Taiwan Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

I mentioned to Fu sometime ago my doubts that the US would ever build a desiel boat again. Like Corbato says the latest US design is over 50 years old. No matter what any agreement says it's just not happening.

But perhaps the US will have, say, Japan build the boats for the ROCN?? I doubt that too..but that has a far better chance of happening than the US building a single boat for the ROCN.

bd popeye said:

I mentioned to Fu sometime ago my doubts that the US would ever build a desiel boat again. Like Corbato says the latest US design is over 50 years old. No matter what any agreement says it's just not happening.

But perhaps the US will have, say, Japan build the boats for the ROCN?? I doubt that too..but that has a far better chance of happening than the US building a single boat for the ROCN.

Click to expand...

Unless Japan modifies its constitution, they can't export military hardware.

Assuming theoritically that Japan would export their hardware and sell to Taiwan (two major hurdles), an Oyashio can cost about half a billion now at least. That's another hurdle.

Japan's Harushio class is a close relative of the Dutch Zvaardis, both descended from the US Barbel class. That kind of knowhow maybe helpful if you plan to do a modernized Barbel.

Pointblank said:

Unless Japan modifies its constitution, they can't export military hardware.

Click to expand...

Nothing in the constitution to say Japan can't export weapons - I think that's an old wives tale. The reason it isn't a major arms player is more down to convention/self-imposed regulation.

crobato said:

The White House has a pledge to supply Taiwan with subs? The US has a choice. And they're not building any. Otherwise, they would have been already built.

Click to expand...

The US won't build any submarines until Taiwan stumps up hard cash. If you're referring to the past, I don't know about that.

The Taiwan budget was planned for German Type 209 subs, a sub that Germany has long since stopped building in favor of the Type 214

Click to expand...

Reportedly the Americans are offering the 209-1400 or S-80. Now don't ask me how, because I don't know. Doubtless that detail is not going to be explained in public because China might put the thumb-screws on whoever could make that possible. The point will be made privately on a need-to-know basis. If the Taiwanese government and legislative approve funds that almost certainly means they've been convinced it can and will happen.

Well you are quite wrong. The Europeans are not going to cough up any subs for the US for Taiwan due to Chinese pressure. 209 means German Type 209 and S-80 means French Scorpene. The Germans are looking to repair their ties with China and besides the Type 209 are no longer in production for years. They have been replaced by the much more expensive Type 214. You want 209s go ahead, they don't even have passive flank sonars. As for the French, Taiwan is hands off due to Chinese pressure and the Ka Ding scandals.

You follow this up with the sheer naivete that the US is willing to build a diesel sub? The US is not willing to build a diesel sub to anyone, not Australia, Greece, Israel or South Korea, and this move have already cost billions of potential export sales. You seem to ignore that the US nuclear sub faction is dead set that the US will never ever design, build, or procure another diesel sub for whatever reason till hell freezes over.

crobato said:

Well you are quite wrong. The Europeans are not going to cough up any subs for the US for Taiwan due to Chinese pressure.

Click to expand...

Not direct sales. But if individual companies want to help the Americans it would be a lot more difficult for their governments to stop - they could also deny involvement later on if pushed.

You follow this up with the sheer naivete that the US is willing to build a diesel sub?

Click to expand...

In that case, why did the US agree to a two-stage order? If they weren't serious they would have insisted on all the money up-front as was the case before 2006.

If Taiwan approves R&D/"feasability study" money for 2008, doubtless we will see whether the US-build suggestion is viable or not.

FuManChu said:

Not direct sales. But if individual companies want to help the Americans it would be a lot more difficult for their governments to stop - they could also deny involvement later on if pushed.

Click to expand...

Lol. These companies can easily be stopped by their own government, not to mention parent companies of said companies may also be involved with business in China. This is way too easy to spot and stop.

In that case, why did the US agree to a two-stage order? If they weren't serious they would have insisted on all the money up-front as was the case before 2006.

Click to expand...

Its called one hand doing what the other hand does not know about. The sub issue is now firmly embedded with politics and again no way will nuclear sub adherents within the USN ever approve of that the US ever design or build a diesel submarine again.

crobato said:

These companies can easily be stopped by their own government, not to mention parent companies of said companies may also be involved with business in China. This is way too easy to spot and stop.

Click to expand...

crobato, a little while ago you were claiming Taiwan could get whatever it needed just by claiming "dual-use" or whatever. Now suddenly the US can't pull the same trick because they might end up in submarines destined for Taiwan? That's not credible.

Its called one hand doing what the other hand does not know about.

Click to expand...

I would say it's more a case of the Pentagon calling the shots. Pro-SSN people can pressure for the sale to be cancelled, but they can't make that decision themselves. At best they can ensure that the USN itself stays all nuclear. If they really could kill the deal they would have done so already.

FuManChu said:

crobato, a little while ago you were claiming Taiwan could get whatever it needed just by claiming "dual-use" or whatever. Now suddenly the US can't pull the same trick because they might end up in submarines destined for Taiwan? That's not credible.

Click to expand...

Are you that daft? How the hell can you dual use a military submarine? Who do you think you are going to fool?

By dual use I mean technologies. A diesel engine for a submarine can be the same as one that is used on a civilian ferry.

I would say it's more a case of the Pentagon calling the shots. Pro-SSN people can pressure for the sale to be cancelled, but they can't make that decision themselves. At best they can ensure that the USN itself stays all nuclear. If they really could kill the deal they would have done so already.

Click to expand...

The deal is practically dead on anything but paper. The Pentagon is with the USN on this. When it comes to budget battles, you don't allow a single chink in your armor. You have to defend your Virginia class sub budgets no matter what, and you cannot raise the prospect about the US building and buying diesel subs because one thing leads to another.

crobato said:

Are you that daft? How the hell can you dual use a military submarine? Who do you think you are going to fool?

Click to expand...

Where did I say anything about dual-use for an entire submarine? Quite obviously the European firms would not be asked to build the whole thing but offer technical advice and/or specific components.

The deal is practically dead on anything but paper. The Pentagon is with the USN on this.

Click to expand...

So then why did the Pentagon authorise the two-stage procurement? I don't believe that it's a case of one hand not knowing what the other was doing, because Taiwan had been asking for a two-stage process in public for some time - even members of Congress had spoken up on the matter. Authorisation would not have been given without top-level approval. In the highly unlikely event someone overstepped their authority, the matter would have been cleared up quickly.