ROC subs

[darth sidious]

Sale of Submarines to Taiwan Stirs Controversy in US


(Source: Voice of America news; issued Nov. 9, 2005)


WASHINGTON --- Eight members of the U.S. Congress have sent a letter to the commander of U.S. forces in the Pacific, demanding an explanation of his alleged opposition to the proposed sale of submarines to Taiwan. The commander says he does not oppose the sale, but is concerned about raising tensions between Taiwan and China.

In their letter, the members of congress from both political parties accuse Admiral William Fallon of contradicting Bush administration policy. They quote news reports as saying his Pacific Command has told Taiwan officials to reconsider the plan to buy eight diesel submarines. And they say that any such statements could further delay the Taiwan legislature's passage of a supplementary defense budget, which has already been five years in the making.

Admiral Fallon says he does not oppose the submarine sale. But he says while the budget debate continues in Taipei there could be other defense systems that the government there might find more affordable in the short term. And in a VOA telephone interview from his headquarters in Hawaii, the admiral expressed another concern.

"I'd like to see Taiwan take steps to increase its own defensive capabilities. I think that would be a very, very wise move that would be helpful to themselves and to us. At the same time, I'd like to not see them taking steps which would be clearly provocative to the mainland," he said.

One of the members of congress who signed the letter to the admiral, Republican Representative Rob Simmons, disagrees with that approach. "Taiwan's efforts to defend itself are going to be provocative to mainland China because mainland China wants Taiwan. And it's almost impossible to defend yourselves without being provocative. So I think we need to get over that little hurdle," he said.

Representative Simmons, who spent five years in East Asia as a young CIA officer in the 1970s, is in his third term in congress. He is a member of the House Armed Services Committee. The congressman says that because the locations of submarines are difficult to pinpoint, they serve as a deterrent to any attack.

"One can say that a submarine is an offensive weapon. I will tell you that, in the same breath, it's also a defensive weapon. And I see nothing offensive about Taiwan acquiring eight diesel submarines when the People's Republic of China is acquiring dozens and dozens of submarines," he said.

The congressman acknowledges there is a local angle to his interest in Taiwan's purchase of submarines. The state he represents, Connecticut, is home to submarine design and building facilities that could benefit from any Taiwanese submarine purchase. But he also says selling the submarines to Taiwan would be good for the island, and would contribute to stability across the Taiwan Straits.

Admiral Fallon says the U.S. goal is to dissuade China from taking any military action to force reunification with Taiwan. Tensions have risen in recent months as some politicians on Taiwan have talked about declaring independence, and some in China have renewed the threat of military action to prevent that. Admiral Fallon says with all the trade and investment across the Straits there are plenty of reasons for the two sides to work together and avoid armed conflict, and he says U.S. forces in the Pacific and the U.S. commitment to Taiwan's defense are part of that. "It seems to me there are many, many more reasons why the future ought to be one of cooperation as opposed to conflict," he said.

But China has been building its military capabilities in ways that experts say could make it capable of challenging U.S. forces in the region, and could improve its chances of success if it tries to take control of Taiwan by force. For now, most experts believe that possibility is remote, partly because the Beijing government does not want to do anything to disrupt the 2008 Olympics it is preparing to host.

But after that, and with several more years of military buildup between now and then, some experts say China could make a move against Taiwan - a situation they say both the United States and Taiwan need to be ready to respond to.

has taiwan made any progress on the sub purchase yet recently there is talk of spainish subs based on the French P-600.but I doubt they will risk angering china just for the 8 billion

[DPRKUnderground]

I hear they're going to be older Guppy-class submarines. Not the Barbel or Albacore. If Taiwan got their hands on a few Barbel or Albacore-class submarines, I bet that they could produce one hell of a sub based on that design. Just look at Japan's Yushio-class and the Netherlands' Walrus-class.

[darth sidious]

I hear they're going to be older Guppy-class submarines. Not the Barbel or Albacore. If Taiwan got their hands on a few Barbel or Albacore-class submarines, I bet that they could produce one hell of a sub based on that design. Just look at Japan's Yushio-class and the Netherlands' Walrus-class.

I highly dont that taiwanese will attempt to buy/produce the Guppy sub that thing dates from WWII. its actual a mordernized version of the American fleet boat comparble to the Russian whiskey but inferior to the british oberon or the Russian romeo. these thing are retired in most navy by the 70s.It employes a inferior hull form and ancient weapon system

barbel/albacore is also quite primitive now days designed in the late 50s they are about the level of Russian tangos. worse yet they have no noise reduction. If taiwan is desperate for a sub a copy of the barbel shoud be the minium

[KYli]

I agreed with Darth sidious. It would be highly unlikely ROC will attempt to produce/buy any of these subs. Actually, the best choice still remain for US built subs, since many Europeans are reluctant to sell submarines to Taiwan. But the budgets delayed still is not resolve yet, even it had. US seems to have second thought.

[DPRKUnderground]

I highly dont that taiwanese will attempt to buy/produce the Guppy sub that thing dates from WWII. its actual a mordernized version of the American fleet boat comparble to the Russian whiskey but inferior to the british oberon or the Russian romeo. these thing are retired in most navy by the 70s.It employes a inferior hull form and ancient weapon system

barbel/albacore is also quite primitive now days designed in the late 50s they are about the level of Russian tangos. worse yet they have no noise reduction. If taiwan is desperate for a sub a copy of the barbel shoud be the minium

I'm not saying they should copy the Guppy. That's just retarded. But they should make a submarine based on the Barbel or Albacore's hull. They were the first diesel submarines to employ the teardrop-hull. Japan and the Netherlands have used the Barbel as a base for thei submariens designs.

[KYli]

I'm not saying they should copy the Guppy. That's just retarded. But they should make a submarine based on the Barbel or Albacore's hull. They were the first diesel submarines to employ the teardrop-hull. Japan and the Netherlands have used the Barbel as a base for thei submariens designs.

You just could not based on the Barbel hull, but make a modern hull out of it. It will take years to study and modifield the Barbell, and even by then Taiwan will not produce any modern subs that are compariable with Japan. If Taiwan want to built for their own, they should get better blueprint from more modern subs and expertise form US.

[DPRKUnderground]

You just could not based on the Barbel hull, but make a modern hull out of it. It will take years to study and modifield the Barbell, and even by then Taiwan will not produce any modern subs that are compariable with Japan. If Taiwan want to built for their own, they should get better blueprint from more modern subs and expertise form US.

Very true. But the thing is the US only uses nuclear subs. And no European country is willing to help out Taiwan's submarine program. The only country who I think could who doesn't really have amazing relations with China would be Brazil, Sweden, and India. But India hasn't produced an indigenous design. Brazil is still researching, and well Sweden doesn't want to sell a submarine to country that will most likely go to war.

[darth sidious]

so builting you own is a goos idea
they have ship yards capable of maitaining sub and tooling for LNG ships can be converted for production. they also just got the Hy-80 steel

[FuManChu]

I agreed with Darth sidious. It would be highly unlikely ROC will attempt to produce/buy any of these subs. Actually, the best choice still remain for US built subs, since many Europeans are reluctant to sell submarines to Taiwan. But the budgets delayed still is not resolve yet, even it had. US seems to have second thought.

Yup. They'll get them through the US if they sort the budget out.

Darth, do the Taiwanese really have the capability to build fairly decent subs? If so can't they just buy plans off the Americans (or anyone else for that matter)? It would be a lot easier for them to keep their reputation intact - after all, who knows where such information might come from?

[KYli]

Yup. They'll get them through the US if they sort the budget out.

Darth, do the Taiwanese really have the capability to build fairly decent subs? If so can't they just buy plans off the Americans (or anyone else for that matter)? It would be a lot easier for them to keep their reputation intact - after all, who knows where such information might come from?

I agreed that US could probably find a way to make subs for Taiwan, but it is not as easy as you might think. US has never bulit a diesel subs for decades, so they have to start from scrap.

Taiwan have some capability to build decent subs, but they do need help from US. The biggest problem is US do not have blueprint for diesel subs, US even need to get their blueprint from Europe. Since Europeans naions do not want to get involve into this, this create dilemma for US. People will know what the design come from, because there aren't that much blueprint out there.

[darth sidious]

I agreed that US could probably find a way to make subs for Taiwan, but it is not as easy as you might think. US has never bulit a diesel subs for decades, so they have to start from scrap.
Taiwan have some capability to build decent subs, but they do need help from US. The biggest problem is US do not have blueprint for diesel subs, US even need to get their blueprint from Europe. Since Europeans naions do not want to get involve into this, this create dilemma for US. People will know what the design come from, because there aren't that much blueprint out there.

Taiwan can construct the subs hull but not much else. design is not a big problem they can use th edutch copy of barbel as the starting point. But where would the sonar, engines and combat control system come from is beyond me.they conld try to smuggle/steal some parts but that a bit risky. country that license produce SSK can be bribed to give some assistance. the cost of builting new ones in us rules out that option

[KYli]

Taiwan can construct the subs hull but not much else. design is not a big problem they can use th edutch copy of barbel as the starting point. But where would the sonar, engines and combat control system come from is beyond me.they conld try to smuggle/steal some parts but that a bit risky. country that license produce SSK can be bribed to give some assistance. the cost of builting new ones in us rules out that option
That is what I am saying, Taiwan could not built a modern subs without direct help from US. I doubt Taiwan could smuggle these kind of high tech without drawing attention, and it make no sense to do it that way whatsoever. Countries can be bribe to give assistance, but it takes more than that to built a decent subs.

[darth sidious]

That is what I am saying, Taiwan could not built a modern subs without direct help from US. I doubt Taiwan could smuggle these kind of high tech without drawing attention, and it make no sense to do it that way whatsoever. Countries can be bribe to give assistance, but it takes more than that to built a decent subs.

criemal activity can yield surpiseing results:D

the taiwanese manage to smuggle out several Mark-48 torperdo in early 90s

they also got SUT torperdo from a certin south east asian country that opertes 209 sub( this country has some bad relation with china in the 50s which led to masscare of chinese civilians ) think the price was some old Lst/Lsm

but unless they are reely desperate they wont resort to such measure

[DPRKUnderground]

I agreed that US could probably find a way to make subs for Taiwan, but it is not as easy as you might think. US has never bulit a diesel subs for decades, so they have to start from scrap.

Taiwan have some capability to build decent subs, but they do need help from US. The biggest problem is US do not have blueprint for diesel subs, US even need to get their blueprint from Europe. Since Europeans naions do not want to get involve into this, this create dilemma for US. People will know what the design come from, because there aren't that much blueprint out there.

One of the plans was to build either a German or Dutch design in the US, but they refused. Unless the US can get the blueprints for a good design, Taiwan is out of luck.

[Su-34]

Well, i don't think that the Taiwanese will pass a budget for purchase of 8 diesel subs. Even if Taiwan Navy does have 8 diesel subs by 2016, by that year, the PLAN will have a huge submarine force of 8-12 Yuan SSKs, 15 Song SSKs, 12 Kilo SSKs, 19 Ming SSKs, and 6-8 Type 093 SSNs. And that's just the PLAN sub force, excluding destroyers, frigates, FACs, and the PLANAF.

[DPRKUnderground]

Well, i don't think that the Taiwanese will pass a budget for purchase of 8 diesel subs. Even if Taiwan Navy does have 8 diesel subs by 2016, by that year, the PLAN will have a huge submarine force of 8-12 Yuan SSKs, 15 Song SSKs, 12 Kilo SSKs, 19 Ming SSKs, and 6-8 Type 093 SSNs. And that's just the PLAN sub force, excluding destroyers, frigates, FACs, and the PLANAF.

Taiwan wants them so they can block any ships or submarines trying to get into their ports. The 2 submarines that are operational would be used to defend their ports and to stop them from hitting their port cities and getting into the waterways.

[Su-34]

Taiwan wants them so they can block any ships or submarines trying to get into their ports. The 2 submarines that are operational would be used to defend their ports and to stop them from hitting their port cities and getting into the waterways.

LOL! DPRK, don't make me laugh!:roll:

How will Taiwan Navy block PLAN ships and subs with their current 2 or future 8 diesel subs when the Taiwanese Navy's subs and ships will be blown out of the water by torpedoes fired by PLA Navy submarines like Yuan class, Song class, Kilo class, Ming class, 093 class, and PLAN destroyers like 052B/C class aand FACs like the stealthy 2208 class. Plus, PLANAF aircraft like JH-7A and Su-30MKK2 will annihilate ROC Navy surface ships in a day.

Plus, PLAN's Kilo class Project 636 submarine armed with Novator 3M-54E with a range of 220 km and a supersonic final warhead will crush ROCN's Kidd class Destroyer.

[Sea Dog]

A link. for those that might be interested:

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/connecticut/ny-bc-ct--taiwansubmarines0225feb25,0,6169728.story?coll=ny-region-apconnecticut

It looks like Electric Boat wants the work. There's no doubt that they could build diesel subs. They just need some upfront money to get design work going.

[vincelee]

speaking from a point of view that centers purely on practicality, spending like 2-3 bil on 8 subs and support packages for a country the size of Taiwan is a bit....extreme. Honestly, the US hasn't built OR maintained an SSK for decades. And what's up with the 12 billion figure? At more than a bil a piece, they might as well buy a burke or two.

PacCom's boss is perfectly correct when he said that the money can be better spent else where.

To be perfectly honest, I wonder why some congressmen even talk, clearly they are just retarded in fields such as this. And working for the CIA doesn't mean shit.

[DPRKUnderground]

LOL! DPRK, don't make me laugh!:roll:

How will Taiwan Navy block PLAN ships and subs with their current 2 or future 8 diesel subs when the Taiwanese Navy's subs and ships will be blown out of the water by torpedoes fired by PLA Navy submarines like Yuan class, Song class, Kilo class, Ming class, 093 class, and PLAN destroyers like 052B/C class aand FACs like the stealthy 2208 class. Plus, PLANAF aircraft like JH-7A and Su-30MKK2 will annihilate ROC Navy surface ships in a day.

Plus, PLAN's Kilo class Project 636 submarine armed with Novator 3M-54E with a range of 220 km and a supersonic final warhead will crush ROCN's Kidd class Destroyer.

That's what I was thinking. But wasn't it a simple chain that kept the Ottomans out of the Constantinople harbor for a few weeks? Global Secuity says that that's what Taiwan will do. $12B for 8 diesel subs is unheard of, but I think some of that money would go into R&D.

[The_Zergling]

Correct if I'm wrong (it's been a while since I've seen the official numbers) but doesn't the 12B price include the PAC-3 missiles plus the anti-submarine aircraft? Or is the whole package 18.3B? I'm getting different numbers from a bunch of different sources, and I'd appreciate it if someone could provide an accurate number.

The price is still pretty damn extreme for a small country like Taiwan though, which is one of the reasons the arms budget hasn't been passed, or even really discussed in the legislature yet.

[adeptitus]

Correct if I'm wrong (it's been a while since I've seen the official numbers) but doesn't the 12B price include the PAC-3 missiles plus the anti-submarine aircraft? Or is the whole package 18.3B? I'm getting different numbers from a bunch of different sources, and I'd appreciate it if someone could provide an accurate number.
The price is still pretty damn extreme for a small country like Taiwan though, which is one of the reasons the arms budget hasn't been passed, or even really discussed in the legislature yet.

Back in 2001, the Bush administration authorized arms sales to Taiwan that was valued at $20 to $30 billion USD. To sum it up, the US wanted to sell older stuff for a large bucket of cash. The ROC government, after many discussions over 3 year period, decided on a $18.2 billion package (NT610 billion).

This arms package was highly controversial, so they de-linked some items, then reduced others, and got it down to $15 bil, then $14 bil, then $12.3 billion. It still failed to pass in the Legislative Yuan 45 times. It's a political hot potato and one KMT legistlator has just announced his "price" for supporting the bill:

http://english.www.gov.tw/TaiwanHeadlines/index.jsp?categid=178&recordid=91196
KMT offers government a deal on arms procurement
The Kuomintang (KMT) suggested on Wednesday that it would be willing to agree to a "reasonable arms procurement budget bill" if the government agreed to open direct transportation links with China.

KMT Legislator Ting Shou-chung (丁守中) proposed on Wednesday during the party's central standing committee meeting that the government should open direct links "in exchange for" the passage of the arms procurement budget bill in the Legislature.

While I am pro-KMT and support in opening direct links between PRC and ROC, I think this kind of deal making is what makes politics really scummy. Arms purchase deals with national security and should be evaluated based on need and merit, and should not be linked to commercial travel. =/

[FuManChu]

While I am pro-KMT and support in opening direct links between PRC and ROC, I think this kind of deal making is what makes politics really scummy. Arms purchase deals with national security and should be evaluated based on need and merit, and should not be linked to commercial travel.

Well that's political reality for you. Do you think the KMT would authorise the budget if they got elected, or only ok the non-sub aspects? Some newspapers have commented that they were fighting for such weapons before the 2000 election.

(Edited for politics)

[darth sidious]

But that's politics for you. No offence, but I think the legislators are still sore they lost in 2004. So they think they can push the executive around.One reason why Taiwan should have a figurehead President and PM (as head of the largest party coalition) leading the executive in my opinion.

Poltics is not allowed in this forum if you want to start flaming war like you did in the key forum go to CMF :nono: :nono:

[The_Zergling]

Arms purchase deals with national security and should be evaluated based on need and merit, and should not be linked to commercial travel. =/

Wise words. So let's examine the need and merit of Taiwan then, shall we?

I posted this on my blog and I'll repost it here...

Arguments against the arms budget point out (rightly so) that if Taiwan puts all of its defense eggs into arms that will not be deployed until the distant future (Confirmed to be at least 2010 or after) there is a disturbing chance that they will not be relevant in the event that they are actually needed (Taiwan's Ministry of National Defense and the DPP’s (the current ruling political party) Department of Chinese Affairs (2003), all unanimously predicted that between 2006 and 2010 the military balance between Mainland China and Taiwan will tip against Taiwan and the potential for war will reach a critical point. ) and also might prevent other more effective purchases from materializing. (Because of cost, among other factors)

Historically, arms purchaes have been solely within the decision-making power of Taiwan's president. However, an arguable point is that since Taiwan is now a democracy (a relatively recent turn of events, arms purchases wise), decisions should be initiated by Taiwan and decided in a democratic matter.

Taiwan's government should strongly reconsider the current arms budget, for the below reasons.

--Taiwan cannot survive in a prolonged arms race with China
--The weapons are not the best suited for defense
--The deal is too fucking expensive

It is still arguable that Taiwan will still need defensive arms considering China's stance on not rejecting use of military force to unite the two countries, so it's obvious that we can't just scrap the idea of buying arms. So what would be a better deal considering the financial situation and effectiveness?

From a purely defensive military standpoint, the submarines (which happen to be the most expensive item on the shopping list) would have to go. US apprehensions regarding capability and America's nuclear submarine-based strategy aside, the main reason would be that as of now it is hard to find a manufacturing country, and the extended delivery team (estimated minimum of at least 8 years) would mean that the submarines wouldn't be around to do the job that they're needed for. Even more discouraging is the probability that they would in fact be of little use against PRC forces.

Using the same concerns, the P-3 anti-submarine aircraft might be considered, but there probably ought to be a reduction in terms of both numbers and (more importantly) price. The current 40 billion NT price tag is far too high for the limited number of aircraft provided. Other defense weapons that could be a better deal for the money include rapid response helicopters, anti-ship mines, land based anti-ship missiles and SAMs are all legitimate useful defensive weapons and should also be taken under careful consideration.

Alternately, the money could also be spent on the strengthening of important military structures, such as airfield runways, fighter shelters, ammo and oil depots, communications, control centers, and other vital military assets. The cost of doing this kind of preparation would be relatively low, but would also serve to strengthen Taiwan's ability to survive a potentially crippling first strike. What's more this money could be spent domestically, helping the economy. (Although this is a lame excuse, as argued by myself against myself on this blog. God I do hate shooting myself in the foot.)

This kind of mindset is more oriented towards "defensive defense" and would arguably be a better direction for Taiwan's government to take.

Now what is the lame sounding "soft power" that I noted in the title, and what does it have to do with Taiwan's future national security?

Soft power encompasses several different but equally important elements. First off, Taiwan is well suited to serve as a bridge among China, Japan, and the US. With its advantageous geographic location, Taiwan can also be a hub for maritime and continental cultures. Something that is somewhat unique and is worthy of mention is the familiarity of the general Taiwanese population towards Chinese, Japanese, and American culture and language, making Taiwan the least disliked member among the China-America-Japan-Taiwan structure. (Albeit 3 big and 1 small)

Other sifnificant attributes to Taiwan's potential "soft power" is its (relatively) well functioning democratic system, free market economy, and arguably liberal society. If Taiwan plays its cards right the economy will flourish for a long time to come.

And most people probably wouldn't disagree that official negotiations between Taiwan and the PRC would probably be more effective in easing cross-strait tensions and improving national security than the procurement of weapons.

Taiwan's future niche depends more on the growing of "soft power", although it is indeed absolutely necessary that Taiwan maintain a certain degree of "hard power" (Which is where the "defensive defense" part comes in. The best route for Taiwan to take in defending against the PRC is to preserve air superiority over the island after surviving a quick and sudden strike, as opposed to anti-amphibious or aerial landing. If the PRC does not have confidence in achieving a quick and painless success in a first strike, the likelihood of one happening diminishes. (Note I say here diminishes as opposed to disappears.)

In conclusion, based on the above thinking, Taiwan's military procurement should not be limited to the 3 items proposed in the 18.3 billion arms package, especially given that the current package is void of immediate practicality. The MND and other qualified defense specialists should explore and consider an appropriate mix if weaponry that is more economical, and pragmatic in the defense of Taiwan.

And um... yeah. That pretty much sums up my argument against the subs.

[adeptitus]

Unless if the ROCN find replacement submarines, it'd find itself without an effective sub fleet... yesterday.

From a military point of view, I think ROCN should replace its aging subs with something newer, to add additional level of deterrance. The PRC is not Taiwan's only security concern, there's also Japan and the daoyutai issue. Also, if by chance pro-TI faction takes over and PRC somehow agree to TI status, I expect the TI nationalists to start eyeing Batan islands as traditional Taiwan territory (north of 20th parallel).

The problem with the subs is that its' too expensive. The US intends to make a bucket of money off this deal and that sure doesn't suit Taiwan's own interests. So can Taiwan build its own submarine with domestic and imported technology? If a low-population nation like Sweden (9 mil) with a smaller economy & military budget can build excellent subs like the Gotland class, why can't Taiwan?

[Gollevainen]

If a low-population nation like Sweden (9 mil) with a smaller economy & military budget can build excellent subs like the Gotland class, why can't Taiwan?

Building different military (or civilian) systems are not down only to size of the country and economy....those are factors, yeas but like in this case the more cruisal issue is that Sweden has the know-how, decades of experience in submarine building...Where as Taiwan's own warship design and building industry is somewhat limited. You cannot expect that Tawan could suddenly just start to design and build top-of-the-nocht submarines overnight?

[darth sidious]

Building different military (or civilian) systems are not down only to size of the country and economy....those are factors, yeas but like in this case the more cruisal issue is that Sweden has the know-how, decades of experience in submarine building...Where as Taiwan's own warship design and building industry is somewhat limited. You cannot expect that Tawan could suddenly just start to design and build top-of-the-nocht submarines overnight?

not quite because sweden will probely never go to war they can uses lots of inported thing in their weapon system Taiwan cant do that

also alot of swedens weapons are improved versons of forgein tech
Bofors needed heavy support from Krupp before they finaly produced some decent guns

[Gollevainen]

not quite because sweden will probely never go to war they can uses lots of inported thing in their weapon system Taiwan cant do that

also alot of swedens weapons are improved versons of forgein tech
Bofors needed heavy support from Krupp before they finaly produced some decent guns

well this migth be true in fighter Aircraft manufacturing, But generally i find that rahter odd statement, when most of other european war industry has so long been the one importing innovations from bofors, not other way around.

[adeptitus]

Building different military (or civilian) systems are not down only to size of the country and economy....those are factors, yeas but like in this case the more cruisal issue is that Sweden has the know-how, decades of experience in submarine building...Where as Taiwan's own warship design and building industry is somewhat limited. You cannot expect that Tawan could suddenly just start to design and build top-of-the-nocht submarines overnight?

not quite because sweden will probely never go to war they can uses lots of inported thing in their weapon system Taiwan cant do that
also alot of swedens weapons are improved versons of forgein tech
Bofors needed heavy support from Krupp before they finaly produced some decent guns

Taiwan does have access to limited amount of US technology. If we look at the IDF aircraft, it contains a lot of imported stuff from the US -- no point in reinventing the wheel. But you can always by the wheel and improve it.

I just don't like the idea of burning $12 billion to buy arms from someone else. For that much, Taiwan can build its own boat docks and shipyards, and train thousands of engineers to work on the project. Yes the Swedes have more experience, but you gain experience by doing it and not by buying the finished product. =p

[Vlad Plasmius]

Taiwan hasn't built any subs of its own as far as I know. They only have four. Two of the guppy class and two of the Zwaardvis class. The Zwaardvis class is their newest one, but it's 70s technology and been around for 20 years. Taiwan can't do much in the way of defending themselves with their current sub force. most likely Taiwan won't get anything particularly impressive and it'll be a decade before they get it. By then, China will have dozens of Kilos, Yuans, and Songs, plus a new type of sub or two. They'll also have far better ASW and naval capabilities. Taiwan is well behind China here. That's not good, either. That means China can easily take out Taiwanese shipping and enforce a blockade. It's hard to break a blockade if you're blocked by three dozen subs, a dozen destroyers, and whatever else China will have by then..