Ship Transfers

rickusn

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
Proposed Ship Transfers

http://www.defenselink.mil/dodgc/olc/docs/May9.pdf

"SEC. ___ . TRANSFER OF NAVAL VESSELS TO CERTAIN FOREIGN RECIPIENTS.
(a) TRANSFERS BY GRANT.—The President is authorized to transfer vessels to foreign recipients on a grant basis under section 516 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2321j), as amended, as follows:
(1) GREECE.—To the Government of Greece, the OSPREY class minehunter coastal ship PELICAN (MHC-53).
(2) EGYPT.—To the Government of Egypt, the OSPREY class minehunter coastal ships CARDINAL (MHC-60) and RAVEN (MHC-61).
(3) PAKISTAN.—To the Government of Pakistan, the SPRUANCE class destroyer ship FLETCHER (DD-992).
(4) TURKEY.—To the Government of Turkey, the SPRUANCE class destroyer ship CUSHING (DD-985).
(b) TRANSFERS BY SALE.—The President is authorized to transfer vessels to foreign recipients on a sale basis under section 21 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2761), as amended, as follows:
(1) INDIA.—To the Government of India, the AUSTIN class amphibious transport dock ship TRENTON (LPD-14).
(2) GREECE.—To the Government of Greece, the OSPREY class minehunter coastal ship HERON (MHC-52).
(3) TURKEY.—To the Government of Turkey, the SPRUANCE class destroyer ship O'BANNON (DD-987)."
 
Last edited:

rickusn

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #3
All these ships are still in-commission in the USN with the exception of Fletcher.

OTOH I understand its pretty much a done deal. I believe the FY2006 defense bill has to be completed first.

All the above ships(except the already retired Fletcher) are slated for retirement from the USN starting in September and continuing into 2006.
 

tatra

New Member
Verified Defense Pro
Fletcher was offered to Chili in 2003, while still in service. Guess it was to expensive to operate for them. Has there been any word from PN on the offer?
 

Supe

New Member
Nice if you can get ships for free. I understand the USN is retiring the Spruance class of ships. I'm sure it would make great additions to Governments that want to 'flex', especially if they receive the VLS optioned versions. Ahh the benefits of U.S largesse. I have read that the USN do run their ships hard though... so that implies some work would need to be done on them.

Why are the Turks and Greeks still receiving what appears to be defence handouts? Surely they now have the economic capacity to fend for themselves. I've often wondered if Australia pays through the nose for its equipment purchases... on the surface we don't seem to be getting the same amount of equipment other nations do.
 

rickusn

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #6
"Has there been any word from PN on the offer?"

Not that I have seen.
 

rickusn

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #8
In the past they have operated ex-UK cruisers basically as Fleet Flag ships.

I see the same here although a Spruance is quite capable in many warfare areas as well.
 

tatra

New Member
Verified Defense Pro
If the Fletcher is transferred to PN, it will have Sea Sparrow launcher in the rear and a 8x8 Mk41 (61 cells plus crane) forward. PN will not likely get VL Tomahawk to go with this ship. It seems silly to load her up with VL ESSM only (244 missiles if using quadpacks). So what else would there be available for the Mk41? Some VL Asroc maybe and VL SM2-MR. Does a basic Spruance class ship have the capability to launch and control SM2-MR? If not, what changes would have to be made to the ship (software, hardware - notably sensors) in order to effetively use SM2-MR? Come to think of it, loading up with ESSM might also require changes to optimize operational effeciveness with this missile...
 

Nautilus

New Member
Supe said:
Why are the Turks and Greeks still receiving what appears to be defence handouts? Surely they now have the economic capacity to fend for themselves. I've often wondered if Australia pays through the nose for its equipment purchases... on the surface we don't seem to be getting the same amount of equipment other nations do.
Not too long ago, the US sent a delegation to Turkey to negotiate use of air bases and land supply lines for the Iraq war, effectively saving the USN to go through the Suez canal and around Saudi Arabia. Back then the Turks didn't exactly make it easy - wouldn't be surprised if the US offered these ships to get a deal ;)
 
Top