Baerboxer 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 !!! Really, do you have the links? I read that if the new planes being built by Lokheed weren't ready then American Naval aviation squadrons may be invited to temporarily make up the air wing. Nothing about offering it to the Americans to operate. They have plenty of their own but would no doubt be willing to help and support us, as they've increasingly done since WW2. Especially as the new carrier will require a lot of sea trials, training and drills. Nice to have some aircraft available. France also suggested basing some of its aircraft on the British carrier under some sort of co-share arrangement. Mr.Toad's observation about recent and current British governments is pretty accurate though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Traveling Sailor 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' Very true! Usually a surface vessel that is large enough to carry a "boat" on board is called a "ship". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casualbiker Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 (edited) 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 !!! Really, do you have the links?I read that if the new planes being built by Lokheed weren't ready then American Naval aviation squadrons may be invited to temporarily make up the air wing. Nothing about offering it to the Americans to operate. They have plenty of their own but would no doubt be willing to help and support us, as they've increasingly done since WW2. Especially as the new carrier will require a lot of sea trials, training and drills. Nice to have some aircraft available.France also suggested basing some of its aircraft on the British carrier under some sort of co-share arrangement.Mr.Toad's observation about recent and current British governments is pretty accurate though. I said " THEY can operate off of it" that means " American Naval aviation squadrons may be invited to temporarily make up the air wing. "I didn't say operate it ! Edited February 23, 2015 by draftvader Messed up quotes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2fishin2 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. Dont try and interject an educated answer into this conversation.... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickJ Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 Well.....as long as they dont go out and try and buy planes that dont fit everything should be ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ebonykap 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. No "if" required there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaywalker Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 I've been out to the Sattahip port next to it. It's not very big. It also has one of those ancient style ramps pointing about 45 degrees upwards at the end. It, (very appropriately) flies a flag with a white elephant on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KhnomKhnom Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 Vital for training in carriers and submarines...... how else can Thai soldiers move directly onto American stuff and "help out." Why is it that the kneejerk thaivisa typists response is just to slag on Thailand instead of digging deeper........ making fun with no basis in facts is just childs play. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willyumiii Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 The UK doesn't even have one The UK is an aircraft carrier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomacht8 Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 Maybe they should tow the aircraft carrier in open neutral waters beyond, Setting up a bit plush and open a gambling casino. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robby nz Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 As has been pointed out it has the capacity to carry and operate helicopters and I would imagine be able to be used as a troop base with hospital facilities for emergency use in the gulf. Could also be fitted out for fire fighting and oil spill clean up and delivering food and fuel supplies to areas cut of by flood or whatever. Having it ready for rapid deployment would give them something to do with it and a great training facility for emergency crews, not just the military. Then there are the tanker pirates that we hear about, having the carrier hanging around in area where they operate with armed choppers on board ready for any mayday call could just prevent some of that.. Don't know if anyone in authority has ever thought along those lines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klauskunkel Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 (edited) The article says it's purpose is rather as a status symbol and not for defense...much like a handbag..., then again, handbags have been known to fight off would-be aggressors...so, I keep an open mind about it even if it hurts from repressed mirth... Edited February 23, 2015 by klauskunkel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billd766 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. Isn't Google a wonderful invention. If you had only done a search here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTMS_Chakri_Naruebet You may have found that the ship was actually built in Spain and not France. The aircraft carrier is designed to operate an air group of V/STOL fighter aircraft and helicopters, and is fitted with a ski-jump so a catapult was not necessary, nor are arrestor wires. It is certainly big enough for the job it was designed for. As for nuclear powered why would the Thai Navy need a ship that could travel continuously around the world many times without refuelling as they only operate in the Asia Pacific region though they were involved in anti piracy operation of Yemen and East Africa. However don't let the fact that you managed to get everything wrong stop you bashing the Thai military. It is about all you do on the forum and you can't even get that right at times. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elgordo38 Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 Wonder what the cut was and has been for those in charge of the original procurement and those responsible for the ongoing maintenance costs? And you talk about a rice deal gone sour wow who got a can tied to their tail over this fiasco? A suggestion would be like Costa Rica get rid of the standing army so I could look out my condo window and see a real policeman standing on the corner. The only time I see a real cop is when they set up their helmut checkpoint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elgordo38 Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 Wonder what the cut was and has been for those in charge of the original procurement and those responsible for the ongoing maintenance costs? Wow you talk about the rice deal going sour who got a can tied to their tail on this deal. It is just another grandoise pipe dream dreamt up by some politician. I shudder when I think that these same people are running the country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
socksy01 Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 And Submarine Day with a Submarine base and no...........................................................Submarine's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 Actually the Thai aircraft carrier has aircraft. Helicopters only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Estrada Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 It also has a submarine base with trained submariners - but no submarines. And bloody big balloons that don't ... err, balloon. Yes, the King wisely pointed out, the previous time the military were in power and they wanted to buy one, that the Gulf of Thailand is too shallow for submarines. Now the new Military Government wants to buy submarines again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FredNL Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 Wonder what the cut was and has been for those in charge of the original procurement and those responsible for the ongoing maintenance costs? In Thailand maintenance costs are always zero !!! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timebandit Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 Can f16's take off on carriers? It's more of a question of "can they land on a carrier?". Carrier planes require a much stronger landing gear than an F-16. There really is way too much perceived value placed on a carrier. In today's Military with it's myriad of stealth anti-ship missiles any carrier can be taken out at will. i.e. the Chinese have a weapon referred to in the West as a "Bammer" which is a Mach 10 kinetic warhead. Nothing now can hit it and being just a big Mach 10 bullet it will go right through a hail of bullets from an Aegis system and right through a ship full of bombs, jet fuel and in some cases a nuclear reactor. The carrier has some uses in fighting a limited war against small arms as in Syria or Kosavo. In a conflict with a formidable enemy the carriers will be out in the first two weeks if it lasts that long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 Actually the Thai carrier has proven useful a few times in rescue and support roles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Plowman Posted February 23, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted February 23, 2015 So somehow funnelling state money directly into the hands of the poor via the rice scheme is corruption but ridiculous multi-billion baht military purchases such as useless aircraft carriers, submarine bases and toy bomb detectors are not! Here is the very definition of what ails Thailand, should the state use its money to help the people or line the pockets of the military. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 So somehow funnelling state money directly into the hands of the poor via the rice scheme is corruption but ridiculous multi-billion baht military purchases such as useless aircraft carriers, submarine bases and toy bomb detectors are not! Here is the very definition of what ails Thailand, should the state use its money to help the people or line the pockets of the military. The Thai carrier came online right when the '97 financial crash happened. To be operational in other than support / rescue roles it needs some VTOL/STOL aircraft other than the helicopters it currently has. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trogers Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 The UK doesn't even have oneYes 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. What did they use for the Falkland War? Row boats? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ratcatcher Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 So somehow funnelling state money directly into the hands of the poor via the rice scheme is corruption but ridiculous multi-billion baht military purchases such as useless aircraft carriers, submarine bases and toy bomb detectors are not! Here is the very definition of what ails Thailand, should the state use its money to help the people or line the pockets of the military. So somehow funnelling state money directly into the hands of the poor politicians, wealthy landowners, rice millers and warehouse owners via the rice scheme is corruption. Yes and so are many of the unnecessary purchases by the military. Both cut from the same cloth,. Bugger the poor, for they shall inherit the earth (or what's left of it.). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAG 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 ! Well anyone intending to operate Harrier Jump Jets off it. The Royal Navy did so with their last three for several decades . The trouble is all the RTN Harriers broke years ago. By the way, as it is a warship then I believe the correct (army) description of it is LGB. Large Grey Boat. I now await abuse from any matelots on this board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozyjon Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 Let's make them happy, we can get blow up balloons that look like scary planes and just lay them about, might look real, they did it in the UK during WW2, we could do it again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatOngo Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 It also has a submarine base with trained submariners - but no submarines. And bloody big balloons that don't ... err, balloon. Yes, the King wisely pointed out, the previous time the military were in power and they wanted to buy one, that the Gulf of Thailand is too shallow for submarines. Now the new Military Government wants to buy submarines again. They are being designed to float on the surface. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casualbiker Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 So somehow funnelling state money directly into the hands of the poor via the rice scheme is corruption but ridiculous multi-billion baht military purchases such as useless aircraft carriers, submarine bases and toy bomb detectors are not! Here is the very definition of what ails Thailand, should the state use its money to help the people or line the pockets of the military. The Thai carrier came online right when the '97 financial crash happened.To be operational in other than support / rescue roles it needs some VTOL/STOL aircraft other than the helicopters it currently has. Thailand suffers from astounding levels of poverty and inequality, in any year, is buying billion baht redundant military junk the best way for state funds to be spent to help alleviate the suffering masses? They should join the Army and get their fair share !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plowman Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 So somehow funnelling state money directly into the hands of the poor via the rice scheme is corruption but ridiculous multi-billion baht military purchases such as useless aircraft carriers, submarine bases and toy bomb detectors are not! Here is the very definition of what ails Thailand, should the state use its money to help the people or line the pockets of the military. The Thai carrier came online right when the '97 financial crash happened.To be operational in other than support / rescue roles it needs some VTOL/STOL aircraft other than the helicopters it currently has. Thailand suffers from astounding levels of poverty and inequality, in any year, is buying billion baht redundant military junk the best way for state funds to be spent to help alleviate the suffering masses? They should join the Army and get their fair share !!! You think promotions are based on merit? Sorry mate, all the lucrative posts are taken (now and into the future by the current Generals offspring). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
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