Prawit says Chinese submarine is okay

[ginjag]

Maybe the Chinese sub IS OK, but to purchase would be idiotic. The gulf waters are too shallow for starters, but if they were not the use is for ?????. We have to assume that it will be operational as fit for combat ?? if so who is the enemy, what nation are they ?? It will near sit on the sea bed and use its periscope in the gulf--------just ridiculous when you have crippled old and young not being cared for. DOH

[JAG]

Why the need for a sub....?

Why not ? The country itself has a long coast line...one suspects Thailand has more coast line than say the UK, but no one questions the need the UK have for subs

The waters, around Thailand, aren't deep enough, subs would easily by detected, from the air, then guess what happens.

Well then the magnificent aircraft carrier which is another part of the well honed and balanced maritime sword of the nation will launch a strike force to destroy the enemies air assets before they can harm the submarine......ah, wait, I'll come back to you in a jiffy.

Edited July 4, 2016 by JAG

[phoenixdoglover]

Here is an indication of how relevant submarines are to the modern (non-nuclear) military. A list of submarine actions since World War II.

1971 — Pakistani submarine sinks Indian frigate (Indo-Pakistani War)

1982 — British nuclear submarine sinks Argentine cruiser (Falklands War)

1991 –US nuclear submarines fire Tomahawk Cruise Missiles against land-based targets (Desert Storm)

1999 - US Submarine sinks crippled merchant ship New Carissa off the Oregon coast. (non-military)

2010 – A North Korean submarine sinks South Korean corvette

That's it.

Edited July 4, 2016 by phoenixdoglover

[harrry]

Thailand has a western seaboard too....they have to protect Phuket against an invasion of foreigners...

Just had a pop up add for World of Warships.....Launch a torpedo at the enemy ship.....they must have been reading this thread.

[american12bthai]

.... said the submarine expert.

[phoenixdoglover]

.... said the submarine expert.

To be fair, he does look somewhat "amphibious".

[Snig27]

Why the need for a sub....?

Why not ? The country itself has a long coast line...one suspects Thailand has more coast line than say the UK, but no one questions the need the UK have for subs

Ah, yes they do, all the time. The U.K. is also a nation with a few offshore possessions. The examples are not similar.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[ChrisY1]

Purely an outstanding opportunity to ensure positive wealth growth for a few of the inner circle........

[tuanku]

Why the need for a sub....?

Why not ? The country itself has a long coast line...one suspects Thailand has more coast line than say the UK, but no one questions the need the UK have for subs

The SNP do

[tuanku]

You just know everytime Pawn opens his mouth, whatever comes out is not going to be to the advantage of Thailand.

Looking at him, is he a Thai ?

He is Mao Tse Tung's brother from another mother.

[tuanku]

Why the need for a sub....?

Sea levels are rising. Will be handy for getting round Bangkok before too long.

[Siam122]

Learn to spell ??, is he in toefel test . You understand what he say. We are not in English school

[lvr181]

The little fella is adamant! Maybe he needs to be remembered?

[Bunnychow]

Maybe the Chinese sub IS OK, but to purchase would be idiotic. The gulf waters are too shallow for starters, but if they were not the use is for ?????. We have to assume that it will be operational as fit for combat ?? if so who is the enemy, what nation are they ?? It will near sit on the sea bed and use its periscope in the gulf--------just ridiculous when you have crippled old and young not being cared for. DOH

So Singapore, Malaysia and Vietnams submarine fleets must be as idotic then ?...what about patrols on the Andaman sea then ?

Actually during WWII the German U boats only had a safe oprating depth of around 90m, the Gulf of Thailand is around 60-75m water depth..and one could argue u boats did some very sucessful operations..

As regards the criplled old and young not being cared for could one not make the same remarks about the US/UK etc ?

Edited July 4, 2016 by Bunnychow

[Sheryl]

Post with flames and profanity removed along with replies to it

[ratcatcher]

Why the need for a sub....?

Why not ? The country itself has a long coast line...one suspects Thailand has more coast line than say the UK, but no one questions the need the UK have for subs

Great Britain has been a naval power for 500 years and anyone with a smidgen of knowledge of European history understands why they have some submarines.

They had a global empire to protect and develop. Thailand has no such thing fortunately, and is unlikely to be attacked by any nation in the area, except perhaps.......................China.

Thailand's coastline may be long, but surface patrol craft would make more sense, but, it is the "sense" word that is the problem.

Once upon a time Brittania ruled the waves, now, they merely waive the rules.

I think you miss the point of my comment

Vietnam has 5 Russian Subs

Singapore has 6

Malaysia has 2

Burma is purchasing 2 from the Russians delivery 2016 possibly

Ergo every country in this region with the exception of Lao,s and Cambodia already has or is in the process of getting subs...so why not Thailand ? Its their right if they wish to...the blow hard farangs have no say

Just because the neighbors have new toys, is it practical and realistic for Thailand to purchase vessels that can be easily detected from the surface and the air.

I understand and respect the point you are trying to make, but, some years ago the sailor boys thought they'd like a nice big aircraft carrier, so they bought a Spanish designed vessel based on Principe de Asturia,

:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTMS_Chakri_Naruebet

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_aircraft_carrier_Pr%C3%ADncipe_de_Asturias

The aircraft carrier would be far more practical and useful, if only it was properly equipped with planes or helicopters. But that is an old toy. The navy wants new toys, hence the sub project.

As to your comment re blowhard farangs, this board exists for precisely that purpose. We as aliens have no say, but can only be amused or shocked by what the natives say and do.

[plachon]

Why the need for a sub....?

"face" ... Army gets their new tanks and things, Navy gets their subs to tie up at the dock and watch them rust away.

They can recoup some money by charging admission to have photos taken in front of them. Certain senior military ranks will be free but foreigners not permitted because they'll be state secrets just like the aircraft carrier.

Ah, but you'll get to tour them free on Children's Day in January, or at least send in your nipper to note down the Chinese commands plastered over every knob and button. Let's hope the naval ratings understand Chinese or they throw in a free manual in Thai.

[marcusd]

Why the need for a sub....?

"face" ... Army gets their new tanks and things, Navy gets their subs to tie up at the dock and watch them rust away.

Just like the Aircraft carrier doping nothing and no planes. Better they spend money they have left to help the PEOPLE they wanted to help but aLAS NO, BETTER TO SCREW THEM ALL OVER. i HOPE THE BLOODY THING blows up WITH ALL ON BOARD INCLUDING THE ARMY CHIEFS OF STAFF!

[marcusd]

This says it all, antiquated TYPICAL Chinese - mass produce CRAP.

Propulsion systems are a major Chinese weak point not easily fixed. China depends on Ukrainian and other former Soviet technology for propulsion systems

Here is the link if you are interested

http://www.andrewerickson.com/2015/11/chinas-naval-shipbuilding-progress-and-challenges-cmsi-conference-event-write-up-summary-of-discussion/

And Thailand loves CRAP

[marcusd]

Maybe the Chinese sub IS OK, but to purchase would be idiotic. The gulf waters are too shallow for starters, but if they were not the use is for ?????. We have to assume that it will be operational as fit for combat ?? if so who is the enemy, what nation are they ?? It will near sit on the sea bed and use its periscope in the gulf--------just ridiculous when you have crippled old and young not being cared for. DOH

So Singapore, Malaysia and Vietnams submarine fleets must be as idotic then ?...what about patrols on the Andaman sea then ?

Actually during WWII the German U boats only had a safe oprating depth of around 90m, the Gulf of Thailand is around 60-75m water depth..and one could argue u boats did some very sucessful operations..

As regards the criplled old and young not being cared for could one not make the same remarks about the US/UK etc ?

Bunny - U - Boats are over 60 years old now and we have NUCLEAR subs not diesel electric although SOME countries still use them but they too are VERY MODERN and VERY different. They can even go under the ice caps you know.

[streetsweeper]

This purchase is part of the monkey junta's long term strategy in fighting ISIS infiltration of Thailand by water.

The other upside is that it will make a superb Senior Officer's Club parked on the Chao Phraya. Many American, Autralian and British tourists love to have their pics taken standing in front of these kinds of things.

[oldsailor35]

Why the need for a sub....?

Why not ? The country itself has a long coast line...one suspects Thailand has more coast line than say the UK, but no one questions the need the UK have for subs

Yes , and Thailand needs to have a nasty surprise lurking under the surface of the Gulf of Thailand, just in case any invaders try to slip in , and take over the countries biggest money earner , Pattaya

[oldsailor35]

Why the need for a sub....?

Why not ? The country itself has a long coast line...one suspects Thailand has more coast line than say the UK, but no one questions the need the UK have for subs

Ohh dear did we bother to check any facts before offering this gem....... suggest you check out World Fact Book " Comparisons of Country Coastlines" under CIA website.....

No-one questions the need for UK to have subs as they are a registered member of the NATO alliance and have a dedicated strike force with nuclear capability.... Thailand on the other hand has NO situation where it can be called to war by other concerns nor contributes greatly to any peace keeping effort or force that is designed to enforce or at least try and ensure regional peace and stability.

Having "a" submarine is probably the most useless waste of money and given that their is unlikely to be a sovereign threat to Thailand from anywhere within a sole submarines effective operating sphere this is just a huge waste of public monies.........

It would make more sense if they spent the money on a decent railway upgrade. But i don't expect to get any sense from the present government.

[oldsailor35]

Why the need for a sub....?

Why not ? The country itself has a long coast line...one suspects Thailand has more coast line than say the UK, but no one questions the need the UK have for subs

Ah, yes they do, all the time. The U.K. is also a nation with a few offshore possessions. The examples are not similar.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

How about comparing UK submarines with this obsolete Chinese heap of trash. Consider what they can do when deployed . Absolutely no comparison whatsoever.

[oldsailor35]

You just know everytime Pawn opens his mouth, whatever comes out is not going to be to the advantage of Thailand.

Looking at him, is he a Thai ?

He is Mao Tse Tung's brother from another mother.

How did this funny fat little man become such a 'tiger' of a General. Bet he has got heaps of medals .

[oldsailor35]

Maybe the Chinese sub IS OK, but to purchase would be idiotic. The gulf waters are too shallow for starters, but if they were not the use is for ?????. We have to assume that it will be operational as fit for combat ?? if so who is the enemy, what nation are they ?? It will near sit on the sea bed and use its periscope in the gulf--------just ridiculous when you have crippled old and young not being cared for. DOH

So Singapore, Malaysia and Vietnams submarine fleets must be as idotic then ?...what about patrols on the Andaman sea then ?

Actually during WWII the German U boats only had a safe oprating depth of around 90m, the Gulf of Thailand is around 60-75m water depth..and one could argue u boats did some very sucessful operations..

As regards the criplled old and young not being cared for could one not make the same remarks about the US/UK etc ?

With todays detection technology, those U boats would not last more than a few days if that.

[Kaalle]

They should ask him why he froze Han Solo.

[Srikcir]

the project was enlisted in the 2017 national expenditure budget but it still needed to get approval from the cabinet.
the Navy had planned to procure a submarine for use for a long time, and had been approved by the majority of all committees scrutinising the project.

From a fiscal viewpoint several things don't add up.

The original announcement was for three submarines. Prawit now refers to one submarine. Submarine maintenance and training needs would require a backup sub apart from a sub on active duty. Having both the southern Gulf of Thailand (where the base is located) and the western Andaman Sea would require two subs in active service for coverage. Hence, the purchase of three subs would be needed as a minimum. If only one sub were being purchased, the navy would only have the operational capability of using it for training.

The original announcement stated that the three subs would be paid over a ten-year period to the seller. This implies seller financing and expenditures would be financed by debt and not by the FY 2017 budget revenues. It would essentially be an off-budget expenditure. The Cabinet had already approved the fiscal year 2017 budget for submittal to the NLA in mid-May 2016.

In June 2016 Prayut had already spent about three hours "elaborating the gist of the fiscal year 2017 budget bill to members of the National Legislative Assembly." On that same day the NLA unanimously passed the first reading of that budget.

So it appears Prawit's current statements about the planned submarine purchase are merely devisive to fabricate a misleading budgetary process. So much for adopting a sufficiency economy.

[Tatsujin]

Why the need for a sub....?

"face" ... Army gets their new tanks and things, Navy gets their subs to tie up at the dock and watch them rust away.

They can recoup some money by charging admission to have photos taken in front of them. Certain senior military ranks will be free but foreigners not permitted because they'll be state secrets just like the aircraft carrier.

Ah, but you'll get to tour them free on Children's Day in January, or at least send in your nipper to note down the Chinese commands plastered over every knob and button. Let's hope the naval ratings understand Chinese or they throw in a free manual in Thai.

Most of the top brass is (Thai) Chinese, so they'll be fine.

[Tatsujin]

Maybe the Chinese sub IS OK, but to purchase would be idiotic. The gulf waters are too shallow for starters, but if they were not the use is for ?????. We have to assume that it will be operational as fit for combat ?? if so who is the enemy, what nation are they ?? It will near sit on the sea bed and use its periscope in the gulf--------just ridiculous when you have crippled old and young not being cared for. DOH

So Singapore, Malaysia and Vietnams submarine fleets must be as idotic then ?...what about patrols on the Andaman sea then ?

Actually during WWII the German U boats only had a safe oprating depth of around 90m, the Gulf of Thailand is around 60-75m water depth..and one could argue u boats did some very sucessful operations..

As regards the criplled old and young not being cared for could one not make the same remarks about the US/UK etc ?

With todays detection technology, those U boats would not last more than a few days if that.

Considering the depth of water in the Gulf of Thailand is no more than 85 metres, and the average is only 59 metres, there's gonna be no problems finding them whatsoever. Their biggest problem is gonna be getting caught in fishing boat nets.