Thai Navy's Costly Sub Dream Needs A Lot Of Explaining

[webfact]

BURNING ISSUE

Navy's costly sub dream needs a lot of explaining

By Avudh Panananda

The Nation

The Navy's used submarine shopping plan lacks foresight and will likely lead to higher costs in the future.

The country saw its first submarine deployment in 1938 when four vessels constructed in Japan, including the HTMS Matchanu, took part in coastal battles during the Franco-Siam War and World War II.

The four boats were decommissioned in 1951 due to both a lack of spare parts- because Japan was barred from weapons production - and political reprisal following a Navy-led coup attempt.

And for the past 60 years, the Navy's big dream has been to rebuild its submarine squadron.

In modern ocean warfare, a battle is fought along three dimensions - in the air, on the surface and under water. From a tactical viewpoint, the Navy has a legitimate reason to try to improve its undersea capability.

The Gulf of Thailand covers about 300,000 square kilometres and borders on four coastal states - Thailand, Cambodia, Malaysia and Vietnam. About one-third of the area is under continental shelf claims.

Besides the Thai-Malaysian joint development area covering 5,800skm, the conflicting and overlapping areas have yet to be sorted out by the four coastal states.

About three-fifths of the country's total geographical area is territorial waters and exclusive economic zones under the Navy's charge. It is inexplicable that for six decades, the Navy has failed to rally the public behind its planned procurement of submarines.

In the reign of King Vajiravudh, Thais donated Bt3 million, a huge sum in those days, from 1914-1920 so that the Navy could acquire a destroyer, the HTMS Phra Ruang, from England.

Despite the hardships caused by the Great Depression, the public did not want the country's naval defences to be compromised. The Navy should reflect on its current awareness campaign to understand why its public support seems to have waned.

In the last few weeks, the Army has dominated headlines by executing daring rescue missions for flood victims in the South, while the Navy launched a one-off mission by dispatching its flagship helicopter carrier, the HTMS Chakri Narubet, to evacuate some 700 tourists trapped on Koh Tao.

Then the sailors stayed on the sidelines while ground troops carried out relief operations in coastal provinces.

The submarine deployment saga had its beginnings in 1996 when the Navy unveiled its budget plan to buy two patrol submarines from Sweden's Kockums Industry.

Due to suspicion of irregularities in the Banharn Silapa-archa government, the deal was sunk even before the procurement details emerged.

Despite the setback to the Kockums deal, the Navy has come up with a handful of new proposals in recent years ranging from buying to leasing new or second-hand submarines. The proposals were shot down during inter-agency reviews before they could reach the Cabinet.

The Navy has a lot of explaining to do if it wants the public's blessing for the submarine deployment.

When the procurement plan was hatched, the Navy wanted two new submarines. Suddenly the plan changed to buying six decommissioned U-206As from Germany with an operating life of no more than 10 years.

Four will be deployed while the other two will be kept for spare parts.

After decades of waiting, it does not make sense to spend Bt7.7 billion for submarines destined for burial in the Gulf of Thailand.

Many see the rush to secure the U-206A submarines as a stopgap measure until funds are earmarked in the future for a newer submarine squadron.

The country will end up paying twice - Bt7.7 billion now for the scrapped ships and much more later for their replacement.

-- The Nation 2011-04-05

[Thaddeus]

The Navy has a lot of explaining to do if it wants the public's blessing for the submarine deployment.

When has any bag of hot air in a uniform given a credible explanation for its actions?

Five monkeys in a cage again.

[Gluestick]

Wasting money on subs just like they did for that "aircraft carrier" that doesn't even function properly.

[StasD]

Better Thais would buy our 641 project submarine. We sold a lot to India.

[AZBill]

Explaining? You're kidding? You must know what it is - certain people need their corruption money and such a project will facilitate that. My god man - where have you been?????

[Soutpeel]

The Gulf of Thailand covers about 300,000 square kilometres and borders on four coastal states - Thailand, Cambodia, Malaysia and Vietnam. About one-third of the area is under continental shelf claims.

I am confused....which 1/3rd ?

[givenall]

Wasting money on subs just like they did for that "aircraft carrier" that doesn't even function properly.

That is not the point. Payoff and corruption are big in any big contracts/projects

[dumpling]

Navy's costly sub dream needs a lot of explaining

easy to much Lao Hai La Hai (Thai whiskey)

[asiawatcher]

I think the Navy is hoping to scrape one home prior to dissolution!

[DP25]

After decades of waiting, it does not make sense to spend Bt7.7 billion for submarines destined for burial in the Gulf of Thailand.

A single new submarine would cost over 30 billion Baht. They can spend the next 15 years training with these inexpensive used subs and decide if more are needed and what kind.

[dananderson]

Maybe they shpuld just deploy one and keep five for spare parts.....

Edited April 5, 2011 by dananderson

[wintermute]

I think I remember a few years ago there was an article where the Thai military said they were going to start an advanced rocket program to send the first Thai to outer space.

This came roughly behind the news of China's successful satellite launching industry and manned space program.

Anyone ever know what happened to these ambitions?

[bangon04]

"The Navy has a lot of explaining to do if it wants the public's blessing for the submarine deployment."

Most Thais I have spoken with about this have no problem understanding the reasons behind it. They are just resigned to the fact that the procurement system is led by corruption and jingoistic morons in uniforms with lots of undeserved medals, and they don't feel inspired to question it too much.

Besides, this is about purchase, not deployment. The aircraft carrier was purchased, but didn't really get deployed much, did it?

[Thaddeus]

I think I remember a few years ago there was an article where the Thai military said they were going to start an advanced rocket program to send the first Thai to outer space.

This came roughly behind the news of China's successful satellite launching industry and manned space program.

Anyone ever know what happened to these ambitions?

Ran out of mushrooms.