Jump to content

How Thailand’s seven-decade submarine dream hit the rocks and sank


webfact

Recommended Posts

28 minutes ago, webfact said:

The price of the frigate is 14 billion baht, about 500 million more than the submarine, according to the Thai defense minister. But this was the “best way out”, he said

:jap: "Best way out", I'm sure! :jap: :thumbsup:

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, webfact said:

Some analysts described the government’s decision to swap the sub for a frigate as a diplomatic move to please China while buying time to look for a better submarine deal from another country.

 

Still tens of billions lying around, to be used for new toys... Never mind the sorry state of infrastructure, education, pollution, etc., etc. What country are they planning to invade/be invaded from that they need submarines?

Edited by StayinThailand2much
  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thailand doesn't need a submarine.  It's vanity.  Like so much of other Thai status bs.
"Look!!! We have submarines!!!"  Big whoop!

And what are you going to do with it? Plus your Navy just proved that perhaps it seriously needs to reassess it's mission and overall preparedness after that fiasco with the HTMS Sukhothai (FS-442). 

Buy another frigate.  That's all that is needed for patrolling the Thai coast.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, StayinThailand2much said:

 

Still tens of billions lying around, to be used for new toys... Never mind the sorry state of infrastructure, education, pollution, etc., etc. What country are they planning to invade/be invaded from that they need submarines?

Laos. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, webfact said:

The price of the frigate is 14 billion baht, about 500 million more than the submarine, according to the Thai defense minister.

The last report I read it would cost (3.5?) Billions more, now suddenly down to a mere 500mil more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, webfact said:

But this was the “best way out”, he said,

they bend over on all 4's, they were/are afraid of the Chinese .... In China is not common policy to issue refunds, I can attest to that, they will always to stick it to you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, 2baht said:

:jap: "Best way out", I'm sure! :jap: :thumbsup:

 

But, it was reported that the sub was to be replace by a frigate or a couple of coast guard ships.

 

Haven't seen anything more re the 'coast guards ships'.

 

Would they be viable in regard to water depth?

 

Would they cost more or less than the submarines?

 

Are they really needed?  Are there any modern vessels doing this service right now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, AgMech Cowboy said:

If I was going to buy a non-nuclear submarine, it would be from the Japanese or the French. What is Thailand's idiocy with China?

You know...  Corruption, Brown Envelope, Holiday home in the Maldives 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Chinese ships and subs are likely poorly made. Thankfully the Chinese navy is incapable of traveling more than 1,500 km., in ideal conditions. Likely more like 600 km. in war conditions. And they have very few deep sea ports. Their navy is a threat only to their smaller neighbors. 

 

Smart decision to let go of the sub fantasy. 

 

Thai naval forces have not operated submarines for over 60 years now, while neighboring countries, particularly those with a major dispute at sea with Thailand, such as Vietnam, are all equipped with modern submarines. 

 

This government is a whirlpool of conflicting loyalties and interests. It's leader has to manage those interests, and effectively buy the loyalties of the various parts of the armed forces. The submarines are the price he has to pay for the navy supporting him. They will end up unusable and unaffordable, as did the aircraft carrier. There is no strategic justification for the submarines. There is really no military threat to Thailand, none of the countries with which it shares a land border have the capacity for anything other than the occasional cross border firefight. If you look carefully at all the military procurement of recent years, they are all to support ambitions, and thus buy the support of the various rival groups within the armed forces. They simply do not add up to any sort of a coherent modernisation or re-equipment of what remains a largely obsolete, immobile and under trained force, able only to undertake the most mundane of garrison duties, whilst it's bloated leadership occupies itself with playing politics or their own largely unregulated business ventures.

 

The government however (or more realistically those to whom it reports) must rely upon the military to keep it in power. It was put into power for one core function; to prevent the nascent political, social and economic liberalisation of Thai society which arose with the arrival of new technologies and communications, which have allowed a (younger) population which has long been kept ill educated and dependent for any advancement on its elders and sponsors, to communicate, educate themselves and develop business independent of those elders and sponsors. The Covid crisis was in a dimension beyond that, and it's timid, chaotic "rabbit in the headlights" response to the challenges it brought were simply because it did not know how to react, other than to use some of the opportunities to exercise power, in pursuit of that core function, which the social and political restrictions they argue the disease has necessitated, and granted them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.







×
×
  • Create New...