  surveillance of activity combined with an ability to intervene quickly. More effective than above water vessels. Thailand does not have  advanced integrated satellite surveillance system and does not have large ocean going  patrol vessel fleet.

 

[bangon04]

On 2/17/2021 at 2:53 PM, foreverlomsak said:

nah, there for the mekong river to stop the illegal migrant workers crossing into Thailand

The Chinese are busy draining the Mekong so they will need tank tracks soon....

 

[metisdead]

A post using a cartoon image has been removed. 

[Morch]

10 hours ago, scammed said:

 

you got it 180 degree wrong, subs is your best bet against a carrier strike group

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/war-games-swedish-stealth-submarine-sank-us-aircraft-carrier-116216

 

And that's relevant to Thailand...how?

 

 

10 hours ago, scammed said:

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/war-games-swedish-stealth-submarine-sank-us-aircraft-carrier-116216

 

Different kind of sub. Different threat. Maybe different waters.

[Morch]

9 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

How do you propose that Thailand police its foreign fishing fleet and protect its substantial volume of cargo essential to national security?

It is not sufficient to  say to illegal activity people, behave, stop. EU imposed big cost on Thailand.

Submarine offers one of the most effective methods of  surveillance of activity combined with an ability to intervene quickly. More effective than above water vessels. Thailand does not have  advanced integrated satellite surveillance system and does not have large ocean going  patrol vessel fleet.

 

 

I'm not aware that subs are routinely use to "police foreign fishing fleets". That's usually done with surface vessels and aerial means. Defending cargo? How do you mean? Are there any foreign navy actually threatening Thailand's cargo ships? 

 

Surveillance? Surveillance of what? Foreign fishermen? The occasional pirate? A Rohingya refugee boat? Hard justifying such a huge investment when it could be handled more efficiently and at a lower price by usual means.

 

Investing in satellite surveillance would make more sense, for example.

[bloodyholly]

20 hours ago, CraigInBangkok said:

and it was raining

And the captain swam away from the scene

[TheFishman1]

The air in Chiangmai is terrible

[scammed]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

And that's relevant to Thailand...how?

 

 

 

Different kind of sub. Different threat. Maybe different waters.

its relevant because unless you have a sonar system in your area of operation and a few dozen tu22M backfire squadrons,

subs is your only way to even begin contest your water against a superior naval force

[Morch]

30 minutes ago, scammed said:

its relevant because unless you have a sonar system in your area of operation and a few dozen tu22M backfire squadrons,

subs is your only way to even begin contest your water against a superior naval force

 

What vastly superior naval force is an actual threat to Thailand?

And as posted earlier, investing in aerial assets would indeed make more sense.

[Patong2021]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

I'm not aware that subs are routinely use to "police foreign fishing fleets". That's usually done with surface vessels and aerial means. Defending cargo? How do you mean? Are there any foreign navy actually threatening Thailand's cargo ships? 

 

Surveillance? Surveillance of what? Foreign fishermen? The occasional pirate? A Rohingya refugee boat? Hard justifying such a huge investment when it could be handled more efficiently and at a lower price by usual means.

 

Investing in satellite surveillance would make more sense, for example.

How many times do I need to write that;

1. Thailand does not have a naval vessel inventory that will allow for the type of operations needed to surveil its fishing fleet or to protect its cargo  shipping that comes through the high piracy prone routes?

2. I have already explained 2X that Thailand's fishing fleet has been implicated in illegal fishing, particularly in the Indian Ocean. Thousands of Thai vessels work in foreign waters sometimes legally and sometimes illegally. The EU has already sanctioned Thailand for this. The agreement for lifting of sanctions was for Thailand to  police its foreign fishing.

3. Do you know what is in the the Thai naval fleet inventory? Aside from its frigates Thailand does not have any vessels that can easily or cost effectively deployed for offshore foreign water activity. The submarines are far more cost efficient to use for foreign activity than the frigates.  Look at Thailand's patrol vessels. They are intended for close offshore work. They are mostly older 30+years. They are not appropriate for the tasks described.The submarines are cost effective.

4. Do you know how reliant Thailand is on on the  Indian ocean for shipping? Are you not aware that  3 of the worst regions for ocean piracy are South China Sea, Malacca Straits Indian ocean with critical area the region around Somalia? Thailand uses these shipping lanes for its regional sea trade.

 

So easy to criticize Thailand having some small submarine capability. Australia has 6 submarines and has a smaller fishing fleet and ocean cargo exposure than Thailand.  Australia submarine mission sets several priorities, but the lead 5  are;

1. Intelligence collection and surveillance;

2. Maritime strike and interdiction;

3. Forward intervention activity.

4. Interdiction interdiction of shipping;

5. Support of land operations

 

How areThailand needs  so much more different than this? You  don't believe Thailand has these requirements?  You think Australia  submarines operate exclusively within 100 km of Australia?

Canada has a few submarines. What do you think they are used for? Israel has submarines. The sea off of Israel is not particularly deep. Your logic would have Israel  a country with a much much smaller coastline and no offshore  island spread like Thailand shut down its submarine fleet.

 

[Patong2021]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

I'm not aware that subs are routinely use to "police foreign fishing fleets". That's usually done with surface vessels and aerial means. Defending cargo? How do you mean? Are there any foreign navy actually threatening Thailand's cargo ships? 

 

Surveillance? Surveillance of what? Foreign fishermen? The occasional pirate? A Rohingya refugee boat? Hard justifying such a huge investment when it could be handled more efficiently and at a lower price by usual means.

 

Investing in satellite surveillance would make more sense, for example.

How many times do I need to write that;

1. Thailand does not have a naval vessel inventory that will allow for the type of operations needed to surveil its fishing fleet or to protect its cargo  shipping that comes through the high piracy prone routes?

2. I have already explained 2X that Thailand's fishing fleet has been implicated in illegal fishing, particularly in the Indian Ocean. Thousands of Thai vessels work in foreign waters sometimes legally and sometimes illegally. The EU has already sanctioned Thailand for this. The agreement for lifting of sanctions was for Thailand to  police its foreign fishing.

3. Do you know what is in the the Thai naval fleet inventory? Aside from its frigates Thailand does not have any vessels that can easily or cost effectively deployed for offshore foreign water activity. The submarines are far more cost efficient to use for foreign activity than the frigates.  Look at Thailand's patrol vessels. They are intended for close offshore work. They are mostly older 30+years. They are not appropriate for the tasks described.The submarines are cost effective.

4. Do you know how reliant Thailand is on on the  Indian ocean for shipping? Are you not aware that  3 of the worst regions for ocean piracy are South China Sea, Malacca Straits Indian ocean with critical area the region around Somalia? Thailand uses these shipping lanes for its regional sea trade.

 

So easy to criticize Thailand having some small submarine capability. Australia has 6 submarines and has a smaller fishing fleet and ocean cargo exposure than Thailand.  Australia submarine mission sets several priorities, but the lead 5  are;

1. Intelligence collection and surveillance;

2. Maritime strike and interdiction;

3. Forward intervention activity.

4. Interdiction interdiction of shipping;

5. Support of land operations

 

How areThailand needs  so much more different than this? You  don't believe Thailand has these requirements?  You think Australia  submarines operate exclusively within 100 km of Australia?

Canada has a few submarines. What do you think they are used for? Israel has submarines. The sea off of Israel is not particularly deep. Your logic would have Israel  a country with a much much smaller coastline and no offshore  island spread like Thailand shut down its submarine fleet.

 

[Bkk Brian]

Lets just brush under the carpet the mess they made with the aircraft carrier that has no planes and now does nothing but gather rust. Do you really trust the navy with subs????

[Morch]

2 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

How many times do I need to write that;

1. Thailand does not have a naval vessel inventory that will allow for the type of operations needed to surveil its fishing fleet or to protect its cargo  shipping that comes through the high piracy prone routes?

2. I have already explained 2X that Thailand's fishing fleet has been implicated in illegal fishing, particularly in the Indian Ocean. Thousands of Thai vessels work in foreign waters sometimes legally and sometimes illegally. The EU has already sanctioned Thailand for this. The agreement for lifting of sanctions was for Thailand to  police its foreign fishing.

3. Do you know what is in the the Thai naval fleet inventory? Aside from its frigates Thailand does not have any vessels that can easily or cost effectively deployed for offshore foreign water activity. The submarines are far more cost efficient to use for foreign activity than the frigates.  Look at Thailand's patrol vessels. They are intended for close offshore work. They are mostly older 30+years. They are not appropriate for the tasks described.The submarines are cost effective.

4. Do you know how reliant Thailand is on on the  Indian ocean for shipping? Are you not aware that  3 of the worst regions for ocean piracy are South China Sea, Malacca Straits Indian ocean with critical area the region around Somalia? Thailand uses these shipping lanes for its regional sea trade.

 

So easy to criticize Thailand having some small submarine capability. Australia has 6 submarines and has a smaller fishing fleet and ocean cargo exposure than Thailand.  Australia submarine mission sets several priorities, but the lead 5  are;

1. Intelligence collection and surveillance;

2. Maritime strike and interdiction;

3. Forward intervention activity.

4. Interdiction interdiction of shipping;

5. Support of land operations

 

How areThailand needs  so much more different than this? You  don't believe Thailand has these requirements?  You think Australia  submarines operate exclusively within 100 km of Australia?

Canada has a few submarines. What do you think they are used for? Israel has submarines. The sea off of Israel is not particularly deep. Your logic would have Israel  a country with a much much smaller coastline and no offshore  island spread like Thailand shut down its submarine fleet.

 

 

You can post it as many times as you like. It's still not an adequate explanation.

 

Other than you saying so, is there any support for the claim that submarines are cost effective with regard to the rather mundane tasks involved? Is that (policing fishing fleets) what they are generally used for by other countries? Kinda doubt that.

 

The Thai navy not having enough resources for the tasks at hand? Then why not purchase the missing surface vessels rather than embark on this submarine adventure?

 

And no, Thailand does not actually face any meaningful threats by neighboring countries, or their fleets. So comparing it to richer countries, or those facing actual threats is off mark.

[Mavideol]

On 2/17/2021 at 8:56 PM, snoop1130 said:

compared to the 24 trillion baht in maritime interests that Thailand is expected to gain.

can somebody please explain what kind of maritime interests will Thailand gain from buying submarines.... have been trying to figure it out for the past 2 days and couldn't find anything

[Reigntax]

On 2/18/2021 at 1:37 AM, Pengo2001 said:

The gulf of Thailand has an average depth of not more that 50 meters. Can a bigger sub even hide and operate in such a shallow envrionment?

Probably not but it cant sink more than 50 m either.

[Isaan sailor]

China is known for kickbacks with its military sales.  In contrast, American military vendors must comply with strict guidelines for these kinds of sales.

[Morch]

37 minutes ago, Isaan sailor said:

China is known for kickbacks with its military sales.  In contrast, American military vendors must comply with strict guidelines for these kinds of sales.

 

I think American firms just need to be more creative about it, but yeah, more constraints. Was the USA offering Thailand to purchase US subs?

[Nsp64]

9 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

How many times do I need to write that;

1. Thailand does not have a naval vessel inventory that will allow for the type of operations needed to surveil its fishing fleet or to protect its cargo  shipping that comes through the high piracy prone routes?

2. I have already explained 2X that Thailand's fishing fleet has been implicated in illegal fishing, particularly in the Indian Ocean. Thousands of Thai vessels work in foreign waters sometimes legally and sometimes illegally. The EU has already sanctioned Thailand for this. The agreement for lifting of sanctions was for Thailand to  police its foreign fishing.

3. Do you know what is in the the Thai naval fleet inventory? Aside from its frigates Thailand does not have any vessels that can easily or cost effectively deployed for offshore foreign water activity. The submarines are far more cost efficient to use for foreign activity than the frigates.  Look at Thailand's patrol vessels. They are intended for close offshore work. They are mostly older 30+years. They are not appropriate for the tasks described.The submarines are cost effective.

4. Do you know how reliant Thailand is on on the  Indian ocean for shipping? Are you not aware that  3 of the worst regions for ocean piracy are South China Sea, Malacca Straits Indian ocean with critical area the region around Somalia? Thailand uses these shipping lanes for its regional sea trade.

 

So easy to criticize Thailand having some small submarine capability. Australia has 6 submarines and has a smaller fishing fleet and ocean cargo exposure than Thailand.  Australia submarine mission sets several priorities, but the lead 5  are;

1. Intelligence collection and surveillance;

2. Maritime strike and interdiction;

3. Forward intervention activity.

4. Interdiction interdiction of shipping;

5. Support of land operations

 

How areThailand needs  so much more different than this? You  don't believe Thailand has these requirements?  You think Australia  submarines operate exclusively within 100 km of Australia?

Canada has a few submarines. What do you think they are used for? Israel has submarines. The sea off of Israel is not particularly deep. Your logic would have Israel  a country with a much much smaller coastline and no offshore  island spread like Thailand shut down its submarine fleet.

 

now why didn't Prayut just say that.?

I don't agree with you but I respect the way you objectively and politely state your point backed up by potential realities.

You sir should be a government advisor......here, have a rolex and a kilo of brown.

[Patong2021]

10 hours ago, Morch said:

 

You can post it as many times as you like. It's still not an adequate explanation.

 

Other than you saying so, is there any support for the claim that submarines are cost effective with regard to the rather mundane tasks involved? Is that (policing fishing fleets) what they are generally used for by other countries? Kinda doubt that.

 

The Thai navy not having enough resources for the tasks at hand? Then why not purchase the missing surface vessels rather than embark on this submarine adventure?

 

And no, Thailand does not actually face any meaningful threats by neighboring countries, or their fleets. So comparing it to richer countries, or those facing actual threats is off mark.

Go and read fleet activity for Australia submarines. You will see that much of the time is used for the 5 items I posted.  Thailand will do similar.  The purchase of a new offshore patrol vessel will not provide the same capabilities and will not be as cost effective. Go look at vessel range, speed, crew complement and other charactersitics of what is required. To accomplish what a submarine would do, Thailand would need to deploy a frigate. Look at the costs.

 

How do you propose that Thailand surveil its fishing fleets that are  active in foreign waters? A Thai naval vessel on the water will be identifiable. A submarine is not.  How do you propose that Thailand  protect its vital shipping lane activity in the Malucca Straits and Indian Ocean? You do not seem aware that Thailand has a  foreign fishing activity 10X+ the size of Australia, Canada, Israel. You do not understand that Thailand is more dependent upon cargo shipments in high risk piracy regions than Germany, and Australia who have much larger submarine fleets. 

 

You "kinda doubt" - Well how about you go look at at mission statements of countries like Australia and Canada  and compare to  Thailand sub mission statement. They are almost identical.  However, because it is Thailand a country of 70 million with more dependence on foreign cargo in piracy zone and much larger fishing fleet that operates in foreign waters you believe Thailand needs are inverse. Not solid logic there.

 

 

[Moncul]

"Regarding the one trillion baht loan, the prime minister said that funding from this borrowing has been used to help many groups of people affected by the pandemic, such as farmers, low-income earners, freelance workers and workers covered by the social security scheme, citing the Rao Chana giveaway scheme as one of the examples."

And I'm sure he's amenable to producing some accounts....

[scammed]

9 hours ago, Morch said:

 

I think American firms just need to be more creative about it, but yeah, more constraints. Was the USA offering Thailand to purchase US subs?

US dont make diesel electric subs, its all nuclear,

and nuclear subs are much bigger,

they would not be suitable here.

chinese subs are unlikely to be on european standard, yet, this is technologies that is propagating slow, learn to crawl before you walk with pampers kinda thing

Edited February 19, 2021 by scammed

[Morch]

10 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

Go and read fleet activity for Australia submarines. You will see that much of the time is used for the 5 items I posted.  Thailand will do similar.  The purchase of a new offshore patrol vessel will not provide the same capabilities and will not be as cost effective. Go look at vessel range, speed, crew complement and other charactersitics of what is required. To accomplish what a submarine would do, Thailand would need to deploy a frigate. Look at the costs.

 

How do you propose that Thailand surveil its fishing fleets that are  active in foreign waters? A Thai naval vessel on the water will be identifiable. A submarine is not.  How do you propose that Thailand  protect its vital shipping lane activity in the Malucca Straits and Indian Ocean? You do not seem aware that Thailand has a  foreign fishing activity 10X+ the size of Australia, Canada, Israel. You do not understand that Thailand is more dependent upon cargo shipments in high risk piracy regions than Germany, and Australia who have much larger submarine fleets. 

 

You "kinda doubt" - Well how about you go look at at mission statements of countries like Australia and Canada  and compare to  Thailand sub mission statement. They are almost identical.  However, because it is Thailand a country of 70 million with more dependence on foreign cargo in piracy zone and much larger fishing fleet that operates in foreign waters you believe Thailand needs are inverse. Not solid logic there.

 

 

 

Instead of chasing others on wild goose chases, perhaps enlighten then with facts (since you seem to have easy access to such)? I do not know what you base your claim that submarines are a cheaper, or most cost effective solution.

 

Let me repeat - Thailand's needs and the supposed threats involved aren't necessarily similar to those relevant to other countries. Same goes for economic situation, or familiarity with the platform.

 

Thailand doesn't not have the authority to police or surveil its fishing fleets in foreign waters. It's not up to the Thai Navy to get into another country's territorial water just for the sake of that. The Thai Navy may do this in international waters, so not quite sure what your issue with a vessel being 'identifiable'. It's not like policing fishing fleets is a behind-enemy-lines-covert-operation. Unless getting it wrong, half the deal with policing is being seen.

 

Do them nasty pirates have submarines of their own? If not, why can't they be handled with surface vessels and aerial means? Is the piracy situation of a magnitude justifying investment in procuring the submarines?

I'm not aware that Australia, Germany and Israel's submarine fleets are mainly there to deal with pirates, but could be wrong...

 

What's the logic of comparing countries with different circumstances as if these aren't relevant?

[Morch]

8 hours ago, scammed said:

US dont make diesel electric subs, its all nuclear,

and nuclear subs are much bigger,

they would not be suitable here.

chinese subs are unlikely to be on european standard, yet, this is technologies that is propagating slow, learn to crawl before you walk with pampers kinda thing

 

The point raised was about kickbacks/bribes/brown envelopes etc., while stating that US firms operate under tighter restrictions compared with Chinese firms. My comment was to the effect that it wasn't very relevant as the USA was not a player in the instance of Thailand's submarine drama.

 

I think the issues with buying submarines from a European manufacturer would be higher costs, less room for the aforementioned shenanigans, sales being impeded/blocked due to Thailand's political situation, and also possibly angering China. 

[Dogmatix]

I think I trust the word of experienced submariners and those who have served in ant-submarine roles that the type of the submarine being purchased would be a sitting duck against aerial attack in the shallow waters around Thailand.  If Thailand is planning naval adventures in blue water oceans further a field, they might have a role.  But Thailand's military has only proved effective against unarmed Thai protestors in recent decades and its only naval engagement saw the Thai navy almost completely obliterated by a mediocre Vichy French naval force in WW2 at Koh Kong in retaliation for invading French territory by land in Cambodia and Laos.