Taiwan Navy News and Developments

buglerbilly

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE 5:20 p.m. EST December 23, 2014

I've always wondered if ASC's LCS/SCS would make a good addition to the RAN. OR possibly, MRV to replace the Armidales........these are good, well-armed additions to the Taiwanese navy..............something LCS isn't, well-armed that is!

SUAO, Taiwan — Taiwan on Tuesday launched its largest ever missile ship Tuesday as the island strives to modernize its armed forces in response to a perceived threat from China.

The — Tuo River — is the first of its kind ever produced by Taiwan and was touted by defense minister Yen Ming as "the fastest and most powerful" in Asia.

Armed with 16 missiles including eight supersonic Hsiung-feng III (Brave Wind) anti-ship missiles, it will boost Taiwan's defense capabilities against its giant neighbor, which considers the island part of China's territory awaiting to be reunited by force if necessary.

EDITED............

Article here: http://www.defensenews.com/story/de...nches-its-largest-ever-missile-ship/20826049/

Regards, BUG
 

Joe Black

Active Member
It is well armed with anti-ship missiles, but its own defence against AShM is minimal, relying solely on the Phalanx CIWS.

Taiwnese ships should at least be armed with a decent SAM likes SeaRAMs, Sea Ceptor or ESSMs.
 

buglerbilly

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #3
It is well armed with anti-ship missiles, but its own defence against AShM is minimal, relying solely on the Phalanx CIWS.

Taiwnese ships should at least be armed with a decent SAM likes SeaRAMs, Sea Ceptor or ESSMs.
SeaRam would replace Phalanx and has too few missiles..........SeaCeptor could be fitted around the perimeter of the heli-hangar............ESSM may be too big to fit in such locations? Maybes?

There is little space to put a podded 4x4 or 6x8 VLS cell due to the SSM and the helicopter facilities IMHO.

Regards, BUG
 

FormerDirtDart

Active Member
...SeaCeptor could be fitted around the perimeter of the heli-hangar........
the Tuo Chiang-class do not have hangers
While the picture attached isn't very large, you can clearly see there is no hanger door, nor is there sufficient space behind the missile area to fit a hanger
 

buglerbilly

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #5
the Tuo Chiang-class do not have hangers
While the picture attached isn't very large, you can clearly see there is no hanger door, nor is there sufficient space behind the missile area to fit a hanger
Quite correct, my bad but it doesn't change the basis of the argument, you have heli support facilities in there although to what extent is debatable, but you also have boat-launching and receiving side doors not uncommon to other warships and LCS..............

Regards, BUG
 

FormerDirtDart

Active Member
Quite correct, my bad but it doesn't change the basis of the argument, you have heli support facilities in there although to what extent is debatable, but you also have boat-launching and receiving side doors not uncommon to other warships and LCS..............

Regards, BUG
What boat-launching doors are you referring to?
The large doors on the superstructure appear to be exhaust vent doors for the missiles. If you look at multiple online images it clearly shows the doors are staggered port & starboard, corresponding with the four missile launch ramps.
The furthest aft small doors look to be insufficient in size (maybe 5 to 6 feet square) to support boat launching.
 

buglerbilly

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #7
What boat-launching doors are you referring to?
The large doors on the superstructure appear to be exhaust vent doors for the missiles. If you look at multiple online images it clearly shows the doors are staggered port & starboard, corresponding with the four missile launch ramps.
The furthest aft small doors look to be insufficient in size (maybe 5 to 6 feet square) to support boat launching.
Maybe's, maybe's not..........the small door seems to be just plain man-size access....

OK so let's presume these are missile exhaust doors, still severely limits access for any VLS missile system. Politically, Taiwan won't be allowed access to SeaCeptor and neither American system is in service with Taiwan, so they are back to their own developments. Do they have a small 20kilometre range VLS system of their own?

Regards, BUG
 

buglerbilly

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #8
More info on this new warship from Defense News.........

Taiwan Navy Accepts New Catamaran

A couple of interesting points:

The stern deck was too small for a helicopter, but a Navy source said it might be used for unmanned aerial vehicles. The ship uses an extensive closed-circuit television system to lower crew numbers to 44. The twin-hulled vessel can handle a sea state of seven (20-30 foot waves). The ship has a top speed of 34 knots and a range of 2,000 nautical miles.
Theoretically, that deck area could also allow you to install a 20+ kilometre range VLS such as ESSM or any Taiwanese system, IF they have one......?

The ship was built with Vietnamese construction workers sent to Taiwan for the build program. "Vietnamese were hired for the hard labor in the construction process, but were not allowed access to sensitive or classified systems or compartments," a Taiwan defense official said.

Vietnamese construction workers attended the ceremony in Suao and were identified by Defense News when they began speaking Vietnamese.

One argument among lawmakers and defense officials for a domestic ship program, which will include four-to-eight submarines, was the promise of new jobs for Taiwan's citizens. However, sources at the commissioning said the Vietnamese workers were "cheap labor" and that Taiwanese would not take these types of difficult jobs.
NOT too unusual in either Taiwan or Singapore, they both rely on foreign Third Country labour for ship-building and offshore semi-subs, something the South Koreans don't do or allow for their ship-building as far as I know?

Regards,

BUG
 

covert_shores

New Member
NOT too unusual in either Taiwan or Singapore, they both rely on foreign Third Country labour for ship-building and offshore semi-subs, something the South Koreans don't do or allow for their ship-building as far as I know?

Regards,

BUG
Hi Bug, just to clarify, what do you mean by offshore semi-subs?
 

Toptob

Active Member
NOT too unusual in either Taiwan or Singapore, they both rely on foreign Third Country labour for ship-building and offshore semi-subs, something the South Koreans don't do or allow for their ship-building as far as I know?
How does that reflect on the ships as far as build quality goes? As I understand it naval ships require higher build standards.

OK so let's presume these are missile exhaust doors, still severely limits access for any VLS missile system. Politically, Taiwan won't be allowed access to SeaCeptor and neither American system is in service with Taiwan, so they are back to their own developments. Do they have a small 20kilometre range VLS system of their own?
For air defense, I could see Sky Bow in a VLS type situation and maybe they could develop Sky Sword in a RAM or ESSM type deal. They could build something compact that fits their particular needs. Indigenous development also ensures availability of the weapons and its support systems, and it stimulates the development of knowledge and industry. But it can also be a very expensive proposition. And it seems to me that for a project like this costs are important. However it looks like a fine boat, and it's good to see the RoC building bigger vessels seeing as they are never lucky with buying abroad these days.
 

buglerbilly

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #11
Hi Bug, just to clarify, what do you mean by offshore semi-subs?
Sorry for the late reply, Offshore Oil & Gas platforms that have a semi-submersible hull, usually to allow them to be moved, or as as a flexible platform for deep water drilling & production.

Google and you'll see lots of pictures.............a couple are used for Defence matters as radar platforms, with one a satellite launching platform.
 

buglerbilly

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #12
How does that reflect on the ships as far as build quality goes? As I understand it naval ships require higher build standards.



For air defense, I could see Sky Bow in a VLS type situation and maybe they could develop Sky Sword in a RAM or ESSM type deal. They could build something compact that fits their particular needs. Indigenous development also ensures availability of the weapons and its support systems, and it stimulates the development of knowledge and industry. But it can also be a very expensive proposition. And it seems to me that for a project like this costs are important. However it looks like a fine boat, and it's good to see the RoC building bigger vessels seeing as they are never lucky with buying abroad these days.
Answer to point one, it doesn't reflect on the quality of the build..........there is nothing wrong with Welders from Vietnam or Thailand or the Philippines as long as they are trained properly. It's then up to your own Quality Control staff to make sure that the quality of the build is maintained throughout...........standard industry practice in SE Asia and the Middle East.

Second point, yes its good to see them build something like this BUT I remain puzzled as to why VLS defence missiles seem to be lacking in the Taiwanese industry? Seems very strange to me especially for their NAVY never mind for Ground Defence
 

Toptob

Active Member
Second point, yes its good to see them build something like this BUT I remain puzzled as to why VLS defence missiles seem to be lacking in the Taiwanese industry? Seems very strange to me especially for their NAVY never mind for Ground Defence
It seems to me that they are doing pretty well in indigenous GBAD systems. Their designs are supplementing or replacing systems at all air defense distances. These same missile's are used by the air force. But it seems to me (though I'm no expert) it would be much harder to integrate these systems in a ship, especially in a VLS.

If I want to fire a missile from the ground I put a launcher on a truck and a radar on another truck and bob's your uncle (I know it's more complex). If I want to launch from a plane I just hang it underneath. But if I want to shoot them from a ship I need to alter it drastically! Although it should be possible to integrate their missile's with existing launchers, and a crotale/chapparal like CIWS system wouldn't be a stretch. Integrating VLS systems seems a long ways away.

First of all installing a VLS into a ship is expensive when it's new, with an old ship it probably requires major construction and redesign. And when I see what ships they are building now I don't see them producing a new major surface combatant any time soon . So do they even have the capacity to undertake this work? (I know they built OHP's just asking)

Also maybe more importantly, where are they going to buy these VLS systems? Because here it gets political. The RoC has problems procuring systems far less incendiary than VLS. It is a very significant asset as it improves stealth and has other advantages. So if they can't buy it they need to develop it themselves.

And I have no doubt that they would figure it out eventually but you have to remember they have to build everything. At least, they want to be as self sufficient as possible and there are many areas where they're still lacking, AGM's for example. Furthermore, when you consider the fleet it starts to look a bit superfluous to spend all that treasure on a system that will have a limited impact on combat effectiveness.

A VLS would be used by the major surface combatants, and while they look pretty impressive. That fleet is actually pretty old and will reach obsolescence (for what the RoC needs with regards to the PLA-N) before they can be replaced. The Kidd's and Knox's are very old. The OHP's are good ships but are putting on years and the design is old, so will offer limited opions for further improvements in the future. And I just don't like the La Fayette's, they're just unimpressive and disappointing.

But that just signifies to me that a very mediocre ship is the best they can get their hands on. And if they cannot build something better themselves, maybe this new ship is a sign that the RoC navy is considering a more littoral approach to naval defense. Which IMO would be an interesting step. Seeing more small ships covering a large area with a lot of weapons capitalizes on their strengths. They can use indigenous systems and munitions which they can replace and build stockpiles of (in secret) as opposed to for instance US weaponry. Which is troublesome to procure, often comes with conditions and is always announced when purchased. They could cover this fleet with long range GBAD from land and specialized corvette sized ships for AAW and ASuW. This way they could have more units deployed that are cheaper to build and less painfull to lose.

(Damn that became quite a rant srry)
 

buglerbilly

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #14
I'd challenge that building VLS launch boxes is FAR simpler than building VLS missiles to fit them.

There is also the fact, politically, it would far easier, and quicker, for the USA to sell Taiwan the VLS launcher units than the missiles they could possibly contain.

If nothing else the USA could provide design assistance/guidance to the Taiwanese to achieve their own design and build.

The question of warships is an interesting one. Is Blue Water a real priority for them? Submarines, most defnitiely yes, but for Surface Warfare, not so sure? Littoral may well be the way for them to go in the short-medium term, then revert to true Blue Water designs subsequently (having built up the design/build legacy knowledge as a result of their Littoral efforts).

Even with submarines, the lots of small approach followed by a few true Oceanic versions seems to be the way to go, and, from reports published, the approach they may well take.
 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
In June 2018, two Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigates the ex-USS Taylor (FFG-50) and ex-USS Gary (FFG-51), were handed over to Taiwan. The transfer cost was an estimated US$177 million. The transfer of the ships includes the advanced AN/SQR-19 Multi-Function Towed array sonar. Taiwan had previously been blocked from acquiring the AN/SQR-19, and the transfer of the system points to an anti-submarine focus in line with the Knox-class frigates they will likely replace.

China Voices Fierce Opposition to US Arms Deal with Taiwan

In July 2018, it was reported that company from India and defense contractor from Japan have submitted design proposals for Indigenous Defense Submarine program alongside two companies from America and another two from Europe. As noted in my other prior posts, submarine capabilities are growing in importance due to the strong incentives by builders and equipment suppliers to ensure the proliferation of this under water capability in Asia. Submarine procurement in Asia is a long-term process, with multiple and diverse drivers, and does not necessarily indicate a particularly destabilizing or competitive trend. Across Asia, submarines feature prominently in the procurement plans of small, medium, and large navies. Yet, this is not happening in isolation; rather submarine programs are part of wider force modernization trend occurring across the region, where navies are replacing old and introducing new capabilities. China is, of course, leading the way in pursuing a broad spectrum modernization of its submarine force. It has introduced new nuclear powered and diesel electric classes, and while numerically its fleet has shrunk, assessments indicate significant qualitative improvements. While Beijing initially relied on Russian imports for its most advanced vessels, its indigenous shipbuilding industry is now fully capable of producing modern submarines. A US Department of Defense publication estimates that by 2020 this figure could increase to between 69 and 78 platforms.

Submarine Matters: Taiwan and Its FOREIGN Designed Submarine (Part 1)

Submarine Matters: What Taiwan's future submarines could be used for - Part 2.

In a ground breaking ceremony on 9 May 2019, it was announced that Taiwan’s eight new Indigenous Defense Submarines (IDS) will be built in a new facility in Kaohsiung harbour. Taiwan's Navy presently has four ageing submarines (and only two, the Zwaardvis-class purchased from the Netherlands in the 1980s are combat-ready). In recent years there’s an evident uptick in relations between Taiwan and Japan, as seen in agreements reached in contentious issues concerning maritime sovereignty and jurisdiction - especially a fishery agreement in the East China Sea. Taipei also voiced support for both American and Japanese advocacy on the Indo-Pacific strategy. At a geo-strategic level, the Japanese and Taiwanese have the most to gain by working together, covertly.

Japan representative to Taiwan says bilateral ties at their 'best' - Reuters

The proposed IDS, many suspect, is designed with Japanese input from "retired" Japanese KHI and MHI employees (and equipped with an American combat system and assisted by submarine integrator Lockheed Martin. The IDS’s US built Harpoon missiles and Mark 48 torpedoes are standard components of the Lockheed Martin integration of weapons and systems) will displace around 2,500 tons and the first of which will be delivered by 2026. Instead of a traditional stern, it will have X-shaped diving planes and rudders, similar to the design of Japanese Soryu class submarines. Flank arrays appear on both sides of the model, are similar to a picture showcased a few years ago.

IMDEX Asia 2019: First Taiwanese submarine to be ready in 2026 - NWI - Naval Warfare - Shephard Media

After facing many challenges in recent years, Taiwan has finally obtained export permits for the key technologies needed to design its submarines. The major breakthrough was the US State Department granting licences to Taiwan in April 2018. The Trump administration will provide key equipment and technologies essential for a modern submarine. The programme will cost NT$49.3 billion (US$15.9 billion) and it will take about five years to build each vessel, with a production rate of about one, each year from 2026 onwards.
 

Joe Black

Active Member
Many people linked the Taiwanese IDS submarine design to either the Soryu class. But if one look carefully, actually the hull shape looks more like the Oyashio class, but there are certain aspect of the IDS shape took some design cues from Soryu, such as having the Conning tower really closer to the bow section rather than sitting in the middle on the hull. Secondly, if one close inspect the X-rudder, the design seems to have been taken from the German Type 212/218/Dolphin(Type 800) rather than from the Japanese subs.

This is hardly surprising as the Taiwanese media has reportedly said many times that Taiwan is getting help from multiple countries, not just from Japan. The IDS design can really be seen as a mashed up of different sub designs from different countries.

In any case, I really hope that Taiwan will finally be able to get some decent modern SSK to replace their Guppy 2s and Hai Lung class.

On the other note, I could see the use of a dozen or more midget subs in the 400-500ton class (like the Korean HDS-400 or HDS-500) for the Taiwanese Navy too. Imagine having a dozen or so prowling along the Taiwanese straits awaiting for any juicy unsuspecting amphibious ships.
 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
Submarines have a role to play outside the ultimate task of preventing an invasion of Taiwan by China. Should Beijing prefer to impose a maritime blockade instead of a full-scale invasion, Taiwan’s submarine forces would play a crucial role in countering the blockade. Although the benefits of having a greater number of submarines also depend on the doctrine developed for their deployment, subs have inherent value as standalone platforms and as a part of an asymmetrical response to China’s growing military might.

The most telling advancement over the past classes of new submarines is in the realm of weapons payloads for these new North East Asian built submarines. Besides the trusty torpedoes and mines, North East Asian navies are also inducting new submarines with enhanced long-range strike capabilities. For example, more are armed with underwater-to-surface guided weapons such as anti-ship missiles. This complements the torpedoes with a long-range strike weapon. But we also observe a growing appetite in submarine-launched land-attack cruise missiles – on 30 April 2019, Korea’s Ministry of National Defense has approved plans to construct a second batch of 3 Dosan Ahn Changho-class KSS-III diesel-electric submarines worth KRW3.4 trillion (US$2.92 billion) for the Korea Navy. The second batch of KSS-III ballistic missile-capable submarines will also be an improvement over the first batch, and are expected to be delivered to the ROKN by 2028.
This is hardly surprising as the Taiwanese media has reportedly said many times that Taiwan is getting help from multiple countries, not just from Japan. The IDS design can really be seen as a mashed up of different sub designs from different countries.

In any case, I really hope that Taiwan will finally be able to get some decent modern SSK to replace their Guppy 2s and Hai Lung class.

On the other note, I could see the use of a dozen or more midget subs in the 400-500ton class (like the Korean HDS-400 or HDS-500) for the Taiwanese Navy too. Imagine having a dozen or so prowling along the Taiwanese straits awaiting for any juicy unsuspecting amphibious ships.
Sale of S-400 to China prompted debate on the potential use of the system for ‘offensive air defense,’ i.e. use of the system to suppress Taiwan’s air force ability to operate within its air space as its plane could be targetted by SAMs right after the take-off. With new submarines that are harpoon capable, the Taiwanese Navy’s silent service can contribute to their air defence fight by targeting China’s SAM radars. It’s not about destroying these radars but rather to force them to displace and move during certain windows.

For Taiwan’s sake, in addition to the build plan for 8 submarines, I remain hopeful for their planned local build programs for four frigates/destroyers, 10 to 15 3,000-ton catamaran frigates, and amphibious transport docks to replace 11 dock landing ships and tank landing ships.
 

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member

Finding information about this class is quite hard, but here are some more details.

 

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
Interesting...
This is of course because no country dare to sell submarines to Taiwan, for a certain reason....


In 1992 Taiwan wanted to order four more Zwaardvisklasse submarines from RDM, but it was turned down by the Netherlands government because of pressure from Communistic China.

China not only threated the Netherlands government but also promised to order Fokker aircrafts. The Netherlands obeyed china and the Dutch government prevented in different ways that RDM could export the submarines to Taiwan. ( 'Den Haag boort RDM orders door de neus' )
But china did not kept its promise and never ordered any Fokkers. Result: until today Taiwan has only two Zwaardvisklasse boats and two antique Second Worldwar boats, and both Fokker and RDM are history.
 
Top