Japan gearing up to acquire F-35 fighters

[Crusader2000]

Stealth jets would replace aging F-4 fleet

Kyodo News

The Defense Ministry is making arrangements to select the F-35 as Japan's next mainstay fighter jet, sources at the ministry and the Self-Defense Forces said Sunday.


The ministry will embark on the full acquisition process in December and prepare to make budgetary requests for the stealth plane in the fiscal 2011 budget, the sources said.

The ministry is looking to buy 40 of the next-generation jets, which can evade radar and are estimated to cost about ¥9 billion each.

The move apparently means priority has been put on strengthening air-defense capabilities as neighboring China makes efforts to enhance its air force by developing its own next-generation aircraft, analysts said.

The ministry, however, may postpone budget requests for the F-35 until fiscal 2012, due to a view in the government that a contract should not be concluded before the jet's actual capabilities can be confirmed. The F-35 is set to be deployed in the mid-2010s.

The F-35 is being jointly developed by the United States, Britain, Australia and other countries. Japan is not participating because doing so would conflict with its principle of banning weapons and arms-technology exports.

Japan initially wanted to acquire the U.S. F-22 stealth jet to replace its aging collection of F-4EJ fighters, which are still used alongside F-15s and other planes, but the United States prohibits the export of the F-22, and plans to halt production have already been announced.

Japan passed on other models, such as the U.S. F/A-18 and F-15FX and the Eurofighter, which is made by a consortium of European manufacturers.

The plan to acquire the F-35 is likely to be incorporated in new defense policy guidelines and a medium-term defense buildup plan to be adopted in December 2010.

The government led by the Democratic Party of Japan decided in October to delay its adoption by a year, partly to reflect the policies of its coalition partners

 

[Awang se]

Don't really trust the VTOL version. better stick with the CTOL..

 

[Crusader2000]

Don't really trust the VTOL version. better stick with the CTOL..

If, the JASDF does purchase the F-35. It will likely be the CTOL F-35A's. Thought, the JMSDF could get a few STOVL F-35B's for its future Carriers. (likely)


BTW The F-35B will be vastly easier to take-off and land. Than is cousin the GR-9 / AV-8B Harrier!

 

[stoker]

If, the JASDF does purchase the F-35. It will likely be the CTOL F-35A's. Thought, the JMSDF could get a few STOVL F-35B's for its future Carriers. (likely)

I will be very surprised if Japan acquires any other model than the F-35a.

Japan's 2 new DDH's could operate F-35b's, but the Japanese Navy has no operational need for this capability.

The Japanese navy's area of responsibiliy is basically the defense of Sea Lanes of Communication around the jJapanese homeland.

All the air cover for any Japanese naval units operating around the Japanes archipelago will come from its Airforce.

The Japanese Airforce has a vast arsenal of aircraft from frontline fighters, Air to Air refuelling , AEW and ASW aircraft, these would cover any scenario necessary.

So Japan has no need for F-35b's as any F-35 they acquire will be land based.

 

[Crusader2000]

I will be very surprised if Japan acquires any other model than the F-35a.

Japan's 2 new DDH's could operate F-35b's, but the Japanese Navy has no operational need for this capability.

The Japanese navy's area of responsibiliy is basically the defense of Sea Lanes of Communication around the jJapanese homeland.

All the air cover for any Japanese naval units operating around the Japanes archipelago will come from its Airforce.

The Japanese Airforce has a vast arsenal of aircraft from frontline fighters, Air to Air refuelling , AEW and ASW aircraft, these would cover any scenario necessary.

So Japan has no need for F-35b's as any F-35 they acquire will be land based.

Well, than you must believe that China and South Korea don't have a need for Aircraft Carriers either??? (or am I wrong)

 

[StingrayOZ]

Japan aquiring expedentionary assets would be a poltical hassle. Doesn't exclude it from happening, just makes it less likely.

Honestly they would be better with land based F-35. They are only looking at 40 odd, they will need to all be F-35A.

I don't know how operational the DDH's are of F-35. The F-35 is a very heavy thirsty plane. I would belive a F-35 could land (if the deck can hold it) and take off with a light a2a load. But thats different from operating an airwing off it.

They have all the carrier power they need from the americans.

 

[Salty Dog]

I will be very surprised if Japan acquires any other model than the F-35a.

Japan's 2 new DDH's could operate F-35b's, but the Japanese Navy has no operational need for this capability.

The Japanese navy's area of responsibiliy is basically the defense of Sea Lanes of Communication around the jJapanese homeland.

All the air cover for any Japanese naval units operating around the Japanes archipelago will come from its Airforce.

The Japanese Airforce has a vast arsenal of aircraft from frontline fighters, Air to Air refuelling , AEW and ASW aircraft, these would cover any scenario necessary.

So Japan has no need for F-35b's as any F-35 they acquire will be land based.

I support Stoker's comments and would like to add the JMSDF does not operate fighter aircraft which further substantiates a non-requirement for the F-35B.

Originally Posted by Crusader2000
If, the JASDF does purchase the F-35. It will likely be the CTOL F-35A's. Thought, the JMSDF could get a few STOVL F-35B's for its future Carriers. (likely)

The comment on F-35B for the JMSDF is pure speculation and unfounded. Best to stick with F-35 discussions for the JASDF since they will be the operators if acquired.

 

[Crusader2000]

Japan aquiring expedentionary assets would be a poltical hassle. Doesn't exclude it from happening, just makes it less likely.

Honestly they would be better with land based F-35. They are only looking at 40 odd, they will need to all be F-35A.

I don't know how operational the DDH's are of F-35. The F-35 is a very heavy thirsty plane. I would belive a F-35 could land (if the deck can hold it) and take off with a light a2a load. But thats different from operating an airwing off it.

They have all the carrier power they need from the americans.

Clearly, the 40 F-35's would be "A" Models for the JASDF. If, F-35B's were acquired they would be for a future platform. As the DDH's are not equipped to operate such aircraft. (at least not efficiently)

 

[Crusader2000]

I support Stoker's comments and would like to add the JMSDF does not operate fighter aircraft which further substantiates a non-requirement for the F-35B.


That hardly means it won't do so in the future!
__________________________________________________________________________
Global Security
Hyuga DHH

Quote::
Japan has long wanted to develop an aircraft carrier. As early as 1983, Japan called for the building of a 20,000-ton aircraft carrier, which could carry 20 helicopters or 20 VTOL Sea Harriers. This was not realized owing to opposition from the United States. The US Navy strongly opposed to the plan, and urged Japan to build more destroyers instead. The US Navy had enough flattops to counter the Soviet Navy but lacked destroyers. The MSDF's plan to own a light flattop raised Washington's eyebrow, apparently taken as a subcontractor attempting to strike out on its own.

That did not daunt the Defense Agency or the MSDF. In a Diet budget session in April 1988, then Defense Agency chief Tsutomu Kawara replied, "The Self-Defense Forces are not allowed to possess ICBMs (intercontinental ballistic missile), strategic bombers, or attack aircraft carriers." Until the 1970s in the US Navy, large-scale flattops had been categorized as "attack aircraft carriers" and small flattops as "antisubmarine aircraft carriers." Prohibition of having attack aircraft carries can be taken to mean allowing possession of small aircraft carriers.

With the decline of Russian naval strength, the Self- Defense Forces’ fighting vessels and aircraft rank second in the world, behind the United States. However, the Self-Defense Forces still maintain an ambition to develop an aircraft carrier and nuclear submarine. It is said that the plan to build DDH helicopter destroyer is actually another demonstration of such ambition.

Mention of a light aircraft carrier was first made in the 2001-2005 National Defense Buildup Program Outline (Mid-term Program) that was approved by the Cabinet in December 2000. According to a designer's concept shown by the agency in December 2000, the vessel's bridge was located amidships to bisect the flight deck-a ship design that was effectively identical to its predecessor. But when it became time for the fiscal 2004 budget request in August 2003, the agency came up with a completely new drawing, which showed the bridge on starboard to create a through deck-a design of none other than an aircraft carrier. The agency, however, insists that since this vessel is just an expanded model of any conventional flagship DDH, it ought to be categorized as such.

"The “16DDH”-class ship has attracted significant media and Diet attention, owing to its resemblance to an aircraft carrier. The vessel’s design features a starboard-side island superstructure and an uninterrupted flight deck, prompting observers to speculate that Japan may be eyeing a carrier capable of handling Harrier-like aircraft. Notes one analyst, “The configuration of the Osumi and the new DDH class indicates that Japan is rehearsing carrier-building technology to reserve for itself this potential military option; and thus, that it is considering discarding the constitutional prohibition on the acquisition of power-projection capabilities.” In the meantime, the 16DDH would fulfill many of the peacetime and wartime missions elaborated in the NDPG. As a wartime flagship, the 16DDH would serve as a command-and-control platform, coordinating the activities of other units while its organic helicopters conducted ASW operations. During peacetime operations, or “military operations other than war” (MOOTW), the 16DDH would join the Osumi-class ships for peacekeeping and relief operations, as well as the “diverse situations” Japan foresees confronting on the high seas." [Yoshihara & Holmes, Summer 2006]

It is almost as large as the Imperial Japanese Navy's Tone class heavy cruisers. It matches in size modern small aircraft carriers as Italy's MM Giuseppe Garibaldi (10,100 tons) and Spain's Principe de Asturia (17,188 tons). In terms of displacement, the two destroyers -- not nuclear-powered -- will be in the class of Britain's Invincible, a 20,600-ton light flattop, when they are fully loaded with fuel.
__________________________________________________________________________

Defense News

Quote:

One Japanese defense analyst with close ties to the Tokyo government suggested the new warship will engage in operations beyond those involving simple helicopters, and may be outfitted with more advanced fighters in the future.

"It cannot be denied that the launch of Hyuga is targeted at carrying the Harriers or F-35s in the future," the analyst said. "It is only natural given Japan-U.S. joint operations in the future."
__________________________________________________________________________




The comment on F-35B for the JMSDF is pure speculation and unfounded. Best to stick with F-35 discussions for the JASDF since they will be the operators if acquired.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry, the thread reads "Japan gearing up to acquire F-35 Fighters". Which, could refer to either the JASDF and/or JMSDF. Of course its very likely that the first batch of F-35's would be for the Air Force.

BTW Maybe you are not aware. Yet, Japan has approved a much larger Hyuga Type DDH to be called the 22DDH. (vs 16DDH for the Hyuga) Which, is suppose to be 248m long and have a empty weight of 22,500 tons. So, to put that into perspective the HMS Invincible is 210m long and has a empty weight of 17,000 tons and the INS Viraat (ex-HMS Hermes) is 227m long and 24,000 tons!

As a matter of fact the Italian Aircraft Carrier Cavour is 232m long and 22,000 tons. Which, means the Japanese 22DDH is slightly larger (very slightly) and its was design from the outset to operate F-35B's.
__________________________________________________________________________

Maybe you think the Hyuga and her larger sisters are really "Destroyers"???:duel


Respectfully.


Crusader2000

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[gf0012-aust]

]-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry, the thread reads "Japan gearing up to acquire F-35 Fighters". Which, could refer to either the JASDF and/or JMSDF. Of course its very likely that the first batch of F-35's would be for the Air Force.

The Japanese servces no longer have SDF in their names.

__________________________________________________________________________

Maybe you think the Hyuga and her larger sisters are really "Destroyers"???:duel


Respectfully.


Crusader2000

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/B]

They're not fixed wing combat carriers either.

1. 1 The decks aren't treated or designed for hot exhaust systems (STOL/STOVL)
2. 2 The bunkerage isn't designed for fixed wing combat aircraft
3. 3 The lifts are in the wrong locations for sustained fixed wing combat air
4. 4 The lifts have to be rated to carry fixed wing combat air (see 3)
5. 5 The lift dimensions have to meet the specs to carry fixed wing combat air. (see 3)

having a flat deck does not make a fixed wing combat aircraft "aircraft carrier" designed for proper combat roles.

lets not suspend reality when trying to make a point.

 

[StevoJH]

The Japanese servces no longer have SDF in their names.

Are you sure? their websites still have SDF in them as the service title.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Are you sure? their websites still have SDF in them as the service title.

They were changing the names to reflect the fact that they were no longer self defence services and that they were "proper" military forces.

this was being flagged approx 2 months ago in the DIET

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

They were changing the names to reflect the fact that they were no longer self defence services and that they were "proper" military forces.

this was being flagged approx 2 months ago in the DIET

‘Twas bound to happen eventually. I think we will see Japan regain her propper place in the region over the next 20 years.

 

[Bonza]

As a matter of fact the Italian Aircraft Carrier Cavour is 232m long and 22,000 tons. Which, means the Japanese 22DDH is slightly larger (very slightly) and its was design from the outset to operate F-35B's.

How do you extrapolate size into "designed from the outset to operate F-35B"? The points made by GF above seem to run counter to that...

I'm also curious, if I may ask, where your fascination with carrier power in the Pacific comes from? Not long ago you were advocating quite vehemently for the operation of F-35Bs from RAN Canberra class vessels, and now it's moved on to the Japanese with assertions like the one above.

As I said, I'm just curious. Are you arguing from the standpoint of increasing individual naval capability, or from a perceived Pacific-wide need, or something else entirely?

 

[swerve]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BTW Maybe you are not aware. Yet, Japan has approved a much larger Hyuga Type DDH to be called the 22DDH. (vs 16DDH for the Hyuga) Which, is suppose to be 248m long and have a empty weight of 22,500 tons. So, to put that into perspective the HMS Invincible is 210m long and has a empty weight of 17,000 tons and the INS Viraat (ex-HMS Hermes) is 227m long and 24,000 tons!

As a matter of fact the Italian Aircraft Carrier Cavour is 232m long and 22,000 tons. Which, means the Japanese 22DDH is slightly larger (very slightly) and its was design from the outset to operate F-35B's.

You have made several factual errors.

22DDH has not been approved. It is in the budget request for 2010 put forward by the Japanese Ministry of Defence.

22DDH is said by the MoD to be 19500 tons light, not 22500. Applying the same multiple as for Hyuuga (13950 light, ca 18000 full load), one gets a full load displacement of about 25000 tons for 22DDH. This could be understated, as it seems light for a ship of that size, but even so, it is not significantly, if at all, bigger than Cavour, which is 244 metres (not 232), 21150 tons light, 22300 tons standard, & about 27000 tons full load as built, with potential to increase to about 30000. It's about the same. 4 metres is not significant on this scale.

BTW, you seem to have confused the length of Cavour with that of Juan Carlos 1.

Note that 22DDH, if built as requested, sounds very much like an LPH. Space for 50 vehicles, large numbers of passengers, & 14 helicopters. Also command facilities, & underway fuel replenishment facilities, presumably for escorts.

 

[Crusader2000]

Clearly, Japan has expressed an interest in Aircraft Carriers for decades. Plus, the fact that it has designed Aircraft Carrier Capable Ships from the Oosumi LSD's to the Hyuga ASW Carriers (16DDH), to the even larger forthcoming 22DDH's. So, for some members to keep discounting Japanese Carriers Ambitions holds little water. Especially, when source after source is available spelling out such ambitions.



Further, that ambition is only likely to increase. With the advent of China building Large Aircraft Carriers and interest in Carriers being expressed by South Korea.


This whole idea that Japan is not interested in Aircraft Carriers is respectfully laughable....nfloorl:

 

[Crusader2000]

The Japanese servces no longer have SDF in their names.



They're not fixed wing combat carriers either.

1. 1 The decks aren't treated or designed for hot exhaust systems (STOL/STOVL)
2. 2 The bunkerage isn't designed for fixed wing combat aircraft
3. 3 The lifts are in the wrong locations for sustained fixed wing combat air
4. 4 The lifts have to be rated to carry fixed wing combat air (see 3)
5. 5 The lift dimensions have to meet the specs to carry fixed wing combat air. (see pt 3)

having a flat deck does not make a fixed wing combat aircraft "aircraft carrier" designed for proper combat roles.

lets not suspend reality when trying to make a point.

Let's cut to the chase!

So, are you saying that Japan has no Carrier Ambitions and is not likely to build Aircraft Carriers design to operate fixed wing aircraft????

 

[jaffo4011]

i thought that this competition was to include the typhoon?....or is that for a different requirement within the japanese air force?

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

i thought that this competition was to include the typhoon?....or is that for a different requirement within the japanese air force?

I thought they had already chosen Typhoon as an F-4 replacement, not sure how many of those birds will still be airworthy by the time the F-35 is available in large numbers.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Let's cut to the chase!

So, are you saying that Japan has no Carrier Ambitions and is not likely to build Aircraft Carriers design to operate fixed wing aircraft????

I think the point is, "ambitions" aside the vessels you have sighted are not carriers. They may be technically capable of deploying a few STOVL fast movers, but they are NOT dedicated carriers. GF has pretty clearly explained the difference.