A Thai air force F-16 fighter at Wing One in Nakhon Ratchasima province. (Photo: Royal Thai Air Force)
The Defense Ministry has decided to push back the deadline for the United States and Sweden to present their final proposals as they vie to supply the air force with a new squadron of jet fighters. The extended deadline is set for next Tuesday, offering each country a bit more time to refine their bids. The announcement came from Defense Minister Sutin Klungsang, who provided an update on the progress in selecting new combat aircraft to replace the ageing fleet, as well as updating the status of new submarines for the navy.
The US is offering an updated block model of its renowned F-16 fighter, whereas Sweden is pitching the latest version of its versatile Gripen aircraft. Both of these planes already have predecessor versions that have been serving in the Royal Thai Air Force. According to Mr. Sutin, the extension was implemented to allow for additional considerations, particularly concerning offset policies related to economic compensation.
“We believe extending the deadline could bring about new and possibly more advantageous offers as both nations strive for this lucrative deal,” Mr. Sutin noted. “I’ve learned that both the US and Sweden are working on new proposals, which gives Thailand the chance to choose the most beneficial offer.”
Mr. Sutin also touched on a separate but critical matter: the engine for the submarine currently under construction in China. He mentioned that the new engine proposal should be ready for presentation to Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin and subsequent cabinet discussion by mid-September.
If the Cabinet gives the nod to amend the current contract, including adjustments to the production timeline and engine specifications, the project can move forward seamlessly. He assured that China would continue building the submarines as per their agreement, and payments would proceed as scheduled. Any previous concerns have been cleared up following discussions with Pakorn Nilprapunt, the secretary-general of the Council of State, indicating the project could advance unimpeded.
Regarding the submarine engine switch, Mr. Sutin reasserted that there should be no lingering issues. All expenses and completed work to date will undergo review to ensure everything is reported accurately.
When questioned about whether the procurement process would continue if Prime Minister Srettha were removed from office by court order, Mr. Sutin confirmed that the process would have to start over from scratch.
The original specifications involved installing a German-made diesel-electric engine, but Germany refused to sell it to China. As a substitute, China proposed an alternative engine that has largely been untested. In May, an agreement was reportedly reached, offering a solution to this impasse.
You can read more about this development here: Read the full story
Extending the deadline? Seems like a ploy to get more concessions from both countries. I think they should just stick to the original deadline and make a decision!
You’re right, James! It’s like they’re trying to milk it as much as possible. Just pick one already!
Well, if it brings in better offers and economic benefits for Thailand, what’s the harm in waiting a bit longer?
True, Ava, but at some point, you have to make a decision. Delays can also lead to increased costs!
Why are we even considering the F-16? It’s outdated and nowhere near as versatile as the Gripen.
Outdated? The F-16 has been upgraded numerous times and is still a solid choice.
Still, the Gripen is more technologically advanced and better suited for modern combat scenarios.
Also, don’t forget the cost factor. Gripen might be slightly more expensive in initial procurement, but lower operating costs in the long run.
But the U.S. has a stronger global presence and military support. That can’t be overlooked!
Good point, but we should be looking at the best jet for our specific needs, not just reliance on international politics.
Why are we even spending money on jets when our economy is struggling?
National defense is crucial. Without security, there won’t be an economy to worry about!
I get that, but can’t we prioritize other sectors first? Education, healthcare, etc.?
Those are important too, but a strong military ensures we can continue to build on those fronts without any external threats.
Sophia, defense spending also fuels technological advancements and creates jobs. Think of the broader picture.
I think Sweden’s neutral stance in global politics gives Gripen an edge. Less political baggage compared to the U.S. deal.
Neutrality is great, but it also means less backup in times of crisis. We can’t ignore the strategic support from the U.S.
True, but we also eliminate the risk of getting involved in conflicts that aren’t our own.
What about the submarine engine issue? Switching to an untested Chinese engine sounds risky!
Agreed. We need reliability in our defense tools. An untested engine could spell disaster.
Absolutely, Chloe. Cutting corners on something so crucial is just asking for trouble.
China has come a long way in tech development. It might not be as risky as it sounds.
I’m all for economic compensation in these deals. It ensures the money spent has benefits beyond just military gains.
Can’t we just build our own jets? Relying on other countries is always risky.
That’s easier said than done. Developing a fighter jet is extremely complex and expensive.
Plus, by the time we develop one, it might already be outdated with the pace of technological advances.
Why hasn’t Germany agreed to sell their engine to China? Seems shady.
It’s likely due to political reasons or concerns over how the tech will be used.
At least with the US and Swedish jets, we’re looking at reliable systems that have been field-tested extensively.
I think extending the deadline is beneficial. It allows us to get the best possible deal for our air force.
It’s not just about the jets; it’s about long-term strategic partnerships. We need to think big picture.
I hope the decision isn’t influenced by corruption. We need a transparent procurement process.