Spruance DDG transfer to allied navies ?

[contedicavour]

I've heard of a potential transfer of 2 Spruance DDGs to Turkey, although I haven't read of which VLS missiles would be handed over with the ships. Which other countries have requested these big destroyers, knowing that Tomahawks would probably not be exported ?

cheers

 

[Big-E]

"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)."

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

I imagine they will load the VLS with ASROC and ESSMs. They will make great ASW and command ships. It would be interesting to see if they can load up another attack missile to fit the launcher.

 

[Jtimes2]

In December 2005; two Spruance class ships were sold to Turkey (USS Cushing and USS O'Bannon) and one to Pakistan (USS Fletcher). Neither country uses VL Asroc, VL Standard, or VL Tomahawk.

Turkey may possibly be sold VL Asroc and VL Standard this year; alternatively; they may be sold VL Asroc and an adapter kit for the Spruance VLS that allows them to fire shorter-range ESSM Sea Sparrow SAMs. Turkey is not interested in cruise missiles.

Pakistan is not eligible for the advanced American SAMs and it is unclear what they will do with their Spruance. One possibility is they will plate over the VLS and install box launchers for Chinese anti-ship missiles. Another possibility is that they will just operate the ships as two-gun destroyers. It doesn't seem like a logical ship buy for them, in my opinion.

The ****'s have a Tomahawk-like cruise missile called Babur; but it can't be fired vertically. Maybe they will develop a VLS version and turn their Spruance into an Arsenal Ship? Who knows.

 

[Big-E]

In December 2005; two Spruance class ships were sold to Turkey (USS Cushing and USS O'Bannon) and one to Pakistan (USS Fletcher). Neither country uses VL Asroc, VL Standard, or VL Tomahawk.

Turkey may possibly be sold VL Asroc and VL Standard this year; alternatively; they may be sold VL Asroc and an adapter kit for the Spruance VLS that allows them to fire shorter-range ESSM Sea Sparrow SAMs. Turkey is not interested in cruise missiles.

Pakistan is not eligible for the advanced American SAMs and it is unclear what they will do with their Spruance. One possibility is they will plate over the VLS and install box launchers for Chinese anti-ship missiles. Another possibility is that they will just operate the ships as two-gun destroyers. It doesn't seem like a logical ship buy for them, in my opinion.

The ****'s have a Tomahawk-like cruise missile called Babur; but it can't be fired vertically. Maybe they will develop a VLS version and turn their Spruance into an Arsenal Ship? Who knows.

Turkey was sold ASROC on 9/13/1994, they were sold Standard on 3/29/1996, the conversion to VL can be completed domestically with a kit for Standard. ASROC needs no conversion. They do not have to buy new weapons.

If Turkey isn't interested in cruise missiles why do they buy Harpoons and want the new Harpoon IIs??? There are other cruise missiles besides TLAMs ya know!

Pakistan's will hold Harpoon IIs for a fact. They do operate ASROC and Standard missiles. The Pak navy isn't so tech challange as you would have us believe.

Please get your facts straight before spouting it off like it's the truth.

 

[aaaditya]

Turkey was sold ASROC on 9/13/1994, they were sold Standard on 3/29/1996, the conversion to VL can be completed domestically with a kit for Standard. ASROC needs no conversion. They do not have to buy new weapons.

If Turkey isn't interested in cruise missiles why do they buy Harpoons and want the new Harpoon IIs??? There are other cruise missiles besides TLAMs ya know!

Pakistan's will hold Harpoon IIs for a fact. They do operate ASROC and Standard missiles. The Pak navy isn't so tech challange as you would have us believe.

Please get your facts straight before spouting it off like it's the truth.

iam a bit confused here ,are you saying that pakistan operates the standard surface to air missile?

that is interesting ,can you tell which ships are equipped with this missile? or which version of this missile equips pakistani ships?(standard missiles have ranges from 60-180kms and are considered to be amongst the more potent of the surface to air missiles and also form a part of the us aegis system).

also can you tell me what sensors does pakistan use with these missiles?

if iam not mistaken pakistani navy uses chinese and french missiles(crotale) as of now ,and from what i know of the current sam fit of the f22p's they definitely do not have a range of in excess of 60kms.

 

[Jtimes2]

Turkey was sold ASROC on 9/13/1994, they were sold Standard on 3/29/1996, the conversion to VL can be completed domestically with a kit for Standard. ASROC needs no conversion. They do not have to buy new weapons.

If Turkey isn't interested in cruise missiles why do they buy Harpoons and want the new Harpoon IIs??? There are other cruise missiles besides TLAMs ya know!

Pakistan's will hold Harpoon IIs for a fact. They do operate ASROC and Standard missiles. The Pak navy isn't so tech challange as you would have us believe.

Please get your facts straight before spouting it off like it's the truth.

Turkey operates the SM-1 Standard; you are correct that it can be converted by adding the solid-rocket tail unit; however this is expensive and also, export of the SRTU would require another round of Congressional approval, next year earliest. The ESSM conversion is more effective and likely.

The ASROC Turkey operates is RUR-5, which can only be fired from the old "pepperbox" launchers. The VLS ASROC is RUM-139. It is a completely different weapon; the ASROC nickname was retained only to ease the program through Congress. The RUR-5 ASROC (which Turkey operates) can not be fired vertically, can not be converted to do so, and in any case is incompatible with the sonar interface on the later Spruances.

Turkey was invited to participate in the Popeye Turbo program with Israel and declined. Turkish naval doctrine stresses regional sea control (esp. in the Aegean); not power projection ashore. If Turkey opts for a land-attack missile in the future; it will likely be SLAM to maximize spare parts commonality with Harpoon......almost certainly not VL Tomahawk.

Pakistan does not operate Standard, of any type. They use the same, older RUR-5 ASROC; as Turkey...again, this is completely incompatible with the Spruance's VLS.

 

[Jtimes2]

iam a bit confused here ,are you saying that pakistan operates the standard surface to air missile?

that is interesting ,can you tell which ships are equipped with this missile? or which version of this missile equips pakistani ships?(standard missiles have ranges from 60-180kms and are considered to be amongst the more potent of the surface to air missiles and also form a part of the us aegis system).

also can you tell me what sensors does pakistan use with these missiles?

if iam not mistaken pakistani navy uses chinese and french missiles(crotale) as of now ,and from what i know of the current sam fit of the f22p's they definitely do not have a range of in excess of 60kms.

You are correct. The Pakistani Amazon frigates were upgraded last year with the LY-60N surface to air missile; a new type developed with much Chinese assistance. It is comparable to earlier marks of Sea Sparrow; kind of inbetween a short-range point defense SAM and a longer range SAM like Standard. It is fired from a 6-round (no reload) launcher.

Pakistan does not use Standard.

 

[Big-E]

iam a bit confused here ,are you saying that pakistan operates the standard surface to air missile?

that is interesting ,can you tell which ships are equipped with this missile? or which version of this missile equips pakistani ships?(standard missiles have ranges from 60-180kms and are considered to be amongst the more potent of the surface to air missiles and also form a part of the us aegis system).

also can you tell me what sensors does pakistan use with these missiles?

if iam not mistaken pakistani navy uses chinese and french missiles(crotale) as of now ,and from what i know of the current sam fit of the f22p's they definitely do not have a range of in excess of 60kms.

What do you think they are going to arm the Fletcher with, spit balls? The package has already been sent. Don't worry though, they are only SM-1s.

 

[Big-E]

The ASROC Turkey operates is RUR-5, which can only be fired from the old "pepperbox" launchers. The VLS ASROC is RUM-139. It is a completely different weapon; the ASROC nickname was retained only to ease the program through Congress. The RUR-5 ASROC (which Turkey operates) can not be fired vertically, can not be converted to do so, and in any case is incompatible with the sonar interface on the later Spruances.

I never said ASROC had to be launched vertically, ( please don't put words in my mouth) they have the launchers that can be mounted on deck and they can be made compatible with a software upgrade.

The Pakistani Amazon frigates were upgraded last year with the LY-60N surface to air missile; a new type developed with much Chinese assistance.

And they can't be used with Mk 41 launchers as you so intelligently pointed out so don't bring them up.

Turkey was invited to participate in the Popeye Turbo program with Israel and declined. Turkish naval doctrine stresses regional sea control (esp. in the Aegean); not power projection ashore. If Turkey opts for a land-attack missile in the future; it will likely be SLAM to maximize spare parts commonality with Harpoon......almost certainly not VL Tomahawk.

Again please don't put words in my mouth... I said Harpoon, it is both a naval and land attack missile. Never did I say they would use TLAMS!!! That was my whole point if you missed it.

Pakistan does not operate Standard, of any type. They use the same, as Turkey...again, this is completely incompatible with the Spruance's VLS.

And you made my point and contradicted yourself with this statement.

Turkey operates the SM-1 Standard; you are correct that it can be converted by adding the solid-rocket tail unit; however this is expensive and also, export of the SRTU would require another round of Congressional approval, next year earliest.

Sorry for my attitude, take it with a grain of salt.

 

[aaaditya]

What do you think they are going to arm the Fletcher with, spit balls? The package has already been sent. Don't worry though, they are only SM-1s.

can you provide a source to that statement? because i believe that most probably the ships would be equipped with the sea sparrow missiles and the ram missiles,equipping the spruance with the sm series would be quite expensive and iam sure will require a comprehensive upgrade.

 

[tatra]

Both in the case of Turkey and of Pakistan, I know they were offered Spruance class ship(s). My question is whether anybody knows for a fact (i.e. can substantiate) that these countries accepted the ships offered and agreed to pay for their transfer. Because AFAIK at least in the case of Pakistan, there has been only the offer, not an acceptance of it.

 

[beleg]

AFAIK thats the case with Turkey as well. There has been an offer but no acceptance as of yet. With the new frigate program of Greece starting this year , i am highly suspicious if TN will want to buy these old ships.They might be used as-is to replace the Knox class ships that are at the very end of their service life but i rather have the money spent for modernising the Mekos.

 

[Jtimes2]

AFAIK thats the case with Turkey as well. There has been an offer but no acceptance as of yet. With the new frigate program of Greece starting this year , i am highly suspicious if TN will want to buy these old ships.They might be used as-is to replace the Knox class ships that are at the very end of their service life but i rather have the money spent for modernising the Mekos.

I do believe you may be right about the Knox-replacement theory; Turkey is keen to rid itself of steam propulsion plants in it's frontline combat fleet and even without VLS Standard the Spruances would offer roughly equal capability (guns, helo, good point defense, Harpoon) plus the advantage of better sensors, and a fresh hull with plenty of tonnage for future equipment.

The MEKO's aren't in dire need of modernization....they are excellent frigates as-is.

I'm trying to think of how I'd improve the Turkish fleet and I can't think of what I'd do....they have a really good blend. When I was in the navy I did an exchange visit to one of their Perry class FFG's. They are a really professional navy.

 

[Big-E]

I'm trying to think of how I'd improve the Turkish fleet and I can't think of what I'd do.....

AEGIS!

 

[contedicavour]

AEGIS!

Or just buy the FREMMs ... both Greece and Turkey have expressed a lot of interest in these 140-metre 5700 ton multi-purpose frigates with 32 Aster AAW missiles (30 km range), and extensive ASUW and ASW equipment.

The MEKOs are good '80s frigates, but still have the goold old Sea Sparrow, not the ESSM. The Perrys are also old, with both Harpoons and SM-1 relying on a single non-VLS launcher.

cheers

 

[alexsa]

Or just buy the FREMMs ... both Greece and Turkey have expressed a lot of interest in these 140-metre 5700 ton multi-purpose frigates with 32 Aster AAW missiles (30 km range), and extensive ASUW and ASW equipment.

The MEKOs are good '80s frigates, but still have the goold old Sea Sparrow, not the ESSM. The Perrys are also old, with both Harpoons and SM-1 relying on a single non-VLS launcher.

cheers

True but as shown by the Australian experiance it is possible to fix these shortcomings in regards to the OHP and MEKO. It wouel seem quite worth while to do this for the MEKO give it is relatively young and such a modification should be cheaper than a new ship. I accept that the cost/benefit analysis on hull life to cost and capability may say otherwise.

Similarly the OHP could be upgraded using the leasons learnt (at some cost I understand) with the HMAS Sydney to reduce risk.

Just a thought.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Similarly the OHP could be upgraded using the leasons learnt (at some cost I understand) with the HMAS Sydney to reduce risk.

Just a thought.

The Aust OHP's (per HMAS Sydneys upgrade) are now regarded as the benchmark for that type - and for some in the USN what they "coulda/shoulda" been.

The Oz exp with the Mekos has also been somewhat fractious - but thats been more of a failure to leash the vendors and control the builds properly.

at one stage a number of years back it was apparently high on the options list to rebuild the superstructure (lead vessel) completely. its really been in the last few years that they have now been transformed into competent warships.

 

[Big-E]

The Aust OHP's (per HMAS Sydneys upgrade) are now regarded as the benchmark for that type - and for some in the USN what they "coulda/shoulda" been.

That was one hell of an upgrade. I think those in the USN who think they shoulda been upgraded at the cost of $1 billion x the cost of many more refits coulda/shoulda been shot. Whats great for a navy lacking AEGIS is not necessarily a good idea with one that has it in the force structure.

 

[gf0012-aust]

That was one hell of an upgrade. I think those in the USN who think they shoulda been upgraded at the cost of $1 billion x the cost of many more refits coulda/shoulda been shot. Whats great for a navy lacking AEGIS is not necessarily a good idea with one that has it in the force structure.

you might have ended up with CEC earlier across the board than later - I'm also referring to a greenfields advantage.

 

[Big-E]

you might have ended up with CEC earlier across the board than later - I'm also referring to a greenfields advantage.

I'm sure it would have, but at what cost? Do we cut back production of DDG-1000s to uprgade OHPs? IMO hell no! If it can't carry SM-3 and fill a slot in ABM defense it's not really necessary with AN/SPY3 comming out.