Pheu Thai opens fire at submarine deal

[realenglish1]

1 minute ago, Zyxel said:

It will take years before Thailand gets its subs, plenty of time to have the infrastructure ready, to train the officers and crew. And about the maintenance nightmare, why do you thing Thailand cannot have well trained mechanics or electricians, they have many servicing their frigates and corvettes as well as their air crafts. I worked more than 10 years in the oil industry here and my company managed to recruit, after some screening of course, excellent technicians.

Ok  but you did not say why Thailand needs the subs I would like to hear  your reasoning 

Edited May 1, 2017 by realenglish1

[Zyxel]

17 minutes ago, realenglish1 said:

Ok  but you did not say why Thailand needs the subs I would like to hear  your reasoning 

You can refer to my post # 66, this is my reasoning and I understand that you might not agree with it. I spent 15 years in the navy on a warship and every time we were having "war games" at least one sub from each side was involved. You cannot go to war at sea without subs, it was true in WWI, WWII, it is true now and it will be in the future.

If you Goggle "Countries with currently operational submarines", you might be surprised.

Edited May 1, 2017 by Zyxel

[realenglish1]

I understand but in Thailands case they are never going to lead an attack The US China or Russian will and they have navel assets

 

Having one or  2 subs is a non starter I understand you where  at sea but with a Naval Power This is a joke  Thai Subs

[Frotting]

4 hours ago, GBK said:

No water deep enough to operate them in.

 

In a conflict, they'd be on the bottom in a heartbeat because they'll be visible from the air for hours before they could dive - this assumes they magically pull a competent sub driver out of a hat.

This is absolutely true.  Deepest part of the gulf of Thailand is 65 metres, and that is actually in Malaysian waters far to the south.  To operate the subs in an adequate water depth, they would have to be in some other country's waters, like Vietnam or East Malaysia/Brunei.  There is always the Andaman side of course, but Thailand has no navy base on that coast and nowhere suitable to build one, given that their section of that coastline is not long.

 

So you operate in the gulf of Thailand, where with the vessel submerged and just off the seabed, the conning tier would be scraping the hulls of ships passing above.  Really well thought out idea to buy submarines.  Then of course you need trained submariners.  Good luck with that one.  I pre dice the first time they do a trial dive the submarine stays permanently on the bottom, 'Kursk' style.  The good thing here will be that they only have to open the hatches and jump out, as they will already be on or near the surface.

[Zyxel]

11 minutes ago, realenglish1 said:

I understand but in Thailands case they are never going to lead an attack The US China or Russian will and they have navel assets

 

Having one or  2 subs is a non starter I understand you where  at sea but with a Naval Power This is a joke  Thai Subs

You are perfectly right if the enemy is the US, China, Russia or even UK, India or France. But against Malaysia, Vietnam or Singapore it could be a different story even if I tend to favor these countries to take the advantage.

Edited May 1, 2017 by Zyxel

[williamgeorgeallen]

3 hours ago, ThailandLOS said:

You might be unaware, but in reality Thailand is at war - although rather low intensive and not very visible in the media.

 

Thailand is definitely under threat from foreign powers - someone is financing the southern muslims and red shirts, among others. This will all become very visible when we approach the elections next year.

do you think these subs will be of any help in these low intensity wars/threats?

i doubt there will be elections next year by the way.

[realenglish1]

40 minutes ago, Zyxel said:

You are perfectly right if the enemy is the US, China, Russia or even UK, India or France. But against Malaysia, Vietnam or Singapore it could be a different story even if I tend to favor these countries to take the advantage.

I have to say you are losing in this argument There is no real reason or threat to Thailand where they need subs

 

This is as I have always said a toy for the navy and nothing more 

It will fall into disrepair the same as the aircraft carrier did 

[billd766]

1 hour ago, realenglish1 said:

For what reason do we need subs because you think it is not stupid They will end up a maintenance nightmare  and a costly one at that There is no infrastructure to take care of them I would like to here your thinking other than "Gee the other powers around here have them" 

 

Of course there is no infrastructure here to take care of the submarines. There are no submarines either and they may take a few more years to arrive. There is no need for an infrastructure yet to sevice something that doesn't exist yet.

[realenglish1]

2 minutes ago, billd766 said:

 

Of course there is no infrastructure here to take care of the submarines. There are no submarines either and they may take a few more years to arrive. There is no need for an infrastructure yet to sevice something that doesn't exist yet.

If Thailand was a super power or regional power I could understand having subs but in both cases this is not a reality

Again they are toys for big boys who want to yell out DIVE DIVE DIVE Up PERISCOPE LOAD TUBES

ARM TORPEDOES FIRE FIRE FIRE!!!!!!!!!!!  

 

We has successfully sunk the Shrimp Trawler Commander should we go after the tourist boat ?

[Baerboxer]

8 hours ago, cornishcarlos said:

Whilst I don't agree that buying Chinese subs is a great idea, what makes these Pheu Thai clowns think they should be dishing out spending advice !!

 

Well, their idea of letting them have a 2.2 trillion baht loan, for them to decided how, when, and on what it  was spent, with no parliamentary scrutiny,  no accounting and no checks and balances makes this submarine deal look tiny tiny.

 

So they probably think they do know better!

 

 

[Srikcir]

8 hours ago, Wilsonandson said:

Indonesia - 4 submarines
Vietnam - 6 submarines
Malaysia - 2 submarines
Singapore - 6 submarines
Thailand - orders 3 submarines

Why can't Thailand have submarines?

Likely all but Thailand and Vietnam need subs as part of their naval forces to secure the adjacent narrow water passages for critical cargo transport. Vietnam can justify due to Chinese aggression in the China South Sea over areas Vietnam claims sovereignty.

 

But Thailand needing subs in the Gulf of Thailand? There seems to be no comparative need. Especially since the Thai military announced that for now it will only buy one sub (lead time 6 years but maybe only 1-2 years if bought used to accommodate specialized equipment). That means no replacement in the event of repair and maintenance.

Edited May 1, 2017 by Srikcir
add caveot for used sub

[fdch]

whoo

this is to much people who can not even drive a car , should be driving 3 submarines in the same ocean??

after road carnage we get sea carnage now

please tell me how ; the submarine deal could actually boost the economy as the junta government has claimed

this is getting very interesting

maybe use the money they must have to much from, on some real education!!!( driving schools and english teaching for free)

[recycler]

10 hours ago, Wilsonandson said:

Indonesia - 4 submarines
Vietnam - 6 submarines
Malaysia - 2 submarines
Singapore - 6 submarines
Thailand - orders 3 submarines

Why can't Thailand have submarines?

Current Military Strength Rankings

1 - Indonesia
2 - Thailand
3 - Vietnam
4 - Malaysia
5 - Singapore

With an average depth of 58 meters there is not a lot of diving possible in the gulf of Thailand!

[metisdead]

Off topic trolling posts and replies have been removed. 

[Sakeopete]

The subs will be great diving attractions once they sink in the shallow waters. Since there are few fish and corals remaining in Thai waters sunken subs attraction will come to the diving industry rescue. I got dibs on "Hunt for Red Chili October" dive tour.

[Chris Lawrence]

Every Govt. has a rice deal in them. This could be the one.

[Dumbastheycome]

11 hours ago, AhFarangJa said:

The people at the top do not want education. Keep the people ignorant, they do not ask questions, and it is easier to continue the rapacious gorging from the trough.

You  could possibly  include  Thailand  in  that  .  lmao

[millwall_fan]

22 hours ago, GBK said:

No water deep enough to operate them in.

 

In a conflict, they'd be on the bottom in a heartbeat because they'll be visible from the air for hours before they could dive - this assumes they magically pull a competent sub driver out of a hat.

That's the clincher really isn't it! The waters off their Sattahip naval base are too shallow for subs to operate invisibly. That rather blows the navy's argument for the subs out of the water.  Peua Thai are quite right. The money should be spent compensating those who lost their livelihoods when the junta shut down their streetfood and market stalls so that rich developers could cash in. It should be spent on increasing the minimum wage which hasn't risen since Peua Thai  raised it several years ago. And it could be spent on providing soft  loans for small businesses now that there has been a clampdown on loansharks.

[geriatrickid]

19 hours ago, billd766 said:

 

But certainly not the views of millions of other Thais.

Ok. In case you were unaware, Thailand at one time had a government system where political parties put forth candidates for public office. Thais voted in elections for the candidates and the political party of their choice.  Pheu Thai was one of those political parties. In the last free election in 2011, Pheu Thai received the largest number of votes.   15,744,190 or 48.41%  of total votes cast. This was 38% higher than the next highest political party, the misnamed  Democrats.

As such the Pheu Thai still has some legitimacy to speak on behalf of the large number of Thais who do not agree with the purchase of Chinese submarines.

 

[biplanebluey]

On 5/1/2017 at 8:44 AM, robblok said:

 

Come on they will make a good tourist attraction.. just like the aircraft carrier. 

Anyone ever seen a plane land or take off from it

[mikiea]

On 5/1/2017 at 6:26 AM, cornishcarlos said:

Whilst I don't agree that buying Chinese subs is a great idea, what makes these Pheu Thai clowns think they should be dishing out spending advice !!

what bothers me is the latest request to add retractable wheels to the sub . the chinese engineers are laughing  but are working out the details to make thailand's sub the world's largest  trike ....

[mtls2005]

20 hours ago, billd766 said:

 

Of course there is no infrastructure here to take care of the submarines. There are no submarines either and they may take a few more years to arrive. There is no need for an infrastructure yet to sevice something that doesn't exist yet.

The RTN has already built a massive sub facility at Sattahip, including a simulator, at great cost in hopes of getting a sub. It opened to great fanfare in July, 2014.

[Bill Miller]

Don't know why this is going forward. Must be some handsome kickbacks from the shipyards.
There are second hand, perfectly servicable boats available on the world market at a fraction of the cost.

Sent from my SM-J200GU using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[JAG]

I agree with you and you could also have mentioned that these countries have subs on order.

Thailand does not want a fleet of subs a la Kriegsmarine, just a couple.

Subs are essential part of a navy force.

Subs have many different missions, not only submerge and launch torpedoes.

The purchase of the aircraft carrier was a stupid thing decided by a civilian government decades ago, today Thailand wants a couple of subs in a increasing tension environment, so why don't we stop comparing apples and oranges.

It will take years for Thailand to get their subs and train officers and crews, may-be too late already if a conflict emerge in South China Sea.

Thailand will not use their subs in the gulf of Thailand nor their enemies, but in the deep territorial waters of their enemies, probably teaming with their allies.

As for expensive toys for the military, today every weapon is expensive, but you can buy cheap obsolete weapons which will be useless in combat. Tiny Singapore has 6 subs and more on order with the shallowest waters in SEA and I trust that its naval officers don't consider them as expensive toys.

Some idiot politicians have said that Thailand needs subs because its neighbors have some, it actually makes sense, if a conflict starts in South China sea, Thailand will probably side with China or adopt a "neutral opposition" and guess who will be the potential enemies.

In 1917 when the US (rightly) declare war to Germany it took a year before they could be ready to fight in Europe. Same, after Pearl Harbor attack, US could not stop the Japanese invading SEA and in particular their colony The Philippines. It took months thanks to their industrial power and will to be on the offensive again.

You want peace? Prepare for war.

You want peace? Prepare for war.

 

Take a long hard look at the Thai military, with its astonishing mishmash of equipment ( they've got four different types of Infantry rifle for example), much obsolescent, much " stored" unservicable, it's lack of any coherent collective training (what there is limited to minimal basic training for endless cycles of conscripts), and consider whether they are in any way prepared?

 

No, this is just the purchase of another piece of kit which is unlikely to have any real bearing on Thailands defensive capability, is unlikely to remain servicable for long, and whose purchase is driven by enthusiasm for the "benefits" of the procurement process.

 

[JAG]

Ok. In case you were unaware, Thailand at one time had a government system where political parties put forth candidates for public office. Thais voted in elections for the candidates and the political party of their choice.  Pheu Thai was one of those political parties. In the last free election in 2011, Pheu Thai received the largest number of votes.   15,744,190 or 48.41%  of total votes cast. This was 38% higher than the next highest political party, the misnamed  Democrats.
As such the Pheu Thai still has some legitimacy to speak on behalf of the large number of Thais who do not agree with the purchase of Chinese submarines.
 

A very valid argument. Of course it might be torpedoed ( like the allusion- vaguely on topic, no?) by holding an election to see who now speaks for the majority. But then...

[Anon999]

On 01/05/2017 at 8:30 AM, jesimps said:

Name one positive with regards to this govt. Lottery tickets? Beach umbrellas?

 

 

In the area of Isaan that I live there has been considerable infrastructure work as opposed to very little in the previous 10 years.

[billd766]

5 hours ago, geriatrickid said:

Ok. In case you were unaware, Thailand at one time had a government system where political parties put forth candidates for public office. Thais voted in elections for the candidates and the political party of their choice.  Pheu Thai was one of those political parties. In the last free election in 2011, Pheu Thai received the largest number of votes.   15,744,190 or 48.41%  of total votes cast. This was 38% higher than the next highest political party, the misnamed  Democrats.

As such the Pheu Thai still has some legitimacy to speak on behalf of the large number of Thais who do not agree with the purchase of Chinese submarines.

 

 

Strange as it may seem to you I was quite aware of that. I am not saying that they don't have the legitimacy to spaek and whilst They had the highest number of votes they had less than half of the number of eligble votes so they spoke for less than half of the Thai voters. Equally the Democrats and all the other parties also have the legitimate right right to speak on behalf of the Thai people

 

OTOH there are many farang posters on TVF who also claim to speak on behalf of the Thai people but unless they have taken the step to become Thai citizens, they don't have the "legitimate right" to speak for them.

 

I certainly would not speak on behalf of my Thai wife or my neighbours and Thai friends unless I was specifically asked to do so, knowing that it would be a waste of time and that I would be ignored if I did so.

[billd766]

2 hours ago, mtls2005 said:

The RTN has already built a massive sub facility at Sattahip, including a simulator, at great cost in hopes of getting a sub. It opened to great fanfare in July, 2014.

 

You are correct but to my way of thinking, infrastructure is more like docks, moorings, refuelling and re-arming docks, deep maintainance, repairs and servicing sheds etc. There is no point in building them until you know for certain what size submarines you will get, length, width, height, how much water they draw when they are fully loaded, where the navigable channels are, how much extra security would be needed, how many crews needed per submarine, barracks, messing facilities, extra housing etc.

[billd766]

1 hour ago, JAG said:

You want peace? Prepare for war.

 

Take a long hard look at the Thai military, with its astonishing mishmash of equipment ( they've got four different types of Infantry rifle for example), much obsolescent, much " stored" unservicable, it's lack of any coherent collective training (what there is limited to minimal basic training for endless cycles of conscripts), and consider whether they are in any way prepared?

 

No, this is just the purchase of another piece of kit which is unlikely to have any real bearing on Thailands defensive capability, is unlikely to remain servicable for long, and whose purchase is driven by enthusiasm for the "benefits" of the procurement process.

 

 

The Royal Thai Air Force has 21 different types of aircraft in current use among its 270 aircraft so they will need at least 21 different types of airframe and engine spares. Electrical and electronic equipments is more common as are flight instruments.

 

Having said that the UK, Usa and some other countries still have on their books aircraft from WW2 and later and they are tremendously expensive to maintain and fly.

[billd766]

27 minutes ago, Anon999 said:

In the area of Isaan that I live there has been considerable infrastructure work as opposed to very little in the previous 10 years.

 

Out here in rural Khampaeng Phet is the same. Rural roads are being slowly upgraded. In the village where I live we now have water 24/7 which came this year. We have lived here for 13 years and it is slowly improving.

 

quote

On 01/05/2017 at 8:30 AM, jesimps said:

Name one positive with regards to this govt. Lottery tickets? Beach umbrellas?

 

What is more important to the majority of rural Thailand is not the stuff that you are talking about but the smaller things like storage areas for water, boreholes for water, improved mobile phone and internet facilities, improvements to roads and all the boring little stuff that city tyupes take for granted.

 

These are the real things that improve life for millions of people but without fanfares and trumpets.

 

There you are jesimps. I have givien you at least 6 improvements to make life better in Thailand.

 

How come you can't find any?