Retitled: BRP Ramon A Alcaraz (PF-16) - ex USCGC Dallas [WHEC-716]

[ManilaBoy40]

let's pray for the best, but prepare for the worst. we have the money, so let us build up our defense OURSELVES, not wait for a favorable White House.

The reason for the delay of all the pending acquisition plans is due to Lack of Funds as reported yesterday from the ongoing AFP budget deliberation , anyway has there been any new updates regarding PF-16 arrival time frame  ...   

[davemap]

The reason for the delay of all the pending acquisition plans is due to Lack of Funds as reported yesterday from the ongoing AFP budget deliberation , anyway has there been any new updates regarding PF-16 arrival time frame  ...

It will sail tentatively Last week of December or in the month of January.

[tagalacion@tmw]

- The potential to embark Harpoons has been there since day one. It has always been more of a "when" rather an "If". What isn't clear is the timeline for this.

Is it possible the PN timeline to upgrade the ex-Hams weps/sensors is planned to coincide with the arrival/delivery of the Japanese patrol vessels for the PCG? 

Perhaps the thinking is:

Once PCG acquires the assets that can patrol our EEZ even during high sea states, EEZ policing will become a mere 'side-dish' in the ex-Hams menu (rather than as a main course) and the need to appear 'weak' (to remove a potential pretext for escalation) disappears.  These ships can then become the main surface combatants that the PN had always meant them to be - and to be armed as such.

All IMHO.  Thanks.

[miggye]

Is it possible the PN timeline to upgrade the ex-Hams weps/sensors is planned to coincide with the arrival/delivery of the Japanese patrol vessels for the PCG? 

Perhaps the thinking is:

Once PCG acquires the assets that can patrol our EEZ even during high sea states, EEZ policing will become a mere 'side-dish' in the ex-Hams menu (rather than as a main course) and the need to appear 'weak' (to remove a potential pretext for escalation) disappears.  These ships can then become the main surface combatants that the PN had always meant them to be - and to be armed as such.

All IMHO.  Thanks.

i have the feeling it may be more timed with the possible arrival of the Maestrale and Grecale from italy in the later half of next year. this way, you still have 2 major surface combatants at the ready while the other two are being upgraded.

[ManilaBoy40]

   The sailors assigned to operate both patrol vessels could be at 'risk' base on a posting from mastersmate at this US military site ...

http://forums.military.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/415197802/m/5000088882001

Recently an e-mail passd through about an ex-CG captain, now a project officer for one of the big contractors ( deepwater maybe ??), looking to hire ex-CG engineer ratings and engineer warrants to be part of a assistance team that will work with the PN to maintain those old junks ships.

If you wanted to get just a bit on the 'conspiracy theory' track you'd wonder ....

Who had any economic influence as to where or why old worn out ships were trandferred foreign, rather than being cut up when they were in too bad a state for continued use....

OK to put a foreign sailor at risk..

My squawk has always been, if these cutters are worn out to the point of being a liability and or safety issue to the Coast Guard, how, as the supposed 'premier maritime safety organization', in good conscience can the send unsafe ships off to another country and put their sailors at risk.
    

[Jester8]

Manilaboy40,

Posting another post from another forum which does not lead to any official document or reference IMHO is
a crap. Whatever that guy was saying even if he is an experienced coastie is practically his own opinion.

Dumale ka nanaman ng wala sa ayos eh.

Nagsimula ka pa ng panibagong thread? Walang kadaladala.

 

[gemini1]

^   Maybe MB40 doesn't have any faith nor trust those from the PN who inspected the ships, prior to acceptance. 

[charismabrix@TMW]

The way our Navy maintained the PF-11 is a testament that however 'old' those ship hulls as long as they serve the purpose of our Navy.  Let us remember that there are other nations interested to take their other sisters.  Nigeria wants more of them while , Bangladesh allegedly wish they can get them.

Having them maybe risky (according to their opinion), but not having them is riskier. We just have to weigh things out. 

[baybum7]

Whatever that guy was saying even if he is an experienced coastie is practically his own opinion.

Dumale ka nanaman ng wala sa ayos eh.

Nagsimula ka pa ng panibagong thread? Walang kadaladala.

Let's give the person on that forum the benefit of the doubt. Although the PF-15 and 16 were scheduled for maintenance prior to its transfer, so we're not sure if this is still true or not. A few people in that forum did work for the USCG, although concrete evidences are more reliable.

One thing I would like to point out though is your choice of words. As per forum rules, please do not start flaming another user in this forum. Manilaboy simply added what he saw from another thread, no point in attacking the user himself. If you are going to react negatively, then do it properly.

[Jester8]

Let's give the person on that forum the benefit of the doubt. Although the PF-15 and 16 were scheduled for maintenance prior to its transfer, so we're not sure if this is still true or not. A few people in that forum did work for the USCG, although concrete evidences are more reliable.

One thing I would like to point out though is your choice of words. As per forum rules, please do not start flaming another user in this forum. Manilaboy simply added what he saw from another thread, no point in attacking the user himself. If you are going to react negatively, then do it properly.

Anu po bang word ang ginamit ko na masama or as an attack to Manilaboy40 paki-distinguish nga po?
If you translate my words into English you would not find any offensive word on my post.

Well, reacting too defensive is permitted given that you can prove otherwise right?

Giving the benefit of doubt here in this forum must be backed by facts, thats the norm as far as I can remember Sir.

[jtrn1@tmw]

Manilaboy40,

Posting another post from another forum which does not lead to any official document or reference IMHO is
a crap. Whatever that guy was saying even if he is an experienced coastie is practically his own opinion.

Dumale ka nanaman ng wala sa ayos eh.

Nagsimula ka pa ng panibagong thread? Walang kadaladala.



To Jester8. I mostly read and rarely comment or post in this forum. Youre a new member but you seem to enjoy bashing other people in this forum. Are you a forum admin? Perhaps you should consider the intentions of the members posting first, and leave reprimands to the mods!

 

[Sarry15]

i have been a lurker here... what i noticed is that the title is misleading... It says "...Sailors at Risk"... Its my understanding that its a statement rather than a question without a legitimate source...   

just my 2 cents.

[franning]

What a mis-leading Subject. Please post some substance other than just saying because USCG retired it then it must be un-usuable.

[jammerjamesky]

I agree with you Sir Franning why dont just change the Heading of the Thread.

Lets look at the positive aspect here.After the transfer of the Ham and Dallas to the Philippine Navy the US Government obligations doesn't end right away. PN already learned from the past. Knowing that the contractors are still training sailors in the country, it is an opportunity to learn and harness new idea and learn new tech advances.

Wala na tayong pakialam sa mga side ng contractor kasi trabaho nila yan. Mas maganda nga kung nasa barkong ito galing ang na empleyado na kinuha na mag turo kasi alam nila ang pasikot sikot at paano remedyohan ang problema.

Why at risk?
 

[ManilaBoy40]

It will sail tentatively Last week of December or in the month of January.

    Thanks for the info, here is a crew shot of PF-16  together with some USCG sailors that I found on a facebook page ...