Oliver Hazard Class Frigate Acquisition by Pakistan

[Penguin]

Yup they probably have fitted some secret sensors for monitoring our positions and provide it to INDIA in case of war

"just because I'm paranoid, doesn't mean they are not after me"

 

[Quwa]

- Aren't the Mk32 ASW torpedolaunchers standard fit? IIRC they have been from the inception of the OHP.
- Harpoon refit would likely only require decklaunchracks, as the ship has traditionally been equipped with this missile (but the Mk13 launcher got made non-operational)
- 4x Mk41 in place of Mk13 would likely not be cost-effective as refit.
- a mix of Turkish (Genesis) and Australian refits would seem appropriate, but a lot depends on what the status of the Mk13 is and whether control equipment (the STIR, but also any below decks consoles for weapon systems) are still present or easily reinstalled/replaced.

They managed to equip the Adelaide Class with a 8 cell Mk.41

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

I wouldn't be surprised it the US is monitoring your position via your cellphone.

Thats why we only use Chinese telecom, more money for china

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

Class: Oliver Hazard Perry (Long Hull As Built)

Displacement: 2750 tons (std), 3605 tons (full)

Dimensions: 453' (oa) x 45' x 14' 9"; 24' 6" (sonar)

Armament: 1 OTO Melara 3"/62 cal. Mk 75, 1 Vulcan Phalanx CIS, 4-.50 cal. MGs,1 Mk 13 Mod 4 launcher,4 SSM McDonnell-Douglas Harpoon missiles, 36 GDC-Pomona Standard SM-1MR missiles,6-324mm Mk 32 (2 triple) tubes / Mk 46 torpedoes, 2 hangars / 2 SH-60B Seahawk LAMPS MkIII helos

Machinery: 2 GE LM 2500 gas turbine engines; 41,000 shp; 1 shaft, cp propeller, 325 hp retractable propeller pods

Speed: 29 Knots Crew: 13/206 (includes 19 air detachment)

Radars: AN/SPS-55 (surface), AN/SPS-49 (air)

Sonars: AN/SQS-56, AN/SQR-19 TACTAS (towed array)

Operational and Building Data
Laid down by Bath Iron Works Corp., Bath ME on 16 January 1978
Launched 4 November 1978, Commissioned 19 November 1979

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status: Active, Atlantic Fleet, Homeported at Mayport FL


Frigate Photo Index FFG-8 USS McINERNEY

now, my understanding is slightly limited on this subject. I am aware that standard SM-1MR missiles have not been in production for some time

will these Pakistan bound frigates get conversion to SM-2???

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

Its a waste of money . We should go for turkish naval ships like F-511 TCG Heybeliada or the TF-2000 AAW FFG instead oof rustly old ships who hardly have any life left.

i think the deal was hard to resist....They still have enough service life in them, they will be refurbished.

The overhaul will include the fitting of an anti-submarine missile system, modern guns and other weapons.

Though equipment received from the US under the excess defence article (EDA) arrangement are free, Pakistan will have to bear the expenses for the refurbishing (at a cost of USD 65 million)

(source --- http://dawn.com/2008/10/19/top6.htm)

that's not a bad deal!! Capability-wise, it will meet our stringent requirements after refurbishment and testing/re-testing/trials

 

[Nutuk]

Buying new ships is a costly business especially if you also need a number of those ships to fulfill the task.

Turkey for instance is in process giving her 8 perry ships a midlife upgrade to function another 10-15 years.
4 of the Perry's receive a limited upgrade with a new GENESIS battle management system.
and
4 will receive an extensive upgrade with new GENESIS battle management system, 8-cell MK41VLS, Smart-S mk2 3D search radar, ESSM missiles.

Maybe Pakistan can follow the Turkish MLU upgrade program as well.

 

[Penguin]

now, my understanding is slightly limited on this subject. I am aware that standard SM-1MR missiles have not been in production for some time

will these Pakistan bound frigates get conversion to SM-2???

USN has opted to removed SM-1 from its inventory (hence the Mk13 being disabled and the STIR removed from OHP). However, foreign navies still use SM-1, with the exception of Australia, which is upgrading some of their vessels to SM-2 (missile is compatible with mk13, but modifications in the fire control system and surveillance systems are required in order to ultilized SM-2 effectively). The US still supports SM-1 in use in other navies, whether on OHP platforms or other ships (e.g. french, italian, chilean/ex-dutch vessels).

It is not a given that OHPs to Pakistan will receive SM-2. In fact, it remains to be seen whether they get any kind of Standard Missile capability: it might just be that a RAM launcher will be parked in the space formerly occupied by Mk13 launcher arm. Or even no SAM at all!

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

Buying new ships is a costly business especially if you also need a number of those ships to fulfill the task.

Turkey for instance is in process giving her 8 perry ships a midlife upgrade to function another 10-15 years.
4 of the Perry's receive a limited upgrade with a new GENESIS battle management system.
and
4 will receive an extensive upgrade with new GENESIS battle management system, 8-cell MK41VLS, Smart-S mk2 3D search radar, ESSM missiles.

Maybe Pakistan can follow the Turkish MLU upgrade program as well.

Pakistan and Turkish navy have very close cooperation together, there are always Turkish navy delegations going to Karachi and Pakistani delegations going to Golcuk naval shipyards

Is Turkiye licensed to do the overhaul work on these ships? We should keep this in consideration, if there is further room for MLU after we receive the ships


i think it is crucial that these ships should have anti-aircraft SAM system, apart from the anti-submarine warfare which these ships will be armed with

 

[SekrutYakhni]

I fail to understand one thing....some people say that U.S. fits spy equipment on our f 16's, ships and so on...than how were we planning to fight with India during Kargil with our F 16s, other hardware.. consider other wars also....

Is there any anti thing to counter those spy equipment if any(tor)

 

[Gazzi]

I fail to understand one thing....some people say that U.S. fits spy equipment on our f 16's, ships and so on...than how were we planning to fight with India during Kargil with our F 16s, other hardware.. consider other wars also....

Is there any anti thing to counter those spy equipment if any(tor)

Saad, I don't even know if they have done so in the past, i'm just thinking out loud, if I was the US, I know I would do it. Maybe I am wrong and maybe Pakistan can dud any trackers, but with the US technology being so far advanced, can Pakistan really track these sensors. Even with China's help, I still believe this will not be possible. The US in technology is so far ahead of China also.

I just think about the 1998 Tomahawk strike in Afghanistan when Pakistan radars were jammed, these were US technolgies also.....just a thought, thats all.

then again, I am sure Pakistan would have had that in mind long before any of us here

 

[SekrutYakhni]

yeah...
nice reply...
I hope we have new radars from different countries or home made ones so the jamming becomes hard as the specs are not given out...

 

[Nutuk]

Is Turkiye licensed to do the overhaul work on these ships? We should keep this in consideration, if there is further room for MLU after we receive the ships

All our ships are overhauled in Turkey, our shipyards are advanced enough to design ships leave alone overhauling. The only case with Pakistani Perry's could be if these ships are given as aid they may have a provision that demands that modernization of it should be done by US companies. (nothing is really for free)

 

[Penguin]

All our ships are overhauled in Turkey, our shipyards are advanced enough to design ships leave alone overhauling. The only case with Pakistani Perry's could be if these ships are given as aid they may have a provision that demands that modernization of it should be done by US companies. (nothing is really for free)

These ships are given in aid, with exactly that stipulation. But that only applies to work to be done prior to delivery to PN. After that it is essentially up to Pakistan to decide where future maintenance and overhauling would take place. There is nothing stopping PN from letting some initial work being done by US companies (imho there is very limited need for work to facilitate hand-over to PN) and then later on - after ownership is attained - perform a modernization. Much like what is done by Turkey I might add (Genesis is done 'in house', not by US companies, while at least some OHPs ended up in Turkish service via military aid)

 

[pak-yes]

Saad, I don't even know if they have done so in the past, i'm just thinking out loud, if I was the US, I know I would do it. Maybe I am wrong and maybe Pakistan can dud any trackers, but with the US technology being so far advanced, can Pakistan really track these sensors. Even with China's help, I still believe this will not be possible. The US in technology is so far ahead of China also.

I just think about the 1998 Tomahawk strike in Afghanistan when Pakistan radars were jammed, these were US technolgies also.....just a thought, thats all.

then again, I am sure Pakistan would have had that in mind long before any of us here

Oh no as we cannot discuss the situation in this thread i am gonna make another if this is true it is very worrysome.

 

[Super Falcon]

it should come with full weapons and upgarded weapons too