the million that we are going to pay is just for a platform with no weapons on it. the ship will be stripped of its mein armament before it is deleviered to PN, it includes guns and missile launch platform that was its main edge over F22p! all the weapon systems and there control equipment will have to be installed.
This is a blatant non-truth that has been proven wrong time and time again and which you keep perpetuating nonetheless. Witness all earlier transfers of Perry and other destroyer and frigate class ships to foreign navies. Besides, it makes no military and budget sense to the suppliers i.e. the Americans
Stripping a ship prior to transfer would costs the US money and would not help the receiving US-ally (and therefor not the US).
more over in addition to the million, it is estimated that an equal amount will have to be spend for weapon integration and upgrades that will make it cost something around 120-130 million dollar.
Again, blatant non-truth. 65 million dollars would be needed to make a 'hot transfer' of e.g. McInerney to PN. Essentially, the ship is handed over directly from one navy user to the other navy user with no non-active period in between. And as you just pointed out before: there is no upgradeprogram envisionedas yet. So what are you going on about contradicting yourself from one sentence to the next?
even though it is still cheaper then the F22p but here we must consider the value and not just the cost! the OPH are a good 20-25 year old and will be kept floating for anoth seven to ten years whereas the F22p are here to stay for good time. now i dont think that it is a wise choice to spend some 130 million on a platform that will service for some ten years then spending 170 on the one that can be good for as long as 25-30 years!
Of course
1) it is 65million rather than 130 million dollars.
2) there are 6 ships to replace, of which F22P will account for 4, leaving 2 that the Perry's coudl usefully replace in the interim.
3) 4-6 perrys plus 4 F22p is 8-10 ships, which is a fleet
expansion in the short run.
4) 4 new ships e.g. more F22P or MILGEM or other could be built in Pakistan to replace the Perry's in due course (but: the new ships arent'going to be built IN PAKISTAN overnight). You cannot uncouple frigate purchases from the development of a domestic naval building capability
the F22p is a modren frigate and is equipped with good modren weapon and control systems! the CIWS onboard is reported amont the Dutch Goalkeeper class, the SAM system is also fine! the main gun is modified for stelth feature and the list goes on...
As is, it is a poorer ASW ships than Perry, which has better sonar and 2 SH-60 helicopters. Also Perry's main radars and EW and communication and combat management equipment are at least equal to if not better than thoe of F22P
moreover sir what about choppers onboard, no news of aanything comming form US for the OHP so what will be our choices in this dept! are we going to adopt the old sea king platform that the PN is already planning to retire??
Australia and Spain operate SH60 SeaHawks on their Perry's. Turkey - like Taiwan - got SH70B2 Seahawks to use on theirs. Egypt and Poland got Kaman SH2G Seasprite for theirs. Bahrein however uses Bo-105, which it already used on its much smaller missile corvettes.
I see no reason whatsoever why PN couldn't use its current Westland SeaLynxes or Aérospatiale SA-319B Alouette III from a Perry, or even the Harbin Z-9EC newly acquired from china in case there is no seperate helicopter purchase from the US.
