Navy's submarine acquisition plan can wait

[BirdsandBooze]

"And that would mean having fewer 'star' generals."

Well, that says it all because Thailand has over 5000 Generals, and no one seems to know how many Admirals there are because the only one listed is the Fleet Admiral........and we all know there is quite probably more than 1000, That is not even counting the Air Force or Special Teams (and I am unsure if the Marines are a department of the Navy). The CIA says there are 35 million Thais in the military service. Breakdowns by ARMY/ AIRFORCE etc. are unavailable at a glance.

That is one Top Heavy structure! Amazing it can even stay upright.

I think you misread something, 35 million would be about half the Thai population.

It's difficult to get an exact, credible number, but according to at least one news source Thailand has approximately 2000 flag officers (generals and admirals) as opposed to less than a thousand for the US, which has a military three times the size of Thailand.

They`re probably mistaking all those civil servants in their best military whites sporting gold braid and a chest full of `campaign` ribbons.

[jaywalker]

.........P.S.: Does anyone know the exact number of sergeants (of all levels) in the army, and the numer of Lt. Col. + Col. + Maj. Gen. + Gen. + Lt. Gen. (including the ones in 'unactive posts'), I wonder what Thailand has the most of (no, in fact I don't)...

Not sure about numbers, but I have observed this:

Most seem to be a Private E-Nothing as they wear no rank.

From there, I've seen a precious few wearing what would be Staff Sgt. rank (E-6).

Next I've seen a few, VERY few Captains & Majors.

Then I've seen an over abundance of Lt. Colonels, and only a handful of full colonels & only met a couple generals in person.

It seems that half the force are either Lt. Colonels or buck privates.

[EyesWideOpen]

http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/newmandala/2011/04/08/on-thailands-submarine-ambitions/

"The utility of submarines to Thailand is disputed, not least by the country’s King Bhumibol Adulyadej. In December 2007, in response to the navy’s annual demand for submarines, the king noted in his birthday address that the boats were unsuitable for the country as the Gulf of Thailand was to shallow for them operate and that they may become stranded in the mud. The navy politely responded by saying the monarch’s advice would be considered in any future plans to acquire submarines."

Why in the world would the military keep flogging this dead horse of an idea contrary to the advice of His Majesty ?? Strange...

[HarryZelter]

I am for a leaner military , this idea the country needs an over bloated toad as its fighting force tend to loose all meaning when you have conscripts doing jack all and National service interfering with any UNI education aims they may have, this old Idea of service to the country is old hat, the military could cut half it's size and still be over loaded with nothingness, Submarines would be an integrated active part of a lean mean fighting machine but as it stands at present, would be just another over bloated item , as with reforms , the military wont give ground on their present status and for anyone to think that any real effort toward a modern Democratic Thailand is on the cards , dream on brother.

Normally I agree with most of your posts but I'm not sure about this one. The military isn't really overbloated as you put it. Numbers are not as relative as numbers active per 1000 capita. For example, Thailand has 305,000 military personnel with 200,000 reserves while Israel has just 176,500 with 564,000 reserve. However this equates to 4.6 military personnel active per 1000 capita for Thailand and 22,2 active per 1000 capita, Singapore has 15.5 military active per 1000 capita. I agree the military is probably not so well trained an a general level but the most bloated and useless force has to be the police! On another note of course it provides much needed jobs but that's a whole other topic! Cheers

Silly post.Israel and to a much lesser extent Singapore is surrounded by countries who would like too see them obliterated.

Thanks for the warning in your post that what followed was silly. Neighboring countries trying to obliterate Singapore are ?????

Good joke.

[HarryZelter]

"And that would mean having fewer 'star' generals."

Well, that says it all because Thailand has over 5000 Generals, and no one seems to know how many Admirals there are because the only one listed is the Fleet Admiral........and we all know there is quite probably more than 1000, That is not even counting the Air Force or Special Teams (and I am unsure if the Marines are a department of the Navy). The CIA says there are 35 million Thais in the military service. Breakdowns by ARMY/ AIRFORCE etc. are unavailable at a glance.

That is one Top Heavy structure! Amazing it can even stay upright.

I think you misread something, 35 million would be about half the Thai population.

Yeah, another clownish post. If he can't even get such basic fundamentals correct, his other stuff is entirely discredited.

[apetley]

Some time ago I remember reading an article that said the average depth of water in the Gulf of Thailand was about 40 metres so where on earth(or sea) could a submarine operate as intended?

[HarryZelter]

Some time ago I remember reading an article that said the average depth of water in the Gulf of Thailand was about 40 metres so where on earth(or sea) could a submarine operate as intended?

It's actually deeper than that, but regardless, there are a number of submarine types that designed specifically for shallow water operations.

Additionally, there are submarines (from other countries) that routinely patrol the Gulf of Thailand and do so even without being specifically designed for shallow water operations.

It's a safe bet that there are submarines operating in the Gulf of Thailand tonight.

Edited November 23, 2014 by HarryZelter

[surangw]

the real money is in supplying parts and repair items for military 2nd hand equipment

[JAG]

I still have my sub from when I was a kid. I'll let it go for half what I paid for it.

.

They want an aircraft carrier as well, can you do a 2 for 1

They have the carrier but no aircraft, apparently.

The Submarines would make excellent fenders, to stop the carrier scratching its paintwork on the harbour wall.

[rickirs]

For unseen enemies, Thailand has unseen submarines.

"Thailand's navy inaugurated a £10m headquarters and training centre for its submarine squadron on Monday [July 7, 2014] even though it has no subs to command....The squadron and its facilities, including a submarine simulator from Germany, were established at an existing naval base in Sattahip, east of Bangkok, on the Gulf of Thailand....It says the new facilities are needed for the future....The navy has sent submarine personnel for training in both Germany and South Korea."

Next there will be navy simulated awards for having the best submarine safety record.

[siampolee]

One wonders whether there was or perhaps there still is a vested interest in submarine purchase and possible future usage of such vessels.

Sometimes one experiences a trifle of a difficulty in the transfer ones newly acquired asset as one doesn't want to attract unnecessary attention to ones newly acquired wealth.

http://indian.ruvr.ru/2013_02_01/Mystery-behind-the-wreck/

[tigermoth]

If Thailand was really ready for a sub fleet they would know how to build their own. It should be the law for Naval gear - if you can't built it - you can't have it. They built some fine little patrol boats and that is a good start. Maybe they can become the hub of small sub building at the centra of the Asian market. You can make trade schools to provide cheap labour with tons of interns that have no hope of fining a real job once pay is required for their service.

You must be joking. Would you go under the waves in a Thai built sub knowing it was built by the lowest tenderer?

[Farang99]

I am for a leaner military , this idea the country needs an over bloated toad as its fighting force tend to loose all meaning when you have conscripts doing jack all and National service interfering with any UNI education aims they may have, this old Idea of service to the country is old hat, the military could cut half it's size and still be over loaded with nothingness, Submarines would be an integrated active part of a lean mean fighting machine but as it stands at present, would be just another over bloated item , as with reforms , the military wont give ground on their present status and for anyone to think that any real effort toward a modern Democratic Thailand is on the cards , dream on brother.

If you go by what India's submarine service has suffered in the way of accidents and disasters, do you really think the Royal Thai Navy would be safe in a submarine?

[mojorison]

Don't let them play submarines... it would be dangerous, and someone could get hurt.

[maidee]

and why would thailand need any subs ? be honest ? to go hunt for ennemies under water from vietnam ? myanmar ? cambodia ?

or is it to transport safely tonnes of heroin & ya ba ?

this is just another big $$$ scam

see what happens to those helicopters & what about that expensive balloon that keeps deflating

new governement, different or same same corruption

[Ricardo]

Some time ago I remember reading an article that said the average depth of water in the Gulf of Thailand was about 40 metres so where on earth(or sea) could a submarine operate as intended?

It's actually deeper than that, but regardless, there are a number of submarine types that designed specifically for shallow water operations.

Additionally, there are submarines (from other countries) that routinely patrol the Gulf of Thailand and do so even without being specifically designed for shallow water operations.

It's a safe bet that there are submarines operating in the Gulf of Thailand tonight.

"It's a safe bet that there are submarines operating in the Gulf of Thailand tonight."

Then the Royal Thai Navy ought to be investing in depth-charges, and the means to deliver them, not trying to buy submarines of their own.

[Thai at Heart]

Whilst the average is 40m for the gulf, how much of the gulf would be deep enough that it could even submerge safely?

Wouldnt it just be a slow moving surface ship in some pretty restricted areas for days before it got to deeper water?

An enemy would find it so easily it would be strategically useless?

[Fred Flinstone]

I feel sorry for those selected to be crew already -

You just know somethings gonna go horribly wrong

[Humberstone]

Tops Supermarket has an annual campaign wherein for the total amount that you spend in the store they donate money that goes towards the purchse of essential items for the RTA. This includes such things such as bullet proof vests for soldiers deployed in southern Thailand.

The point here is that the armed forces are happy to rely on the contributions of Tops towards what most would consider as being essential, inexpensive kit for the RTA against asking for vast sums from the public purse for something seemingly unnecessary.

[HarryZelter]

Some time ago I remember reading an article that said the average depth of water in the Gulf of Thailand was about 40 metres so where on earth(or sea) could a submarine operate as intended?

It's actually deeper than that, but regardless, there are a number of submarine types that designed specifically for shallow water operations.

Additionally, there are submarines (from other countries) that routinely patrol the Gulf of Thailand and do so even without being specifically designed for shallow water operations.

It's a safe bet that there are submarines operating in the Gulf of Thailand tonight.

"It's a safe bet that there are submarines operating in the Gulf of Thailand tonight."

Then the Royal Thai Navy ought to be investing in depth-charges, and the means to deliver them

Depth charges haven't been effective against submarines since the 1950's, and even then, weren't that effective.

[HarryZelter]

Whilst the average is 40m for the gulf, how much of the gulf would be deep enough that it could even submerge safely?

Wouldnt it just be a slow moving surface ship in some pretty restricted areas for days before it got to deeper water?

An enemy would find it so easily it would be strategically useless?

As said previously, it's actually deeper than that.

Also as said previously, some submarine types are designed specifically for shallow water operations.

Submarines, of almost all types, are extremely difficult to locate (hence they are so successful at what they do).

Submarines are strategically superior to all other naval vessels.

[Langsuan Man]

I am sure a Captain commanding and aircraft carrier would dispute your "strategically superior" opinion

[HarryZelter]

I am sure a Captain commanding and aircraft carrier would dispute your "strategically superior" opinion

Commanding officers of aircraft carriers, like the USS Carl Vinson above, are always trying to explain away how they show up in the crosshairs of undetected submarines', like the USS Dallas above, periscopes with submarine missile launch data locked in.

[Ricardo]

Do Thailand's enemies or neighbours have many aircraft-carriers ?