New Japanese Destroyer or Aircraft Carrier?

Black Swan

Does the recently launched DDH183 Izumo appear to be an aircraft carrier rather than destroyer? It carries several ASW helicopters. The old "Jeep carrier" comes to mind, in contrast to a destroyer. A 27,000 ton, 815 foot CVL or DDH? A rose by another name?

goldie fish

Its a Helicopter carrier.

With china/Taiwan and North/South Korea on their doorstep, combined with the impact of being located on the ring of fire, its an ideal ship type for their needs. The JMSDF has always had very large very well armed surface vessels.

amurph0

As goldie said it's a helicopter destroyer.

The Japanese have a bunch of helicopter destroyers like that already. The Izumo is just the first in a new class of ships.

Conmaicne Mara

Memories of WW2 aside, are the Japanese prohibited from having aircraft (jet) carriers? And, do they even want them in the first place?

bizmark

Think they arent allowed or self restrict themselfs from anything that could be considered "offensive" weapons an aircraft carrier with jet fighters could only really be considered offensive a helicopter carrier is more defensive against subs and so likely doesnt cross the line of offensive weapons in their minds anyway i mean a torpedo fireing helicopters going to ruin your day just as happly as a jet

tac foley

Conmaicne Mara wrote: »

Memories of WW2 aside, are the Japanese prohibited from having aircraft (jet) carriers? And, do they even want them in the first place?

Article 9 of the MacArthur Constitution [revised] limits Japan's own ability to 'wage war or undertake warlike activities EXCEPT in defence of the home islands'.

This new ship is categorised as a helicopter-carrying destroyer - a VERY large destroyer nonetheless, and only slightly smaller than the now gone RN 'Ark Royal' and others.

Its purpose is anti-submarine defence, something that the Japanese have excelled in for many years - they are a vital part of the PACFLEET defensive screen.

I'm sure that the Japanese government and minstry of defence have thought long and hard over these new generation of naval vessels - you may or may not know that the present Maritime Sef-Defense Force is, depending on what you read, the third or fourth largest navy on earth.

Even their coastguard service has over 12,000 full-time personnel, and the largest in-service coast guard vessel on the planet - PLH 31 'Shukishima', bigger than many naval frigates.

tac

goldie fish

Worth taking a look to see what the "Home Islands" actually consist of. The home Islands are located geographically close to foreign states that have in recent years taken pot shots at them.

Black Swan

tac foley wrote: »

Article 9 of the MacArthur Constitution [revised] limits Japan's own ability to 'wage war or undertake warlike activities EXCEPT in defence of the home islands'.

Their version of "defense" and calling this newly launched warship a destroyer (DDH), including a few others launched earlier in this or similar classes, appears to be change in policy by their government in response to the strategic naval growth and development of nearby PRC; i.e., the "best defense is a good offense" capability?

Furthermore, I bet most of the Izumo helicopters could be replaced with many more 5th generation Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II's, and all of a sudden "destroyer" becomes mini-flattop. Both the landing and take-off configurations of the Lightning II easily fit this 815 foot flight deck.

tac foley

Black Swan wrote: »

Their version of "defense" and calling this newly launched warship a destroyer (DDH), including a few others launched earlier in this or similar classes, appears to be change in policy by their government in response to the strategic naval growth and development of nearby PRC; i.e., the "best defense is a good offense" capability?

Furthermore, I bet most of the Izumo helicopters could be replaced with many more 5th generation Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II's, and all of a sudden "destroyer" becomes mini-flattop. Both the landing and take-off configurations of the Lightning II easily fit this 815 foot flight deck.

The mini-gif shows two such aircraft in situ already. Japan IS buying the F-35, BTW.

tac

Maoltuile

Black Swan wrote: »

Their version of "defense" and calling this newly launched warship a destroyer (DDH), including a few others launched earlier in this or similar classes, appears to be change in policy by their government in response to the strategic naval growth and development of nearby PRC; i.e., the "best defense is a good offense" capability?

The British forces, prohibited from buying new carriers, called the Invincibles "through-deck cruisers" - even though they were, as anyone can see, actually aircraft carriers.

I believe the same thinking went for the Broadswords being called 'frigates', etc.

goldie fish

Maoltuile wrote: »

The British forces, prohibited from buying new carriers, called the Invincibles "through-deck cruisers" - even though they were, as anyone can see, actually aircraft carriers.

I believe the same thinking went for the Broadswords being called 'frigates', etc.

Prohibited? Nonsense.
The Broadswords were frigates. Always were, always intended to be.

Maoltuile

goldie fish wrote: »

Prohibited? Nonsense.
The Broadswords were frigates. Always were, always intended to be.

The Type 2's ended up with 5,300 tonne displacement (the Batch 3's, as per Wikipedia). That's an awful lot of 'frigate', don't you think?

Jawgap

The purpose / role / mission defines the appellation attached to a ship, not it's displacement.

There's a lot of destroyers and frigates knocking around today that would be comparable in displacement to WWII era cruisers - HMS Cornwall (Batch 3, Type 22) displaces not much less than the Arethusa and Dido classes of light cruisers, which themselves displace significantly less than the Type 45 destroyers.

goldie fish

Maoltuile wrote: »

The Type 2's ended up with 5,300 tonne displacement (the Batch 3's, as per Wikipedia). That's an awful lot of 'frigate', don't you think?

The Meko 200 frigate Displaces 3400T
The US Perry Class is 4200t
The Dutch De Zeven Provincien comes in at 6050t

Displacement means nothing.

CorsendonkX

tac foley wrote: »

The mini-gif shows two such aircraft in situ already. Japan IS buying the F-35, BTW.

tac

How many F-35 have they signed up for? Are they buying the F-35B vertical takeoff model?

Jawgap

CorsendonkX wrote: »

How many F-35 have they signed up for? Are they buying the F-35B vertical takeoff model?

42 - 38 of which will be assembled in Japan.

And they've gone for the A variant. The aircraft are destined for their air force, not the navy.

tac foley

Ah, you mean the Japanese Air Self-defense Force.

As opposed to the Japanese Maritime Self-defense force.

My friends in Japan think it's very amusing that you all seem to be very concerned about their new ship. :0 Watanabe wrote to tell you that you are all quite safe...'we have no plans to self-defend ourselves anywhere near your beautiful country with our confusingly-named new ship. Please accept our deepest apologies for upstting [sic] you'.

tac

Jawgap

tac foley wrote: »

Ah, you mean the Japanese Air Self-defense Force.

As opposed to the Japanese Maritime Self-defense force.

My friends in Japan think it's very amusing that you all seem to be very concerned about their new ship. :0 Watanabe wrote to tell you that you are all quite safe...'we have no plans to self-defend ourselves anywhere near your beautiful country with our confusingly-named new ship. Please accept our deepest apologies for upstting [sic] you'.

tac

Yes, but I was too lazy to type out all those words.

Interestingly, Gen Shigeru Iwasaki, current Chief of Staff of the Joint Staff Council of the Japan Self-Defense Forces, began a recent interview by saying ""When I was the head of the air force......."

Of course one could suggest it was Freudian slip, but the Japanese are not exactly renowned for imprecision in their language

tac foley

http://www.hlj.com/product/KHMKH80102

Not only a lot cheaper, but more compact, too. I figure they'd be able to embark about 80,000 on the deck alone...

tac

long range shooter

Pearl Harbour next,lol

Tabnabs

The Chinese have recently formed their CG into an independent service and continue to add numbers to the ranks and fleet.



The majority of the CCG fleet will be used for participating in territorial disputes with neighbours.