Thailand will buy frigate fro singapore

BANGKOK - Thailand's military, still standing watch over the kingdom's political upheaval, has been cleared to purchase thousands of Israeli assault rifles and a Singaporean warship.

Embattled Thai Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej, who doubles as defense minister, approved a package of defense modernization deals with his Cabinet on Sept. 9. In total, the package is worth an estimated $191.3 million.

Most of the package is devoted to a $152.8 million Singapore Technologies-designed amphibious frigate. The Royal Thai Armed Forces will also buy thousands of Israeli assault rifles and Russian shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles.

"The Cabinet has been lenient with military requests this year in particular," said Thitinan Pongsudhirak, a political and security analyst with Bangkok's Chulalongkorn University. "The last thing Samak needs right now is disgruntlement in the military."

Cabinet documents obtained by Defense News say that Thailand's military will contract with Singapore Technologies to buy one large, amphibious frigate - called a landing platform dock ship - for transporting cargo and troops.

However, the papers don't specify an exact model. The frigate will be paid off in installments through 2011.

Thailand has also inked a contract to buy 15,037 Tavor TAR-21 assault rifles from Israel. This $30.1 million buy will boost the Thai military's total stock of the bullpup-design rifles to more than 30,000 - replacing many of the Army's aging rifles.

That purchase is coupled with a $4.4 million order for 531 Israeli Negev light machine guns, raising Thailand's stock to more than 1,100. These will be partially paid for from a special budget tied to securing the violence-scarred Malaysian border, where separatist Muslim insurgents continue to target soldiers and civilians. Russia will also supply 36 Igla-S shoulder-fired, surface-to-air missiles to Thailand - with seven launching mechanisms - for nearly $4 million.

The contracts, which Thitinan described as "scattered," suggest the Thai military lacks a "coherent long-term procurement strategy," he said.

In December, when a military council still led Thailand after former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra's 2006 coup, it announced a similar round of purchases. In addition to overall modernization plans for each service, the military announced plans to buy Saab Gripen fighter jets, Chinese surface-to-surface missiles, armed personnel carriers and more.

"It's been a hodgepodge package in the last few years," Thitinan said.

The new package appears in part to address some of Thailand's topical needs, with the Negev light machine guns intended to fight the kingdom's gruesome southern insurgency. The amphibious frigate, according to Cabinet documents, will provide quick disaster relief. Singapore's fleet of landing platform dock ships - all built by the same Singapore Technologies firm - were among the many vessels delivering medics and supplies during the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami.

The deal, a modernization boon to Thailand's military, was inked under a shroud of political unrest. To approve the package, the prime minister and his Cabinet convened many provinces away from their Bangkok compound, still occupied as of Sept. 12 by protesters demanding Samak's resignation. At one point 10,000 deep, the protesters transformed the prime minister's stately grounds into a grungy campsite ringed with razor-wire and makeshift barricades.

After Samak issued a state of emergency on Sept. 2, no soldiers were dispatched to the compound, and many questioned his sway over the military.

Gen. Anupong Paochinda, the Royal Thai Army's commander in chief, has insisted that restoring peace through the military is not the answer. Still, Thai military leaders took a similar public stance just before they ousted previous Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra two years ago.

Relations between Samak and the military remain "smooth and close," said government spokesman Nattawut Saikua. But he added: "I say this realizing the leader of the last coup said many, many times he would not seize power."

However, Samak's tenuous hold on the prime minister's seat is not expected to affect the military's new arms package. source : http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=3722292

Singapore will buy more M-346 Jet Trainer from Italy

To bost trainng capability and capacaty on their own foghter pilot program, singapoe air force will buy 12 mre M346. This contract worth of 250milion euro. Italy's Finmeccanica has been awarded a 250 million euro contract by Singapore to supply 12 M-346 jet trainers built by its unit Alenia Aermacchi, the firm announced Sept. 28. Finmeccanica, teamed with prime contractor ST Aerospace and Boeing, expects to deliver the first aircraft in 2012.

"Successively, together with ST Aerospace, Alenia Aermacchi will make a contribution to ITS (Integrated Training System) activities and to supporting the fleet," Finmeccanica said in a statement. Finmeccanica CEO Pierfrancesco Guarguaglini said the contract proved "The international supremacy of this aircraft."

In July Finmeccanica confirmed that the aircraft had been selected by Singapore over the T-50 built by Korea's KAI.

The speed of the signing contrasts with negotiations to sell the M-346 to the UAE. The aircraft was selected by the Gulf state in early 2009, beating off competition from the T-50, but a firm order has yet to be made. The Italian Air Force has meanwhile ordered six M-346 trainers with the aim of acquiring a total of 15.

Finmeccanica has also teamed with EADS to pitch the aircraft for Europe's multi-nation Advanced European Jet Pilot Training (AEJPT) program and is set to compete with the T-50 again to supply the U.S. Air Force with a new trainer, a battle which will see BAE System's as a third competitor.

BTR 3E1 APC : Thailand brand new APC

As we know, thailand put order on BTR e31 APC from ukraine, On septem 2010 thailand navy receive first batch of his order (96 unit BTR E31). BTRE31 is very well armed apc and for thailand, BTR 3E1 didnt use Germany machine, as we know germany parlement didnt afford machine selling for Thailand BTR E31. Below is an expert view on this apc (source www. bangkokpost.com)

In some aspects the Ukrainian vehicle is definitely better than those from Canada and China, because it carries an anti-tank missile. Actually, even though the Ukrainian APC claims to be "totally new", it shows all the signs of being a development of the Soviet APC, but the Soviet BTRs were absolutely incomparable with anything else in the world - the Soviets were always the best in this field - but the Ukrainian machine is okay.

However, if it were my decision, I would rather buy the Russian BTR-90 because it's faster and can carry nine troops instead of six, which is the greatest advantage in my opinion. Besides, the BTR-90 has an 800km range on roads, while the Ukrainian machine only has a range of 600km. That's a big difference, I would say - 200km under combat conditions is really a lot.

In addition, I believe that the Russian-made armour is much better than the Ukrainian. But when it comes to usability, since Thailand is not going to fight a real war anyway, it doesn't matter what they actually buy. Moreover, it's a waste of money because any APC made in any country would be destroyed by a single RPG [rocket-propelled grenade] or a couple of shots from any 20mm, or 30mm rapid-firing cannon mounted on a helicopter or jet-fighter, or by a single anti-tank mine.

It could also be destroyed by a single Molotov cocktail - so it's vulnerable to opponents that can't afford anti-tank grenades, but can afford a bottle. So, the combat effectiveness of these vehicles is doubtful in any case.

During combat missions by Soviet troops in Afghanistan, soldiers always sat on top of BTRs [bronyetransporter, or armoured transporter] and BMPs [boyevaya mashina pyekhota, or infantry fighting vehicle] while on the road, because it increased their survivability. If an RPG hits it, or it runs over an anti-tank mine, the soldiers inside will be killed - with 0% chance that any will survive.

But when they are on top of the vehicle, they could only be killed by a sniper's bullet or by a machine-gun, and in this case they will not all be killed at once - those who are not killed will have a chance to take cover. That is to say that while these vehicles were initially designed to provide armoured cover for troops while on the road, this feature is not used in practice.

The conclusion is that the soldiers would feel much more comfortable, and would travel much faster, with less fuel consumption, on non-armoured vehicles. But because countries such as Switzerland, Thailand and Singapore have never fought a modern war, they still believe in the value of APCs, despite the fact that the concept behind them is flawed. The use of these vehicles by the Soviet army was partly justified by the fact that the Soviets were prepared to fight a nuclear war, in which tanks and APCs can provide a lot of protection to troops against an atomic blast, but even in this case their value was doubtful. But to use them in non-nuclear wars, where an enemy is armed with RPGs and similar weaponry, is just ridiculous.