Taiwanese navy under-rated

crobato said:

Yet somehow Germany does not seem to mind engines of its design end up in PLA subs and tanks.

Click to expand...

Given that the last Chancellor was heavily in favour of lifting the embargo, I'm not surprised that he allowed the embargo to be circumvented. But as has been discussed on here before, there are crucial things that are still prohibited from being sold. If there was nothing to be gained in lifting it, countries like France and Germany would not have pushed so much for it being lifted last year and China would not have rushed around Europe signing multi-billion dollar bribes - I mean trade agreements.

Anyway, we've talked about this a lot - no need to go over old ground.

Pointblank said:

Also the problem of whenever or not nations are willing to sell subs to Taiwan... many of the countries that currently build conventional subs are more pro-Beijing than pro-Taiwan... and the Americans have no recent experience in building conventional subs. As much as Taiwan needs new submarines, I just don't see them coming any time soon. I may be wrong, but that is what I can tell.

Click to expand...

More evidence of the need for Taiwan to develop an indigenous weapons industry. Several things that Taiwan needs to fill in major holes in its otherwise formidable defences-some diesel subs and air to air missles for one-are not exactly high technology. Besides, Taiwan is one of the Asian tigers. And Taiwan already is building/has built the Hsiung Feng series, the Sky Sword series, the Kwang Hwa class, the Cloud Leopard APC, and the Chung Kuo. Why not submarines?

Finn McCool said:

More evidence of the need for Taiwan to develop an indigenous weapons industry. Several things that Taiwan needs to fill in major holes in its otherwise formidable defences-some diesel subs and air to air missles for one-are not exactly high technology. Besides, Taiwan is one of the Asian tigers. And Taiwan already is building/has built the Hsiung Feng series, the Sky Sword series, the Kwang Hwa class, the Cloud Leopard APC, and the Chung Kuo. Why not submarines?

Click to expand...

Submarine technology is highly specialized. Just look at what happened with the Australian Collins class submarines. They had to import most of the knowledge and technology needed to build the submarines, and when they were built, they weren't perfect (which is an understatement). Today's submarines are way more complex than you might think. Getting that technology to build their own subs will be difficult for Taiwan.

One possible method of improving Taiwan's navy, & other armed forces as well, would be the scrapping of conscription & moving to an all-volunteer military. I'm sure you don't need me to spell out the advantages of this.

Maybe five or ten years ago, Taiwan's navy was very good. But I do think it is getting left behind by China's PLAN. And if the gap gets too wide, no amount of technology will compensate; especiallynas the PLAN will almost certainly have the same or similar technologies. (It is very nieve to assume the US is the fountain of all new technologies...)

As for Taiwan's yet-to-be-procured subs., I do tend to think that they largely have themselves to blame for this. Surely the Taiwanese, assisted by the US, could have commenced sub. building back in the 1950's? Had they done so, they would have a quite credible sub.-building capability today. (This, at least, is what their cousins across the Taiwan straight did(Although with Soviet, not US assistance!) & are reaping the benefits of this today.

As well the Chinese being potential adveraries of the Taiwanese, there are also the little isalnds, Diao Yu Tai if I recall,to the north which both Taiwan & Japan lay claim to. Only last year (I think...) patrol boats from the Japanese navy (Or was it coast guard?) forced some Taiwanese fishing boats to leave an area the fishing boats thought was their territorial waters. (Incidentially, there wasn't much made about this in the Taiwanese media... Had it been China, well, I'm sure you can join the dots & imagine the furore...)

Oh & hello to everyone on this forum thingy; I've just signed up today.

i would have to disagree on scrapping conscription. All volunteer armed force would not be nessecerily better, it all depend on the training, just look at the Israeli Defense force. Plus only large nations with high population (China, India) or very wealthy (US, Europe, Australia) can afford to do that. And unlike most countries that does not conscript, ROC is in constant danger of being involved in war, so the government needs a steady supply or men power. Nations like Israel and South Korea, which has similar security situation, are actively conscripting their citizens while not compromising their armed forces' effectiveness.

Plus, the benefit of conscription is that it gives more people military skills that can come in handy when war does break, thus lessening the amount of time needed to train the reserve soldier. Socially, it gives the people some shared experiences and helped to unite the society.

Pointblank said:

Submarine technology is highly specialized. Just look at what happened with the Australian Collins class submarines. They had to import most of the knowledge and technology needed to build the submarines, and when they were built, they weren't perfect (which is an understatement). Today's submarines are way more complex than you might think. Getting that technology to build their own subs will be difficult for Taiwan.

Click to expand...

I don't see much options for the ROC but to build them themselves. You can always get the plans, blueprints and design from other sources, and the "source" can always use deniability if Beijing complains.

crobato said:

I don't see much options for the ROC but to build them themselves. You can always get the plans, blueprints and design from other sources, and the "source" can always use deniability if Beijing complains.

Click to expand...

Nations in submarine building tend to reflect their design concepts in their products and technology. Each nation has its own distinct style in design philosophy, and if the Chinese see and get intelligence on any new subs the Taiwanese get, they can tell the origin of the technology that went into the subs. Once the Chinese find out who it is that gave them the technology, relations will become extremely frosty between them and China.

Conscription, as you suggest, does indeed provide military skills for all. But, unless you have programme of retraining to maintain these skills, the initial advantage is quickly lost. Nations that have a volunteer military usually have a well-developed reserve system as well. If you don't like the full-time military, you can serve 'part-time' in the reserves. And it is not, as you suggest, nations that are wealthy or that have high populations that can afford to scrap conscription. New Zealand, for example, (Guess where I'm from...) has neither a large population & certainly wouldn't deserve to be classified as 'wealthy', has an all-volunteer military. NZ's armed forces also have a very high level of respect for their professionalism. Even the US, after their experience in Vietnam, abandoned conscription. Volunteers usually ahve a much higher esprit de corps that their conscripted bretheren.

One fundamental difference between Taiwan & both Israel & S. Koera is that, unlike Taiwan, Isreal & S. Korea have extensive land borders with their potential adveraries. All manner of sneaky goings-on happen all along land borders... sometimes even fully-blown wars... Isreal also has a large part of it's armed forces on 'occupation duty' (Other people's words, not necessarily in accordance with my own views...) in areas immediately adjacent to it. Taiwan's security situation is nothing like that of Isreal or S.korea.

You also say that the ROC is in constant danger of being involved in a war. Do not forget that for much of it's existance, the ROC had, as a fundamental part of it's constitution, a section all about returning to 'The Mainland', beating up the communists & setting up shop in Nanjing. Perhaps the war the ROC is worried about exists only in it's own mind... And when the US had troops & other bits & pieces stationed here in Taiwan, the Chinese were more than a little worried of a US-supported, Taiwanese invasion of their country. (I read somewhere that China managed to soot down five ROC-manned U-2 spyplanes in the 1960's & '70's.)

But anyway, kunmingren, methinks we agree to differ on this.

cheers!!!

Pointblank said:

Nations in submarine building tend to reflect their design concepts in their products and technology. Each nation has its own distinct style in design philosophy, and if the Chinese see and get intelligence on any new subs the Taiwanese get, they can tell the origin of the technology that went into the subs. Once the Chinese find out who it is that gave them the technology, relations will become extremely frosty between them and China.

Click to expand...

Maybe, but it would be difficult to prove, unless the submarines were obviously copies of models already in service. Taiwan already has around 80% of the design details of the Hai Lung-class from the Netherlands - most of what was left out was the fire-control system. So if another party helped update the Hai Lung design where necessary, providing specifications for the submarine's systems, etc it would be possible to build a submarine which couldn't be tracked back to any particular country.

Since Popeye said to take discussion from that closed thread to this one, I'll post some comments here.

lilzz said:

US side also don't want a full confronation /w China. Why risk so much just to protect Taiwan. US is pretty a Anglo-white controlled country ,why they bother to risk so much of their resources and lives to save some asians in taiwan. No way. For what? preservation of democracy? yeah right, democratic values in US put aside after 9-11. self-preservation come first. Again why the anglos in US want to risk their countries and lives to save some foreign asians is beyond me. besides the democratic party is back.

Click to expand...

This statement is so incorrect it is beyond me. I agree that the US doesn't want a confrontation with China. That is a no-win situation for both sides. However, I don't see how it is possible that you can say that the US will not protect Taiwan because its population is Asian. What about the Korean War? The US lost 60,000 lives to protect South Korea. What about WWII, in which the United States essentially prevented China from being subjugated by Japan? What about the Vietnam War in which the US shed another 60,000 lives fighting for a nation that was totally Asian. And let's not forget that the United States is committed to defending Japan. That statement is simply not true. Do you know how many Asians live in America?

Secondly you claim that the US will give no regard to the fact that Taiwan is a democracy. Of course, other considerations-strategic, economic, military-will factor much higher in America's thinking such a situation, but the US will not take lightly to an attack on a democratic nation. Even if this does not factor into the thinking of US policymakers, it will certainly factor into American public opinion.

Lastly, you seem to think that committal to defending Taiwan (at least in some situations, I'm no fool or a neo-con ) is a partisan policy. This is patently false. The policy was initiated by a Democrat, Harry Truman. Every President since then, Democrat or Republican, has continued that policy. The most recent Democratic president, Bill Clinton, sent the USS Enterprise (I believe, not sure) through the Straits to deter the Chinese in the 3rd Taiwan Straits Crisis. And finally, I must remind you that the Democrats have only seized control of Congress, not the Presidency, and thus do not control military action.