FormerDirtDart
Well-Known Member
Well, obviously a V-22 will fit on the aft elevator on the Hyuga's
Japanese Maritime Self Defense Force Thread
- Thread starter gf0012-aust
- Start date
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Neat picture and answers the question. I have never seen a V-22 folded up before, pretty cool.
Japan has got their first 5 V-22s contracted, with an overall goal for 17 airframes. The initial Japenese request is for 17 aircraft and 40 engines.
First five Japanese V-22s placed on contract - IHS Jane's 360.
The seeds of their amphibious units have been planted, they'll have one hell of a bird to deploy from.
First five Japanese V-22s placed on contract - IHS Jane's 360.
The seeds of their amphibious units have been planted, they'll have one hell of a bird to deploy from.
Second Izumo class flat top - named Kaga - has been launched.
Japan launches second Izumo-class helicopter carrier - IHS Jane's 360
Seems an ideal capability to be regenerating, what with the number of subs popping up in navies all over SEA. I'm sure they'll be out to good use as a mixed ASW carrier/amphib.
Japan launches second Izumo-class helicopter carrier - IHS Jane's 360
Seems an ideal capability to be regenerating, what with the number of subs popping up in navies all over SEA. I'm sure they'll be out to good use as a mixed ASW carrier/amphib.
t68
Well-Known Member
Intersting to see from that article the crewing requirments increased from 470 to 520, wonder if that got more to with DC needs or something else.
Probably not. However, from their latest Defence budget report, they are making preliminary study on multi role vessels similar to JC1 or Mistral and be capable to operate V-22. That will be surely strong enough to operate F-35.
Description on the Multi role vessel is on page 13 of the pdf.
http://www.mod.go.jp/j/yosan/2015/yosan.pdf
Which would be good if there was an English language version of it for those of us who cannot read and / or speak Japanese.
Google translate is perfectly adequate - but it won't tell you much, because the text says very little. You can guess the captions to the photos, & the main bit says -
"Multi-function that combines command and control and large-scale transport and aviation operational capability in amphibious operations, etc.
Overseas research in order to consider the modalities of vessels (5 one million yen)"
The interesting bit is the drawing.
Cool thanks. I had forgotten about that, so my apologies.
White Water
New Member
Japan MOD English websites
If you access the MOD.go.jp website, you can click a button that will take you to an English version. It is located at the top and about 1/3 from the right. The URL below will take you directly to English
mod.go.jp/e/index.html
2015 budget in English
mod.go.jp/e/d_budget/pdf/270414.pdf
There already is a budget request for 2016 in Japanese:
mod.go.jp/j/yosan/2016/gaisan.pdf
Small increases everywhere to keep everyone satisfied. Main ones are one AEGIS DDG (8200t empty, increase of 500t over previous Atago class) and one Soryu class sub (LiI battery, no AIP). Not sure ChinComs will be impressed.:
If you access the MOD.go.jp website, you can click a button that will take you to an English version. It is located at the top and about 1/3 from the right. The URL below will take you directly to English
mod.go.jp/e/index.html
2015 budget in English
mod.go.jp/e/d_budget/pdf/270414.pdf
There already is a budget request for 2016 in Japanese:
mod.go.jp/j/yosan/2016/gaisan.pdf
Small increases everywhere to keep everyone satisfied. Main ones are one AEGIS DDG (8200t empty, increase of 500t over previous Atago class) and one Soryu class sub (LiI battery, no AIP). Not sure ChinComs will be impressed.
:Very interesting thanks for posting that guys. I have long been a fan of Japanese kit and in particular the thinking behind it.
I have questioned the way our government (current and previous) has handled SEA1000, not because i have an issue with the Soryu, but because they are seemingly more concerned about politics and treaties than capability and sustainment. IMO an Australian built evolved Soryu would be ideal, I am just concerned that the government was not listening to the operators and what the platform actually needs to do, so enamoured were they with the prospect of buying a completely MOTS platform and securing an alliance to boot.
GF has been saying for years that we should as a minimum be looking to leverage Japanese propulsion tech whatever design we went for, or perhaps even a major upgrade of the Collins class itself. With him 100% on that, as I am with the idea of using a Japanese design as the basis of or new subs or engaging them as a partner for a new design. What I am against is ignoring RAN requirements, sacrificing local design, build and maintenance capability, buying 100% offshore, all for the sake of "yes minister" type games that have nothing to do with defence capability.
Fingers crossed it all pans out for the best and any investment in new or improved production facilities will be in Australia to ensure we improve our sovereign capability, rather than throwing it all away.
I have questioned the way our government (current and previous) has handled SEA1000, not because i have an issue with the Soryu, but because they are seemingly more concerned about politics and treaties than capability and sustainment. IMO an Australian built evolved Soryu would be ideal, I am just concerned that the government was not listening to the operators and what the platform actually needs to do, so enamoured were they with the prospect of buying a completely MOTS platform and securing an alliance to boot.
GF has been saying for years that we should as a minimum be looking to leverage Japanese propulsion tech whatever design we went for, or perhaps even a major upgrade of the Collins class itself. With him 100% on that, as I am with the idea of using a Japanese design as the basis of or new subs or engaging them as a partner for a new design. What I am against is ignoring RAN requirements, sacrificing local design, build and maintenance capability, buying 100% offshore, all for the sake of "yes minister" type games that have nothing to do with defence capability.
Fingers crossed it all pans out for the best and any investment in new or improved production facilities will be in Australia to ensure we improve our sovereign capability, rather than throwing it all away.
Potentially, thankfully the kit for the AEW Merlin is a RoRo setup so modifications for an Osprey airframe is within reason.
Not that it'll happen this side of 2030 however.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #156
I love those ships, if Australia was ordering three or more of them i(or even the smaller and I believe more expensive Hyugas) I would not complain at all. As I see it they wouldn't even need F-35s, although provision to effectively operate them following a MLU would be a good idea, as the capability they would bring just with ASW helicopters alone would make the acquisition worthwhile. Add to that MCM, maritime support.(MH-60 Sierras, for anti surface, SOF support, CSAR, etc), AEW helicopters and we are talking a serious increase in capability and flexibility for the fleet. When you look at what VTOL and even STVOL or STOL UCAVs could bring, tilt rotors (Osprey or Valour), not to forget Tiger, MRH-90 and Chinook, along with the ability to maintain and repair other task force helicopters, aircraft and UAV/UCAVs, as well as to embark useful numbers of troops, the type makes even more sense.
Japanese doctrine uses them as the center piece of their ASW groups, each serving with an AEGIS DGG, a DGG and several DDs. Australia, with the smaller size of the RAN, could make even more radical use of them with each dramatically adding to the capability of a surface or escort group of an AWD and a couple of FFGs (FFG and ANZAC replacements). Imagine a future group of a DDH, AEGIS DDG, FFG and a pair or more of light frigates / corvettes (especially if they are adaptable multirole vessels with various LSC type mission modules). Such a group would be superb in any currently envisioned RAN tasking, as well as vastly superior in ASW, escort (or LHDs etc) and even independent power projection, i.e. deploying army aviation, infantry and special forces in scenarios where an LHD would be too vulnerable.
Like I said I see these ships as a transformational capability and would love to see three or more with the RAN, even if that does mean a reduction in major combatant numbers. This is because they bring far more capability than would be lost. In fact I would rate what the flight deck, hanger, maintenance, command and control medical facilities bring far higher than the benefits of another couple of variable depth or towed array sonars, or large VLS with SM-2/6 or Tomahawk, even without the transformational capability of the F-35B. Three AWD, three DDH and six new high end frigates would be very capable as well as highly affordable, add twelve corvettes (imagine a Turkish Milgem with CEAFAR, Mk-48 and LCS mission modules) using systems pulled through from the ANZACs and this is a very impressive fleet. Play with the numbers and make the ANZAC replacements more capable than the AWDs and the RAN could conceivably operate more DDH, say five or six AWD/Super ANZAC(R) and five or six DDH, plus ten or twelve corvettes.
Anyway, enough of the sensible, affordable, transformational fantasy and thread derailment and lets get back to the real world were like replaces like generation after generation.
t68
Well-Known Member
Impressive ships. I have never been able to nail down the number of V22 spots on Izumo as both Canberra and America class by specs I have found a beam of 32m as we know Canberra has a single spot for V22 and have seen images of Wasp Class with 5x V22 waiting on the deck.
I imagine the restrictions on Canberra is deck strength and perhaps the size of the island for V22 ops, I also imagine Izumo would be capabile of multi-spot ops for V22 as well, can anyone confirm this please
It certainly will be interesting to see the future midlife refit of the Izumo class and the fact that Japan is building a Final Assembly and Check Out (FACO) facility for JSF and have indicated a preliminary need for 40 aircraft, I’d imagine with that investment more JSF will be procured in the future, in what number and variant makes for interesting speculation.
As well as the Japan Daily Press from 12 mths ago making suggestions that “Depending on its research, Japan might someday build an aircraft carrier equipped with fighter jets,” the report added, citing unnamed sources. How hard would it be to adapt a ramp to Izumo if they use the same hull?
An interesting future proposition, 36x F35B, 17x V22 Osprey with 6x roll on AAR kits and a possible future 6x V22 AEW variant
I imagine the restrictions on Canberra is deck strength and perhaps the size of the island for V22 ops, I also imagine Izumo would be capabile of multi-spot ops for V22 as well, can anyone confirm this please
It certainly will be interesting to see the future midlife refit of the Izumo class and the fact that Japan is building a Final Assembly and Check Out (FACO) facility for JSF and have indicated a preliminary need for 40 aircraft, I’d imagine with that investment more JSF will be procured in the future, in what number and variant makes for interesting speculation.
As well as the Japan Daily Press from 12 mths ago making suggestions that “Depending on its research, Japan might someday build an aircraft carrier equipped with fighter jets,” the report added, citing unnamed sources. How hard would it be to adapt a ramp to Izumo if they use the same hull?
An interesting future proposition, 36x F35B, 17x V22 Osprey with 6x roll on AAR kits and a possible future 6x V22 AEW variant
Last edited:
Japan is becoming more assertive in matters pertaining to national security and this is having repercussions with it's regional neighbors.
The Japanese are raising the ante their military standoff wih China. The JG is no longer shy to disclose the measures it is taking in lockstep with the US to mitigate China's ability to project power into the Pacific. Fortifying it's Southern island chain with overlapping AShM and SAM coverage backed up by advanced warships and aircraft leverages the advantage of geography. A couple of month's back it was disclosed that a SOSUS array off the Nanasei Island Chain was intended to detect PLAN subs transiting to and from the Pacific.
Can't post links so google the title of the Reuter's article if interested.
Exclusive: Japan's far-flung island defense plan seeks to turn tables on China
OKYO (Reuters) - Japan is fortifying its far-flung island chain in the East China Sea under an evolving strategy that aims to turn the tables on China's navy and keep it from ever dominating the Western Pacific Ocean, Japanese military and government sources said.
The United States, believing its Asian allies - and Japan in particular - must help contain growing Chinese military power, has pushed Japan to abandon its decades-old bare-bones home island defense in favor of exerting its military power in Asia.
Tokyo is responding by stringing a line of anti-ship, anti-aircraft missile batteries along 200 islands in the East China Sea stretching 1,400 km (870 miles) from the country's mainland toward Taiwan.
Interviews with a dozen military planners and government policymakers reveal that Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's broader goal to beef up the military has evolved to include a strategy to dominate the sea and air surrounding the remote islands.
While the installations are not secret, it is the first time such officials have spelled out that the deployment will help keep China at bay in the Western Pacific and amounts to a Japanese version of the "anti-access/area denial" doctrine, known as "A2/AD" in military jargon, that China is using to try to push the United States and its allies out of the region.
Chinese ships sailing from their eastern seaboard must pass through this seamless barrier of Japanese missile batteries to reach the Western Pacific, access to which is vital to Beijing both as a supply line to the rest of the world's oceans and for the projection of its naval power.
China's President Xi Jinping has set great store in developing an ocean-going "blue water" navy capable of defending the country's growing global interests.
To be sure, there is nothing to stop Chinese warships from sailing through under international law, but they will have to do so in within the crosshairs of Japanese missiles, the officials told Reuters...
Rather than A2/AD, we use the phrase 'maritime supremacy and air superiority'," said Yosuke Isozaki, Abe's first security adviser until September and a key author of a national defense strategy published in 2013 that included this phrase for the first time.
"Our thinking was that we wanted to be able to ensure maritime supremacy and air superiority that fit with the U.S. military," he added.
Toshi Yoshihara, a U.S. Naval War College professor, said Tokyo could play an important role in limiting China's room for maneuver through the East China Sea to the Western Pacific, enhancing U.S. freedom of movement and buying time for the alliance to respond in the event of war with China.
"You could say Japan is turning the tables on China," Yoshihara said.
More at the link.
The Japanese are raising the ante their military standoff wih China. The JG is no longer shy to disclose the measures it is taking in lockstep with the US to mitigate China's ability to project power into the Pacific. Fortifying it's Southern island chain with overlapping AShM and SAM coverage backed up by advanced warships and aircraft leverages the advantage of geography. A couple of month's back it was disclosed that a SOSUS array off the Nanasei Island Chain was intended to detect PLAN subs transiting to and from the Pacific.
Can't post links so google the title of the Reuter's article if interested.
Exclusive: Japan's far-flung island defense plan seeks to turn tables on China
OKYO (Reuters) - Japan is fortifying its far-flung island chain in the East China Sea under an evolving strategy that aims to turn the tables on China's navy and keep it from ever dominating the Western Pacific Ocean, Japanese military and government sources said.
The United States, believing its Asian allies - and Japan in particular - must help contain growing Chinese military power, has pushed Japan to abandon its decades-old bare-bones home island defense in favor of exerting its military power in Asia.
Tokyo is responding by stringing a line of anti-ship, anti-aircraft missile batteries along 200 islands in the East China Sea stretching 1,400 km (870 miles) from the country's mainland toward Taiwan.
Interviews with a dozen military planners and government policymakers reveal that Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's broader goal to beef up the military has evolved to include a strategy to dominate the sea and air surrounding the remote islands.
While the installations are not secret, it is the first time such officials have spelled out that the deployment will help keep China at bay in the Western Pacific and amounts to a Japanese version of the "anti-access/area denial" doctrine, known as "A2/AD" in military jargon, that China is using to try to push the United States and its allies out of the region.
Chinese ships sailing from their eastern seaboard must pass through this seamless barrier of Japanese missile batteries to reach the Western Pacific, access to which is vital to Beijing both as a supply line to the rest of the world's oceans and for the projection of its naval power.
China's President Xi Jinping has set great store in developing an ocean-going "blue water" navy capable of defending the country's growing global interests.
To be sure, there is nothing to stop Chinese warships from sailing through under international law, but they will have to do so in within the crosshairs of Japanese missiles, the officials told Reuters...
Rather than A2/AD, we use the phrase 'maritime supremacy and air superiority'," said Yosuke Isozaki, Abe's first security adviser until September and a key author of a national defense strategy published in 2013 that included this phrase for the first time.
"Our thinking was that we wanted to be able to ensure maritime supremacy and air superiority that fit with the U.S. military," he added.
Toshi Yoshihara, a U.S. Naval War College professor, said Tokyo could play an important role in limiting China's room for maneuver through the East China Sea to the Western Pacific, enhancing U.S. freedom of movement and buying time for the alliance to respond in the event of war with China.
"You could say Japan is turning the tables on China," Yoshihara said.
More at the link.
This is the link for the article above which is quite an interesting article in its entirety.