maidee Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 i suggest they lease it to farangs and can build a house on it, that they can literally bring back to their home country, if needed same as thais would fear farangs would do, if they were allowed to own 1 rai for their own house in their name, a human right in all civilized countries 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toybits Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 An Audit would surely show that it was Worth (555) the expense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soalbundy Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 The UK doesn't even have one They will have two large ones soon but no aircraft Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lupatria Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 A Carrier strike group CSG normally consist of 1 Aircraft Carrier, 1 Guided Missile Cruisers (for Air Defense), 2 LAMPS (Light Airborne Multi-Purpose System) Capable Warships (focusing on Anti-Submarine and Surface Warfare), and 1–2 Anti Submarine Destroyers or Frigates. Escorts, if it were to be deployed for non-humanitarian missions would likely consist of the mostly Chinese and US supplied frigates in the Thai fleet. It is not clear that the Thai navy has plans or ability to use the Chakri Naruebet in any fleet or power projection missions. However, if you need to invite all 1,750 Thai flag officers (generals and admirals) for a joy cruise you need a lot of space for the morning assembly, a cruise ship don’t provide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soalbundy Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 they have a submarine or two as well. dont mess with the thai military. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatOngo Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 In Thailand, the price of scrap metal has dropped from18 Baht to just 2 or 3 Baht, or less than 9 cents per kilogram. ..................and there you have it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alant Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 The UK doesn't even have one Yes the Royal Navy does not have a carrier. What a disgrace! In Queen Victoria's reign the Royal Navy was 4 time the size of the sum of other Navies, now nothing. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fullstop Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 <script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script> Aust doesn't have one, we have a couple of tinnies with spare oars thats about it Yes we do. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMAS_Melbourne_%28R21%29 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
car720 Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 The UK doesn't even have one So I guess Britannia doesn't rule the waves any more? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
car720 Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 <script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script> Aust doesn't have one, we have a couple of tinnies with spare oars thats about it Yes we do. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMAS_Melbourne_%28R21%29 What's that old expression? If Melbourne is the bowels of Australia then Tasmania must be the result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chooka Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 <script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script> Aust doesn't have one, we have a couple of tinnies with spare oars thats about it Yes we do. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMAS_Melbourne_%28R21%29 I believe the Melbourne was turned into Toyotas over 30 years ago and was never replaced. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wabothai Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 For operations on US's borders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrY Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 It was built by France and is a joke. It isn't true that Thailand doesn't have aircraft. It has F-16's. The carrier lacks catapults and can't launch aircraft. It can't catch them either due to a lack of arresting cables. The carrier is also way too small, isn't nuclear powered and can't go far. It was built in Spain and was quite capable [for it's time]. Assuming of course you fit it with aircraft, trained crews, an air defense systems, and accompany it with other vessels needed for it's supply and defense. Thailand ran out of funds for all those as soon as it was commissioned. Thailand has aircraft, the carrier doesn't. The carrier's aircraft were decommissioned ten years ago. F-16s are not carrier aircraft. The carrier lacks catapults as it wasn't designed to have them. Same for arresting cables (Your F-16 would get wet even if it had them, as none of them have hooks...). It is a Harrier (or "Matador", the Spanish version) "jump jet" carrier, thus the small size too. 10,000 nautical mile range is hardly a limitation for Thailand. (I just had to look the range up, as aircraft carriers usually have quite a long range.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HiSoLowSoNoSo Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 they have a submarine or two as well. dont mess with the thai military. Must be these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matchanu-class_submarine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
starkey_rich Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 Not only does this carrier not have any aircraft after the retirement of the Harriers, it is also the smallest carrier in all of Asia... Oh the horror... Just as Thai men have the smallest Brain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kerryd Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 Can f16's take off on carriers? No, F16's have never been used as carrier based aircraft... Thanks, thought that was the case but wasn't sure lol Yeah, their wingspan is too small which means they need a much longer runway to get enough speed to take off with. Even with the steam catapults an aircraft carrier has too short of a deck for the F-16s. Their small wingspan also means they need a much longer runway to land on (because they have to come in at higher speeds than aircraft with larger wingspans). I believe most carrier aircraft also have 2 engines whereas the F-16 is a single engine plane. In Kandahar they often had to use their braking chutes to slow down when landing (in part due to the higher elevation and temperatures resulting in thinner air, etc, etc). There was even a special crew whose only job was to zip down the runway after an F-16 landed to catch the chutes so they could be repacked/reused and didn't end up tangled in the fences. As for the carrier, Thailand's best option would be to turn it into a Helicopter Carrier ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helicopter_carrier ). Helicopters are a lot easier to launch/recover obviously, are cheaper so you could have a lot more of them with a variety of functions (attack, transport, anti-submarine, search & rescue, etc). Could be very useful in an area like this (gulf/coastal waters, lots of islands, thick foliage). It would most likely be too expensive to convert the ship into a proper Amphibious Assault Ship, but some modifications could be done to allow it to launch things like RIBs (Rigid Inflatable Boats) to increase it's functionality. Beef up the air-defense and you'd have a ship that would be a powerful asset in coastal waters (while still being able to operate over the horizon). The problem is, without proper support vessels (and an adequate defence) it becomes a very attractive target to whoever you are using it against. Next best option would be to sell it to someone else that could actually use it. (Maybe Brunei ? New personal yacht for one of the sheikh's family perhaps ?) The ship is already 18 years old so it won't be long before it requires a refit, even if it's spent most of it's time docked up in port. Use it or lose it as they say. Re-purpose it to a Helicopter/Assault ship, do the refit when it's due and you'll have a decent ship that'll be in service for another 20-30 years. Or sell it now while it still has some value (if it would even be possible to find a buyer). (Thailand also has a National Submarine Day, 4 Sept, despite not having any submarines since 1951 ! The new Submarine base at Sattahip was supposed to be completed in 2014 I believe, even though the planned purchase of 4 used German subs fell through in 2011.) 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canman Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 Q. What do you call a small aircraft carrier with no aircraft? A. A boat. Mind you, being Thailand they'll probably fit sails to the thing (at a cost of 28 trillion baht) and call it a yacht. It's only submarines which are refered to as a 'boat' I had a boat - and it certainly was not a submarine I didn't phrase that comment properly. I should have said that a submarine is always refered to as a boat. There is no reliable definition on what exactly is a boat. My favourite definition goes to the where the COG is. On a boat the COG is below the freeboard while on a ship it is above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiSePuede419 Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 Look at me! I'm on a boat! Said every rich guy, everywhere... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ratcatcher Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 The UK doesn't even have one So I guess Britannia doesn't rule the waves any more? But she sure knows how to waive the rules (when necessary). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bsd Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 Aust doesn't have one, we have a couple of tinnies with spare oars thats about it The last Aircraft Carrier that Australia had sank 2 ships HMAS Voyager - 82 crew killed USS Frank E. Evans - 74 crew killed Only ISIS would want OZ to have a new carrier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post mrtoad Posted February 23, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted February 23, 2015 The UK doesn't even have one So I guess Britannia doesn't rule the waves any more? Sadly our pathetic government have seen to that . More interested in lining the pockets of bankers and politicians, than defending the country. Even the topic of immigration is taboo . Pathetic 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casualbiker Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 The UK doesn't even have one So I guess Britannia doesn't rule the waves any more? Sadly our pathetic government have seen to that . More interested in lining the pockets of bankers and politicians, than defending the country. Even the topic of immigration is taboo . Pathetic We have offered OUR aircraft carrier to the USA so THEY can operate off of it... Strange but true !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casualbiker Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 As for this Singaporean article it's either warning of the trouble that an aircraft carrier can bring or just beating the Singaporean chest saying theirs will be better ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HiSoLowSoNoSo Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 Guided tours ( http://www.eugenegoesthailand.com/?p=8855) The Royal Thai Navy (Sattahip, Chonburi) Open everyday 9.00 a.m. to 17.00 p.m. ( Foreign visitors require permission from Royal Thai Navy ) Inexpensive Navy Souvenirs like??hats, T-shirts, keychains etc?? are available. (They have found out a way to make some money from the vessel it seems!) Wonder if Farangs have to pay 10 times more than the locals? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suffinator Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 The UK doesn't even have one The Queen Elizabeth II is due to be launched soon I believe; and it's slated as being one of the largest in the world. http://www.queenelizabethcruises.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/CVF-queen-elizabeth-class-aircraft-carrier.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post geriatrickid Posted February 23, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted February 23, 2015 The UK doesn't even have one Not exactly. The HMS Ocean is technically an aircraft carrier. It carries helicopters and helicopters are considered aircraft. The air craft carrier Queen Elizabeth was floated out last July and is currently undergoing its fitting, and its It's new aircraft are currently undergoing operational testing at Edwards AFB, California, USA. BTW, the Prince of Wales construction is well underway. Anyway, Thailand needs a helicopter carrier for search and rescue as well as disaster relief activity. Thailand has many islands that can not be quickly reached. The Thai military wanted a carrier, and forced it upon the taxpayers. That's what happens when the military is not accountable to the people who pay for their bloated budget. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Deerhunter Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 Ahhh...the country's aircraft carrier has no aircrafts since 1997, but a Thai PM after this date had a personal jet paid by the country. Shows the importance of an individual over an entire country. Does it have wi-fi with a link to The Shopping Channel? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baerboxer Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 It was built by France and is a joke. It isn't true that Thailand doesn't have aircraft. It has F-16's. The carrier lacks catapults and can't launch aircraft. It can't catch them either due to a lack of arresting cables. The carrier is also way too small, isn't nuclear powered and can't go far. Thailand wanted to be top dog with the first aircraft carrier among its peers in Asia but now several countries such as S. Korea, Japan, etc. have actual working carriers. Thailand's carrier would make a great habitat for marine life if they'd just sink it. And an aircraft carrier is an attack weapon to operate airplanes far away of your borders. What possible scenario would require Thailand use it? Best use for it: park some airplanes on it, find some escort vessels and sink it a popular tourist spot for scuba diving and artificial reef. An aircraft carrier would surely attract lots of diver and with the sunk escort vessels there will be enough to explore...... Maybe the same scenario that requires Singapore or India to have them. Or the supposedly non aggressive heavily restricted home defense only Japanese. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baerboxer Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 The UK doesn't even have one Not exactly. The HMS Ocean is technically an aircraft carrier. It carries helicopters and helicopters are considered aircraft. The air craft carrier Queen Elizabeth was floated out last July and is currently undergoing its fitting, and its It's new aircraft are currently undergoing operational testing at Edwards AFB, California, USA. BTW, the Prince of Wales construction is well underway. Anyway, Thailand needs a helicopter carrier for search and rescue as well as disaster relief activity. Thailand has many islands that can not be quickly reached. The Thai military wanted a carrier, and forced it upon the taxpayers. That's what happens when the military is not accountable to the people who pay for their bloated budget. It's also what happens when defense procurement, the full procurement cycle, is crap. The British tax payer and servicemen know all about that too. Come on, who would buy a carrier from Spain and then not specify a catapult for take off or restricting cables for landing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casualbiker Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 The UK doesn't even have one Not exactly. The HMS Ocean is technically an aircraft carrier. It carries helicopters and helicopters are considered aircraft. The air craft carrier Queen Elizabeth was floated out last July and is currently undergoing its fitting, and its It's new aircraft are currently undergoing operational testing at Edwards AFB, California, USA. BTW, the Prince of Wales construction is well underway. Anyway, Thailand needs a helicopter carrier for search and rescue as well as disaster relief activity. Thailand has many islands that can not be quickly reached. The Thai military wanted a carrier, and forced it upon the taxpayers. That's what happens when the military is not accountable to the people who pay for their bloated budget. According to Wikipedia it has been used in that way and has access to a contingent of helicopters ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
.thumb.jpg.bc523c85a8d558dbc282dca7a2e602c9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now