Thai Navy Defends Plan To Buy Used Subs

[dean999]

Why don't they just ask the uk? Won't be long untill we are selling some more.

[featography]

Should I already draft that news release about those missing torpedos?

good one, yes get started on that. Youre quick today

[hardy1943]

'Left Hand Down A Bit, Mr Pertwee. Whooop ! Whooop! Oops, Sorry Pardon' (UK's Navy-Lark radio-show of old)

At least they're not nuclear-submarines, but the need for these does seem a bit of a stretch, are there no Italian 2 Man Subs left-over, from the 2nd WW ?

My god, Ha Ha Pity they couldn't have got the BISMARK -HOOD-BELGRANO-Troop carrier TITANIC, and with the aircraft carrier they have, they would become collectors items, and good money for the set.

My post I know is ridiculous, but the purchace is a joke ..The only threat could be Laos--in full flood they could go up the Mekong. :cheesy:

The whole idea is a joke. Do they have anyone qualified to operate them. They may submerge and never com back up.Sorry left the manual on land.

[dunkin2012]

Should I already draft that news release about those missing torpedos?

good one, yes get started on that. Youre quick today

did ya mean this?

the army reported the weapons disappearance

[asiawatcher]

Buying 30 year old submarines with a life of 10 more years is a complete waste ,what happens after 10 years what do they upgrade to another lot of 10 year submarines.

It would make more sense to buy 1 or two new submarines and have crews that are trained with latest technology.

To say they will protect Thailand from military conflict is a bit of waffle. Modern day Submarines , aircraft and ships will detect these old black subs well before they have a chance to fire a single missile.

My suggestion would be let the Germans display how good they are in a real miltary exercise I bet they will be one of the first to be blown up.

Because they can bring them to the the mouth of the Chao Phraya in the event of invasion and fill them with concrete thus stopping marine invasion of Bangkok?

[saintofsilence]

While the Government is over there purchasing these antiques they should try and get the Germans to throw in a few hundred VW beetles as part of the deal, they came out at about the same time as theses submarines were built great for the crew to get around in and another lot of junk that Germany will be happy to get rid of.

Edited March 29, 2011 by saintofsilence

[jfchandler]

Sometimes I read this stuff, and I choke in disbelief. But then I remember, ahhhh.... this IS Thailand....

Thailand is facing increased [naval] security risks from China, among others??? Well, that's news to me...and to most Thai people I suspect...

And even if it were true, Thailand's going to take on China with a bunch of 35-year-old German sub manned by Thai sailors... Sorry, but I don't think so.

As stated above, the Army got its new toys... And the Air Force just got theirs with the new Swedish jets... So now it's the Navy's turn, maybe...

What I'm wondering is, why doesn't Thailand go the whole nine yards and buy the decommissioned Royal Ark aircraft carrier that the UK is putting up for sale at present? Heck, it's not as old as the German subs involved. And it would be a great toy because the Navy and the Air Force could play with it together...in the same sandbox.

The govt. cant seem to cough up enough money to keep its own people from dying in poorly staffed government hospitals that are going broke and losing underpaid doctors and nurses left and right... But it's OK to cough up billions of baht to buy decades old piles of Navy scrap metal to deal with a non-existent threat....

Ahhh..... now I understand!!!

[dominique355]

"In case of a clash, they could send their submarines to block our territorial waters, and Thailand would be left helpless. We need submarines to counter such an operation. All the countries around Thailand now have their own to protect their sovereignty. Burma is getting theirs from China soon," the source said.

These old German subs are certainly not able to carry out an anti-submarine warfare. If fighting enemy submarines is really the concern of the Thai Navy, they should rather invest in modern anti-submarine warfare, with surface vessels. Outdated, loud diesel subs won't do the job.

[dananderson]

Singapore is a "well known war monger"? <deleted> Time for some more urine tests-inside the navy base this time. Maybe thier referring to Singapore's war on drugs.

[bumpkin]

Did I read this right ? The mighty Thai Navy are going to protect their country against the tin-pot Chinese Navy, with 30 year-old subs. Is this the same Thai government that is encouraging the Chinese to construct a high-speed railway from the Chinese border into the heart of Thailand. Of course, the Chinese Navy would be frightened by the Thai subs, so they might catch the next train ?

[ginjag]

Did I read this right ? The mighty Thai Navy are going to protect their country against the tin-pot Chinese Navy, with 30 year-old subs. Is this the same Thai government that is encouraging the Chinese to construct a high-speed railway from the Chinese border into the heart of Thailand. Of course, the Chinese Navy would be frightened by the Thai subs, so they might catch the next train ?

This purchase idea is from someone SUBnormal.--When a country is scrapping some equipment/arms/or whatever it means that is aged---past it's best---far too costly to maintain--NO MORE USE, so what on earth do the Thais want the subs for ???? better to buy the harriers from U.K. to use off the aircraft carrier. Buy them and SUBcontract them out.

[Igor]

Could someone please give me holler when you hear they've put out a call for bids to install screen doors?

[Lite Beer]

A number of posts questioning moderation issues have been deleted.

Also posts questioning the policy about posting content from The Bangkok Post have also been deleted.

We have no problems with Bangkok Post content being posted providing you contact us first and verify that you will provide the funds to pay for the lawyers to fight the lawsuit that will follow.

Thanks.

[bangon04]

Thailand wants to become a HUB of SUBs? A SUBHUB?

[rich54321]

sounds like a sub to someone! ( for those who don't understand - a sub - money to someone )

[dunkin2012]

sounds like a sub to someone! ( for those who don't understand - a sub - money to someone )

Oh.... i got it...

Sub = a Thai word means wealth or credit... right?

[Buchholz]

These old German subs are certainly not able to carry out an anti-submarine warfare. If fighting enemy submarines is really the concern of the Thai Navy, they should rather invest in modern anti-submarine warfare, with surface vessels. Outdated, loud diesel subs won't do the job.

For the obviously uninitiated, diesel subs are the quietest type of subs there are.

eg. "The beauty about a diesel submarine is that it has the potential to be far quieter than a nuclear submarine," says Guy Stitt, president of AMI International, a Bremerton, Wash.-based company specializing in naval market analysis. Diesel boats are propelled by batteries when submerged and move through the water by diesel engines when on the surface.

Quiet but deadly: diesel-electric submarines

http://www.entrepreneur.com/tradejournals/article/177991483_1.html

Furthermore, one of the functions of the 206A is anti-submarine warfare, so I'd be interested to hear why they can't carry it out.

Lastly, and again for the apparently uninitiated, a submarine's worse enemy is another submarine. Surface ships carrying out anti-submarine operations are a far less danger to a sub, than another sub is.

.

[saintofsilence]

These old German subs are certainly not able to carry out an anti-submarine warfare. If fighting enemy submarines is really the concern of the Thai Navy, they should rather invest in modern anti-submarine warfare, with surface vessels. Outdated, loud diesel subs won't do the job.

For the obviously uninitiated, diesel subs are the quietest type of subs there are.

eg. "The beauty about a diesel submarine is that it has the potential to be far quieter than a nuclear submarine," says Guy Stitt, president of AMI International, a Bremerton, Wash.-based company specializing in naval market analysis. Diesel boats are propelled by batteries when submerged and move through the water by diesel engines when on the surface.

Quiet but deadly: diesel-electric submarines

http://www.entrepreneur.com/tradejournals/article/177991483_1.html

Furthermore, one of the functions of the 206A is anti-submarine warfare, so I'd be interested to hear why they can't carry it out.

Lastly, and again for the apparently uninitiated, a submarine's worse enemy is another submarine. Surface ships carrying out anti-submarine operations are a far less danger to a sub, than another sub is.

.

They have very short battery life if used under combat conditions compared to nuclear and yes they are very quiet when running on electric but they have to run those big diesels to recharge and must come to periscope depth to do that.

A nuclear goes , faster , deeper and can stay under for a long time , not knocking the diesel electrics they were great a 30 years ago but with the technology available now nuclear would be much more superior.

One of the australian oberon class submarines years ago on a big exercise actually got up under the american ship the Enterprise and sunk it then got away without being detected and the Enterprise had two nuclear submarines protecting it.

Edited March 29, 2011 by saintofsilence

[philw]

Thailand wants to become a HUB of SUBs? A SUBHUB?

Thank You !!!

[Buchholz]

These old German subs are certainly not able to carry out an anti-submarine warfare. If fighting enemy submarines is really the concern of the Thai Navy, they should rather invest in modern anti-submarine warfare, with surface vessels. Outdated, loud diesel subs won't do the job.

For the obviously uninitiated, diesel subs are the quietest type of subs there are.

eg. "The beauty about a diesel submarine is that it has the potential to be far quieter than a nuclear submarine," says Guy Stitt, president of AMI International, a Bremerton, Wash.-based company specializing in naval market analysis. Diesel boats are propelled by batteries when submerged and move through the water by diesel engines when on the surface.

Quiet but deadly: diesel-electric submarines

http://www.entrepreneur.com/tradejournals/article/177991483_1.html

Furthermore, one of the functions of the 206A is anti-submarine warfare, so I'd be interested to hear why they can't carry it out.

Lastly, and again for the apparently uninitiated, a submarine's worse enemy is another submarine. Surface ships carrying out anti-submarine operations are a far less danger to a sub, than another sub is.

They have very short battery life if used under combat conditions compared to nuclear and yes they are very quiet when running on electric but they have to run those big diesels to recharge and must come to periscope depth to do that.

A nuclear goes , faster , deeper and can stay under for a long time , not knocking the diesel electrics they were great a 30 years ago but with the technology available now nuclear would be much more superior.

One of the australian oberon class submarines years ago on a big exercise actually got up under the american ship the Enterprise and sunk it then got away without being detected and the Enterprise had two nuclear submarines protecting it.

The advantageous aspects you point out about nuke subs is accurate, but those aspects are not in tune with the needs of Thailand, eg. diving deeper and staying under for extended time. The nuke sub also needs much more highly trained personnel which as a virgin sub country is impracticable at present. The huge jump in costs between the two is another factor not in keeping with Thailand's needs.

It's always a matter of tasking when comparing the two. A super-power country sub on an extended and far-reaching cruise is absolutely ideal to pick nuke over diesel. In the case of a non-super power country looking for coastal defense or drug interdiction on short cruises, then diesel is ideal. It's why at present those other countries matching the latter situation go with them and the U.S. subs, for example, are all nuke.

Also in regards to diesel-electric, advances in technology allow them to stay submerged for weeks between battery charges, although that's certainly not the technology Thailand is buying into yet.

Submarine detection is never easy. The sub I was on would often get right up underneath surface ships without them knowing about it. The cat and mouse games between other subs was always much more involved and difficult.

.

Edited March 29, 2011 by Buchholz

[saintofsilence]

You will get no arguments with me about how hard they are to detect I was actually part of the crew on the one that sank that big US aircraft carrier during an exercise quite a few years back the americans never spoke much about that they were to shocked

Also I realise that they can stay under for weeks if they don't use to many resources but if they get detected and start getting chased its a different story

But getting back to the point of thailand buying six old subs with short lives just seems a waste of time and money they need to look at there needs and budget again I just can't see the current deal being the right one.

Edited March 29, 2011 by saintofsilence

[sunholidaysun1]

No problem , they are all Yellow and have glass bottoms.

[kimamey]

next they will paint them yellow in keeping with the sixties theme

Should upset the redshirts as well.

[Bagwan]

I'd be very interested to know how a submerged diesel/electric submarine got underneath a warship travelling at say 15 knots. Wouldn't the cavitation it caused give it away? Can present days submersibles (a more accurate description of these scrap German craft) get up to the speeds attained by surface vessels?

[saintofsilence]

I'd be very interested to know how a submerged diesel/electric submarine got underneath a warship travelling at say 15 knots. Wouldn't the cavitation it caused give it away? Can present days submersibles (a more accurate description of these scrap German craft) get up to the speeds attained by surface vessels?

From Worldiq.com

The Oberons were arguably the best conventional submarine class of its time, with an astonishing reputation for quietness that allowed it to exist into the 21st century until replaced by newer classes such as the Collins and Victoria classes in Australia and Canada respectively. In fact, the ability of the O-boats to run in total silence enabled Australian submarines to successfully attack USS Enterprise, despite a huge number of supporting ships 'protecting' it. This led to the U.S. re-instating diesel boats into their fleet with the Los Angeles class SS.

http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Oberon_class_submarine

They wont match a surface ship on speeds .

[ginjag]

These old German subs are certainly not able to carry out an anti-submarine warfare. If fighting enemy submarines is really the concern of the Thai Navy, they should rather invest in modern anti-submarine warfare, with surface vessels. Outdated, loud diesel subs won't do the job.

For the obviously uninitiated, diesel subs are the quietest type of subs there are.

eg. "The beauty about a diesel submarine is that it has the potential to be far quieter than a nuclear submarine," says Guy Stitt, president of AMI International, a Bremerton, Wash.-based company specializing in naval market analysis. Diesel boats are propelled by batteries when submerged and move through the water by diesel engines when on the surface.

Quiet but deadly: diesel-electric submarines

http://www.entrepren...77991483_1.html

Furthermore, one of the functions of the 206A is anti-submarine warfare, so I'd be interested to hear why they can't carry it out.

Lastly, and again for the apparently uninitiated, a submarine's worse enemy is another submarine. Surface ships carrying out anti-submarine operations are a far less danger to a sub, than another sub is.

They have very short battery life if used under combat conditions compared to nuclear and yes they are very quiet when running on electric but they have to run those big diesels to recharge and must come to periscope depth to do that.

A nuclear goes , faster , deeper and can stay under for a long time , not knocking the diesel electrics they were great a 30 years ago but with the technology available now nuclear would be much more superior.

One of the australian oberon class submarines years ago on a big exercise actually got up under the american ship the Enterprise and sunk it then got away without being detected and the Enterprise had two nuclear submarines protecting it.

The advantageous aspects you point out about nuke subs is accurate, but those aspects are not in tune with the needs of Thailand, eg. diving deeper and staying under for extended time. The nuke sub also needs much more highly trained personnel which as a virgin sub country is impracticable at present. The huge jump in costs between the two is another factor not in keeping with Thailand's needs.

It's always a matter of tasking when comparing the two. A super-power country sub on an extended and far-reaching cruise is absolutely ideal to pick nuke over diesel. In the case of a non-super power country looking for coastal defense or drug interdiction on short cruises, then diesel is ideal. It's why at present those other countries matching the latter situation go with them and the U.S. subs, for example, are all nuke.

Also in regards to diesel-electric, advances in technology allow them to stay submerged for weeks between battery charges, although that's certainly not the technology Thailand is buying into yet.

Submarine detection is never easy. The sub I was on would often get right up underneath surface ships without them knowing about it. The cat and mouse games between other subs was always much more involved and difficult.

.

They don't need the flaming subs, all this sub info about types -etc, always we get the internet details of this that and the other, no one asked posters to decide what types to buy or which is best. Thailand cannot afford old or new, and submarines are the last thing they need, we may as well buy APOLLO

[Bagwan]

I'd be very interested to know how a submerged diesel/electric submarine got underneath a warship travelling at say 15 knots. Wouldn't the cavitation it caused give it away? Can present days submersibles (a more accurate description of these scrap German craft) get up to the speeds attained by surface vessels?

From Worldiq.com

The Oberons were arguably the best conventional submarine class of its time, with an astonishing reputation for quietness that allowed it to exist into the 21st century until replaced by newer classes such as the Collins and Victoria classes in Australia and Canada respectively. In fact, the ability of the O-boats to run in total silence enabled Australian submarines to successfully attack USS Enterprise, despite a huge number of supporting ships 'protecting' it. This led to the U.S. re-instating diesel boats into their fleet with the Los Angeles class SS.

http://www.wordiq.co...class_submarine

They wont match a surface ship on speeds .

Six were commissioned between 1967 and 1978 for the RAN. In 1982, HMS Onyx took part in the Falklands War, the only conventional submarine of the RN to do so, landing members of the SBS. All Oberons in service, including boats exported, have now been decommissioned; the last RN boats were decommissioned in 1993, with the final Canadian and Australian Oberons decommissioned in 2000. (Note that submariners do not refer to their weapons platforms/homes as ships; they are at all times BOATS.)

Like the Porpoises, the Oberons were far quieter than their American counterparts. They performed remarkably well in clandestine operations, performing surveillance and inserting special forces, vital during their heyday in the Cold War. These operations were primarily carried out by the British across Arctic Europe; the Canadians across the North Atlantic; and the Australians throughout south-east Asia and as far north as the Sea of Japan.

The Oberon class was arguably the best conventional submarine class of its time,[3] with an astonishing reputation for quietness that allowed it to exist into the 21st century until replaced by newer classes such as the Collins and Victoria classes in Australia and Canada respectively.

All the Aussie Oberons were built by Scott on the Clyde so you surely got your money's worth. I am certain that all Aussie submarine C.O.'s underwent the Perisher course that RN skippers do. Knowledgeable US observers admit that RN submarine skippers are awesome and the best you can get. An explanation of the Perisher course from a US point of view follows.

http://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/n87/usw/issue_18/perisher.htm

[Buchholz]

This led to the U.S. re-instating diesel boats into their fleet with the Los Angeles class SS.

http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Oberon_class_submarine

The World's IQ just went down a smidgen after reading Word IQ.

None of Los Angeles class subs are assigned an SS designation (diesel boat). All 62 of them are SSN (nuclear-powered boats) designated.

They wont match a surface ship on speeds .

No, but they do go faster than the public knows. I'm presuming the Oberon could go faster than the 12 knots reported on the link? I know mine did.

The officially-approved blanket statement of, "can submerge deeper than 400 feet and travel faster than 20 knots" for U.S. subs is just a starting point for the actual figures, which are classified.

You are right that they still can't match surface ships, but as long as torpedoes can exceed them, they'll remain silent but deadly.

[Buchholz]

I'd be very interested to know how a submerged diesel/electric submarine got underneath a warship travelling at say 15 knots. Wouldn't the cavitation it caused give it away? Can present days submersibles (a more accurate description of these scrap German craft) get up to the speeds attained by surface vessels?

From Worldiq.com

The Oberons were arguably the best conventional submarine class of its time, with an astonishing reputation for quietness that allowed it to exist into the 21st century until replaced by newer classes such as the Collins and Victoria classes in Australia and Canada respectively. In fact, the ability of the O-boats to run in total silence enabled Australian submarines to successfully attack USS Enterprise, despite a huge number of supporting ships 'protecting' it. This led to the U.S. re-instating diesel boats into their fleet with the Los Angeles class SS.

http://www.wordiq.co...class_submarine

They wont match a surface ship on speeds .

Six were commissioned between 1967 and 1978 for the RAN. In 1982, HMS Onyx took part in the Falklands War, the only conventional submarine of the RN to do so, landing members of the SBS. All Oberons in service, including boats exported, have now been decommissioned; the last RN boats were decommissioned in 1993, with the final Canadian and Australian Oberons decommissioned in 2000. (Note that submariners do not refer to their weapons platforms/homes as ships; they are at all times BOATS.)

Like the Porpoises, the Oberons were far quieter than their American counterparts. They performed remarkably well in clandestine operations, performing surveillance and inserting special forces, vital during their heyday in the Cold War. These operations were primarily carried out by the British across Arctic Europe; the Canadians across the North Atlantic; and the Australians throughout south-east Asia and as far north as the Sea of Japan.

The Oberon class was arguably the best conventional submarine class of its time,[3] with an astonishing reputation for quietness that allowed it to exist into the 21st century until replaced by newer classes such as the Collins and Victoria classes in Australia and Canada respectively.

All the Aussie Oberons were built by Scott on the Clyde so you surely got your money's worth. I am certain that all Aussie submarine C.O.'s underwent the Perisher course that RN skippers do. Knowledgeable US observers admit that RN submarine skippers are awesome and the best you can get. An explanation of the Perisher course from a US point of view follows.

http://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/n87/usw/issue_18/perisher.htm

hahahaha...

although competition is healthy...uhmmmmm, we ARE allies, right?

[saintofsilence]

This led to the U.S. re-instating diesel boats into their fleet with the Los Angeles class SS.

http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Oberon_class_submarine

The World's IQ just went down a smidgen after reading Word IQ.

None of Los Angeles class subs are assigned an SS designation (diesel boat). All 62 of them are SSN (nuclear-powered boats) designated.

They wont match a surface ship on speeds .

No, but they do go faster than the public knows. I'm presuming the Oberon could go faster than the 12 knots reported on the link? I know mine did.

The officially-approved blanket statement of, "can submerge deeper than 400 feet and travel faster than 20 knots" for U.S. subs is just a starting point for the actual figures, which are classified.

You are right that they still can't match surface ships, but as long as torpedoes can exceed them, they'll remain silent but deadly.

The only info that i can disclose is public knowledge