Thailand Purchase Three Chinese-Built Submarines

[New World]

And Chinese S-20 has?

S20 for Pakistan will be a custom built..

 

[Penguin]

@Penguin
Can you confirm or deny if S20 is capable of carrying long range missiles. I'm not reffering to CM's

China has submarine launched antiship missiles, variants of their surface launched antiship missiles. So long as a cruise missile in its canister fits the heavyweight torpedo tubes (diameter 533mm, length can vary but Tomahawk w.o. booster is just under 6 m), any submarine can potentially launch it

S20 for Pakistan will be a custom built..

So?

 

[Indus Falcon]

China has submarine launched antiship missiles, variants of their surface launched antiship missiles. So long as a cruise missile in its canister fits the heavyweight torpedo tubes (diameter 533mm, length can vary but Tomahawk w.o. booster is just under 6 m), any submarine can potentially launch it


So?

Anti-ship Missiles, CMs, I am very clear about. What I actually meant was Ballistic missiles, like the JL-1 & JL-2 ? A limited number like 4 or 6 ?

 

[Arsalan]

And Chinese S-20 has?

They can, they will.

China have a anti ship missiles and there land attack version which will come with the Chinese submarines. As long as we can get missiles that are canister launched and fit in the torpedo tube we may even be able to get our Agosta subs to fire these missiles with slight tweaking. However we may not do that because of sanctions issues is assume. With Chinese subs (that are newer design and better then the older Agosta) this wont be a problem

Also there are rumors that the S-X version that Pakistan will get customer build MAY come with some VLS for land attack missiles. At the moment it is just a rumor and i don't believe it but who knows. People are saying that 2 or 4 subs that we will get customized for second strike capability will have VLS for land attack missiles. The S20 seems to small for that but still the sub we are going for will be custom build, heck we are not sure if it will be S20 to begin with!!

 

[New World]

So?

SO, what PN need is there for them..

 

[Penguin]

Anti-ship Missiles, CMs, I am very clear about. What I actually meant was Ballistic missiles, like the JL-1 & JL-2 ? A limited number like 4 or 6 ?

JL-1 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Specifications of S20:

• Structure: double hulled
• Length: 66 meter
• Beam: 8 meter
• Draft: 8.2 meter
• Surface displacement: 1850 tons
• Submerged displacement: 2300 tons
• Maximum speed: 18 knots
• Cruise speed: 16 knots
• Range: 8000 nautical miles @ 16 knots
• Endurance: 60 days
• Crew: 38 total
• Maximum depth: 300 meters

Type 039A submarine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Yuan Type 039A Type 041

How would the S-20 sub, with its 8m hull diameter, accommodate an 11m-13m ballistic missile?

By comparison, Russia offer a VLS-plug for submarines for Yakhont/Brahmos. This results in a slight 'humpback' on an LADA/AMUR 950 SSK. Brahmos/Yakhont launch length (in canister) is 8.4 m.
BrahMos - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
BrahMos - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Anything longer would require using the sail for launcher location, or a substantially bigger (fatter, larger diameter) boat. e.g. Type 032

Or Soviet Golf class (firing 11,25m R-11FM 'Scud-A' or 11,8m R-13 'Sark' or 13m R-21 'Serb' missiles)

Or Soviet Hotel class (R-13, R21)

See http://fas.org/nuke/guide/russia/slbm/

Or, of course, shorter ballistic missiles ..... (think Polaris A1 sized)

Submarine Launched Ballistic Missiles - United States Nuclear Forces

The first version, the Polaris A-1, had a range of 1,000 nautical miles (1,900 kilometres) and a single Mk 1 re-entry vehicle, carrying a single W-47-Y1 600 kt nuclear warhead, with an inertial guidance system which provided a Circular error probable (CEP) of 1,800 meters (5,900 feet). The two-stage solid propellant missile had a length of 28.5 ft (8.7 m), a body diameter of 54 inches (1.4 m), and a launch weight of 28,800 pounds (13,100 kg). USS George Washington was the first fleet ballistic missile submarine (SSBN in U.S. naval terminology) and she and all of the other Polaris submarines carried 16 missiles.
UGM-27 Polaris - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

MOST SLBMs are around 10m or more, Polaris A1 is an exception .....
Missiles of the World - Missile ThreatMissile Threat

598 G. Washington class > hull diameter 33ft = about 10m (and it still had a humpback)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_George_Washington_(SSBN-598)

SO, what PN need is there for them..

Your not making sense.

 

[TaiShang]

Thailand to buy three Chinese-built submarines

Xinhua, July 1, 2016
Thai Deputy Premier Prawit Wongsuwan confirmed on Friday that Thailand will buy three Chinese-built submarines for a combined price of one billion U.S. dollars.

The Thai navy's proposal to procure the three Yuan-class S26T subs from China has been put on hold since last year by the deputy premier who is concurrently defense minister.

Now that Gen Prawit has given his nod, the navy will use its fiscal 2017 budget amounting to some 333 million U.S. dollars to buy the first Chinese sub next year with the two others to follow over the next few years.

The deputy premier said the navy will only pay for the Chinese subs on instalment basis which will span a ten-year's time from next year.

The Yuan-class S26T sub is a derivative, export version of the Yuan-class 039A sub deployed by the Chinese navy and is fitted with an air-independent propulsion as an auxiliary system to a regular diesel-electric power.

 

[Daniel808]

Congrats for our Thailand Friends


Yuan Class Submarines with AIP Technology (Air Independent Propulsion) is very Deadly.
This is a BIG News for Thailand Navy Development and Increase Much of Their Naval Capability in South East Asia.

 

[ahojunk]

I think this is a misprint because US $333 million per submarine is a bargain. I don't think the price is correct.

Recently, Australia awarded a French company US $50 billion for 12 submarines. This works out to be about US $4 billion per sub.

In 2014, US Navy Orders 10 Virginia-class Submarines at a cost of $17.6 Billion, i.e. US $1.8 billion per sub.

What do you guys think?

 

[Daniel808]

I think this is a misprint because US $333 million per submarine is a bargain. I don't think the price is correct.

Recently, Australia awarded a French company US $50 billion for 12 submarines. This works out to be about US $4 billion per sub.

In 2014, US Navy Orders 10 Virginia-class Submarines at a cost of $17.6 Billion, i.e. US $1.8 billion per sub.

What do you guys think?

I think you cannot use Virginia Class Submarine for Reference.
They are Different.

Virginia Class is SSN (Nuclear Submarine) just like Type 093A/B, and Type 095 China's Navy SSN (Nuclear Submarine).

But, Yuan Class is Heavy Class SSK (Diesel Submarine) with AIP.
3,600 Tonnes.
And $ 333 Million per Submarine is very Reasonable bro @ahojunk
I heard Scorpene Class SSK from French have cost about $ 450 Million.
And Kilo Class from Russia cost about $ 200-250 Million per Submarine.

 

[Dungeness]

The Diplomat： How Did China Just Win Thailand’s New Submarine Bid?
The country has chosen Beijing to help realize its long-deferred submarine quest.

June 26, 2015 By Prashanth Parameswaran

Thailand’s navy has elected to buy three submarines from China, moving the country one step closer to acquiring a capability it has lacked for more than six decades, media sources reported June 26 (See: “Thailand Eyes Submarine Fleet”).

According to The Bangkok Post, a source on the 17-member submarine procurement committee appointed by the Royal Thai Navy (RTN) revealed that a majority of its members had voted to buy three Chinese submarines costing 12 billion baht ($355 million) each because they were the “best value for money.” The rest of the committee members were apparently split between submarines from South Korea and Germany. As I have written previously, Thailand has lacked a submarine capability since 1951 and has tried but failed since the 1990s to ink submarine deals with several suppliers, including Seoul and Berlin (See: “Will Thailand Realize its Submarine Quest?”).

The official line from military sources is that the decision to go with Chinese-made submarines was based largely on value. In a separate report, The Bangkok Post cited various sources from the navy and the procurement committee as saying that China was chosen because its submarines were not only the cheapest, but of good quality as well contrary to concerns on this score. But a committee member also disclosed that Beijing had offered military technology transfer and training as part of the package, which other countries would otherwise charge more for. That member likened buying submarines to a car purchase. “If we are able to buy a Mercedes but have no money left for petrol, we should look at a top model Toyota instead, which would still leave some money for petrol,” the source said.

Nonetheless, if confirmed the decision is likely to be read by some as another sign that Thailand is leaning closer towards China amid a rocky relationship with its ally the United States following a coup last May. As I have pointed out previously, the reality is in fact much more complex. It is certainly true that Bangkok and Beijing have been looking to boost their defense ties, with an uptick of high-level visits and commitments to expand joint military exercises and training and enhancing defense industry cooperation (See: “China, Thailand Eye Deeper Defense Ties”). But as I have written before, Sino-Thai defense relations have been slow to develop in these areas, while U.S.-Thai defense ties are significantly more mature such that comparing the two makes little sense (See: “Did China Just Boost Military Ties With Thailand?”).

If this new submarine deal is finalized, it could open the possibility for other areas of defense collaboration between Thailand and China such as the ones being deliberated by both sides. But Thailand’s past experience with submarines suggests that renewed efforts in this direction ought to be viewed with caution. Internal differences, political stability and cost issues could complicate and derail plans as they have previously. And as Thai navy chief Admiral Kraisorn Chansuvanich said earlier this year, even if the government were to approve the submarine purchase today, time will be needed to build the ships and send personnel for training for one or more years, which means that it will take five or six years before they can enter the service. There may also be lingering questions about the quality of the submarines.

That being said, if the deal goes through, this would constitute a boost to the Sino-Thai relationship as the two countries celebrate their 40th anniversary this year. And it would move Bangkok one step closer to realizing its long-deferred dream of acquiring submarines, which would finally be able fill its multi-million dollar submarine training center after some time.

http://thediplomat.com/2015/06/how-did-china-just-win-thailands-new-submarine-bid/

 

[CAPRICORN-88]

A very prudent move by Thailand!

I read some Western articles that claimed the Thailand Military considered China Military Hardware as INFERIOR and cannot last but why did Thailand keep buying China Military Hardware then?

The reason is simple. It is NOT TRUE.

 

[alaungphaya]

I wonder why ALL of SE Asia is tooling up.

 

[C130]

A very prudent move by Thailand!

I read some Western articles that claimed the Thailand Military considered China Military Hardware as INFERIOR and cannot last but why did Thailand keep buying China Military Hardware then?

The reason is simple. It is NOT TRUE.

who said China stuff is crap?? this might of been true a decade or two ago

 

[dy1022]

50 VT4 MBTs in May, and Now 3 S26T AIP subs!

great!


in long term, 150 VT4 and 8 S26T AIP subs for Thailand!