Go Back   DefenceTalk Forum - Military & Defense Forums > Global Defense & Military > Navy & Maritime

Defense News
Land, Air & Naval Forces






Military Photos
Latest Military Pictures
Defense Reports
Aerospace & Defence


Japanese Maritime Self Defense Force Thread

This is a discussion on Japanese Maritime Self Defense Force Thread within the Navy & Maritime forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; Or in other words its roughly the same size as the Canberra class or the spanish Juan Carlos I....


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old December 30th, 2012   #76
Defense Enthusiast
Master Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 364
Threads:
Or in other words its roughly the same size as the Canberra class or the spanish Juan Carlos I.
Wall83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 30th, 2012   #77
Super Moderator
General
swerve's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Reading, Berkshire
Posts: 6,684
Threads:
Yup. If the published dimensions are correct, it's a bit bigger, marginally longer & marginally slimmer than Cavour.
swerve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 30th, 2012   #78
Defense Enthusiast
Master Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 364
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by swerve View Post
Yup. If the published dimensions are correct, it's a bit bigger, marginally longer & marginally slimmer than Cavour.
If they added fixed wings (F-35) to this project it would become relly something. Im fearing a military naval buildup in the region in the next decade. I presume that China soon will start constructing heavy carriers for its navy. And south Korea is also up there.
Wall83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 31st, 2012   #79
New Member
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 32
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wall83 View Post
If they added fixed wings (F-35) to this project it would become relly something. Im fearing a military naval buildup in the region in the next decade. I presume that China soon will start constructing heavy carriers for its navy. And south Korea is also up there.
The situation we are living right now reminds me a lot of the naval build up period between WWI and WWII. IMHO, the question is not wether there will be a war in Asia, but when it will start.

And it will start in the South China sea, near the Spratlys and the Paracel reefs.
mankyle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 31st, 2012   #80
Defense Enthusiast
Master Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 364
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by mankyle View Post
The situation we are living right now reminds me a lot of the naval build up period between WWI and WWII. IMHO, the question is not wether there will be a war in Asia, but when it will start.

And it will start in the South China sea, near the Spratlys and the Paracel reefs.
I duobt anyone of the players are searching or wanting a war. Noone would winn anything from that. Im thinking it will continue like a new Cold war with defencebudgets growing larger and larger and the naval units will be more in numbers, greater in decplacement and more advanced.
China probobly will have carrier battlegrups in 5-10 years and Japan and other countries will follow suit.
Wall83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 2nd, 2013   #81
Senior Member
Brigadier General
No Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Reading
Posts: 1,602
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by mankyle View Post
The situation we are living right now reminds me a lot of the naval build up period between WWI and WWII. IMHO, the question is not wether there will be a war in Asia, but when it will start.

And it will start in the South China sea, near the Spratlys and the Paracel reefs.
I can't see any comparision with the interwar period. China spends quite a low percentage of GDP on defence (ok huge growing GDP). Its massive wealth is largely dependent on exports. How would a war help that?

If there is a comparsion and I don't think there is, one could view like the period between the Crimean & WW1. A long peace, ending in a arms race built up on mutual fear and then thne collective suicide of the European Powers, over the most minor issues.
1805 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 4th, 2013   #82
Just Hatched
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: London
Posts: 7
Threads:
Presumably whatever the JMSDF does in the next decade is a direct challenge/response to what China is doing with its own expanding blue water capability.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gf0012-aust View Post
New Helicopter Carrier for Japanese Navy
By Keith Henderson at October 11, 2011 07:35
Filed Under: Research & Development

Details of the propulsion system for the new Helicopter Carrier of the Japanese Navy / Maritime Self-Defence Force (JMSDF) have been announced. To be built by IHI of Tokyo, the LOA 814 ft (248 m) and beam of 124 ft (38 m) vessel will have a fully loaded displacement of around 27,500 tons. The official Japanese 22DDH designation of the ship is of a “destroyer” but in reality it is a helicopter carrier. The reason for the diplomatic designation lies in the post World War 2 constitution which prohibits Japan to own aircraft carriers.

Japan already has two smaller Hyuga Class helicopter carriers of 18,000 tons full displacement and the new ship will become the largest vessels in the Japanese Navy.

The propulsion system comprises four GE LM2500 gas turbines of 33,600 hp (25 MW) each giving a total power of around 135,000 hp (100 MW) in a COGAG arrangement giving a speed of 30 kt. The ships will also be using GE’s smaller turbine, the LM500 with an output of approximately 6,000 hp (4.5MW) in a turbo-electric configuration for on board power generation.

The turbines will be built by GE licensee IHI with a delivery date of late 2012 for the LM500s and early 2013 for the LM2500 engines.

The LM2500 and LM500 gas turbines have been in service on a number of other ships of the JMSDF. LM2500s presently power the Hyuga helicopter carrier class, the destroyer classes Atago , Takanami, Murasame and Kongou: LM500 are in service on the Hayabusa class patrol boats and Sparviero fast attack class hydrofoils.
Strangelove is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 10th, 2013   #83
Defense Enthusiast
Lieutenant
No Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: USA,TN
Posts: 553
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1805 View Post
I can't see any comparision with the interwar period. China spends quite a low percentage of GDP on defence (ok huge growing GDP). Its massive wealth is largely dependent on exports. How would a war help that?

If there is a comparsion and I don't think there is, one could view like the period between the Crimean & WW1. A long peace, ending in a arms race built up on mutual fear and then thne collective suicide of the European Powers, over the most minor issues.
You can never really trust the budget numbers completely. Plus ships, planes and weapons take longer to build than training the men to use them now in most cases.

Also I think the idea isnt so much to fight a war as look so terrible that people will simply bend the knee as it were and obey. Add to that a very large industrial and population base and you have alot of power to threaten those who thwart your will.
Belesari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 10th, 2013   #84
Defense Enthusiast
Lieutenant
No Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: USA,TN
Posts: 553
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wall83 View Post
I duobt anyone of the players are searching or wanting a war. Noone would winn anything from that. Im thinking it will continue like a new Cold war with defencebudgets growing larger and larger and the naval units will be more in numbers, greater in decplacement and more advanced.
China probobly will have carrier battlegrups in 5-10 years and Japan and other countries will follow suit.
I believe they are already building them based off their carrier atm. They could squeeze out quite a few very fast and the chinese are willing to push men into the grinder to get the best as fast as possible. So in 10 years we may have a china with 5-6 carriers and the escorts to go with them. Who knows.
Belesari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 11th, 2013   #85
Senior Member
Brigadier General
No Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Reading
Posts: 1,602
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Belesari View Post
You can never really trust the budget numbers completely. Plus ships, planes and weapons take longer to build than training the men to use them now in most cases.

Also I think the idea isnt so much to fight a war as look so terrible that people will simply bend the knee as it were and obey. Add to that a very large industrial and population base and you have alot of power to threaten those who thwart your will.
Probably a greater issue is that China can get so much more out of its spend than say the USA, not just from cheap labour/production costs but also they are much more relaxed about buying in cheap technology and focusing on lower standards.

That said I can't help feel a PLAN carrier battlegroup would be just target practice for a USN SSN. However I see little in it for China to pick a fight with its customers/debtors.
1805 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 11th, 2013   #86
Defense Aficionado
Lieutenant General
No Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: NSW
Posts: 2,769
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1805 View Post
Probably a greater issue is that China can get so much more out of its spend than say the USA, not just from cheap labour/production costs but also they are much more relaxed about buying in cheap technology and focusing on lower standards.

That said I can't help feel a PLAN carrier battlegroup would be just target practice for a USN SSN. However I see little in it for China to pick a fight with its customers/debtors.
That's what most people thought about Japan pre-1938( oil embargo), only diffence is that the US no longer has the upper hand economicly against China.
t68 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 12th, 2013   #87
Super Moderator
General
swerve's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Reading, Berkshire
Posts: 6,684
Threads:
Which is why you don't push someone to the edge of a cliff unless you're ready for them to fight to stop themselves falling over it.

I don't see anyone proposing to try to defeat China militarily by bringing its economy to its knees, so the 1930s Japanese analogy doesn't hold.
swerve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 16th, 2013   #88
Junior Member
Private First Class
SteelTiger 177's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: I live in Sierra Vista Arizona since November 2001
Posts: 85
Threads:
I would like to see Japan aqcuire some ospreys for it's force not just for troop transport but also antisub/antisurface warfare missions but also an awac variant to work with any carrier based fighters tha Japan should consider buying.
SteelTiger 177 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 16th, 2013   #89
Defense Enthusiast
Major
the road runner's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 890
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelTiger 177 View Post
I would like to see Japan aqcuire some ospreys for it's force not just for troop transport but also antisub/antisurface warfare missions but also an awac variant to work with any carrier based fighters tha Japan should consider buying.
I would argue that Japan already operates the SH-60K version of the Sea hawk with close to 50 Units for its anti sub warfare.Add to that 100 odd units of the SH-60 J version,i would think Japan's Navy would be the envy of most Navy's around the world ,with the number of Naval helicopters it operates.

Japan also operates E-2C (13 units)aircraft for its navy ,why would Japan spend ton's of money to develop a Osprey AWAC's,when the US navy dose not even operate that version? Japan would be the sole operator of this version.Not a good idea
the road runner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 13th, 2013   #90
Super Moderator
Major General
AegisFC's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2,016
Threads:
Japan is considering two more Aegis equipped DDG's for BMD duty, interesting news.

Japan eyes two new Aegis destroyers to counter N. Korea missile threat | The Japan Times
________________
"The beatings will continue until morale improves."
Forum rules, read them!
AegisFC is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:29 PM.