Forum: F-35 Lightning II

Forwards basing is a myth. The Harrier and the F-35B would not be able to operate in such conditions because of FOD. There are also major resupply issues.

F-16.net Sponsor

This is interesting news coming out of Japan that must make the F-35 naysayers feel rather sick in the stomach seeing as yet another much respected country seeks to order the machine they claim is utter garbage.

Japan to build fleet's biggest helicopter destroyer to fend off China Japan is set to commission the largest destroyer to join its fleet in response to a Chinese military buildup. By Danielle Demetriou in Tokyo Published: 11:18AM GMT 23 Nov 2009

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... China.html

"The nation's Maritime Self-Defence Force is reportedly planning to construct a new 284 metre long destroyer capable of transporting 14 helicopters, 4,000 people and 50 trucks. [284m = 932 feet! SOME HELO carrier! CVF size]

The purchase is part of a wider military build up in which the Defence Ministry has sought funds to purchase around 40 F-35 fighter jets which will become the future mainstay of the nation's air force, according to Kyodo News.

The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), is projected to cost around £61 million (nine billion yen) and is currently being developed by the United States, with Britain and Australia as founding partners.

Japan's decision to expand the role of its military despite its pacifist post-war constitution is a reflection of growing concerns surrounding military tensions with regional neighbours.

The new destroyer, which will become the largest in the nation's fleet of 52 vessels in the class, will also provide fuel to other carriers, transport servicemen and assist with emergencies and international peace keeping missiles."

spazsinbad wrote:

Japan to build fleet's biggest helicopter destroyer to fend off China Japan is set to commission the largest destroyer to join its fleet in response to a Chinese military buildup. By Danielle Demetriou in Tokyo Published: 11:18AM GMT 23 Nov 2009

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... China.html

"The nation's Maritime Self-Defence Force is reportedly planning to construct a new 284 metre long destroyer capable of transporting 14 helicopters, 4,000 people and 50 trucks. [284m = 932 feet! SOME HELO carrier! CVF size]

The purchase is part of a wider military build up in which the Defence Ministry has sought funds to purchase around 40 F-35 fighter jets which will become the future mainstay of the nation's air force, according to Kyodo News.

The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), is projected to cost around £61 million (nine billion yen) and is currently being developed by the United States, with Britain and Australia as founding partners.

Japan's decision to expand the role of its military despite its pacifist post-war constitution is a reflection of growing concerns surrounding military tensions with regional neighbours.

The new destroyer, which will become the largest in the nation's fleet of 52 vessels in the class, will also provide fuel to other carriers, transport servicemen and assist with emergencies and international peace keeping missiles."

Not to split hairs but the last couple of sources that I have read. Claim the 22DDH will displace 19,500 tons light. (one quotes 22,500 tons). With a maximum lenght of 248m. Which, would make it ~814 ft long. Still impressive.

For comparison the cuurrent INS Viraat (ex-HMS Hermes) is 227m long with a 23,900 ton light displacement.

Regardless, Japan is slowing moving toward building true Aircraft Carriers. If, the 22DDH's can operate STOVL Aircraft like the F-35B is anybody's guess with the scant information available. But, they could at very least be used to develope flight operatons for such aircraft.

www.asahi.com/english/Herald-asahi/TKY200911230073.html

Corsair1963, heheh. Maybe a dyslexic journo at the UK Tele 'got the 248m transposed to 284m' and 'lost in translation'. Smile

spazsinbad wrote:

Corsair1963, heheh. Maybe a dyslexic journo at the UK Tele 'got the 248m transposed to 284m' and 'lost in translation'. Smile

Well, considering how articulate I can be sometimes. We must be cousins? Wink

That said, at 248m the 22DDH is going to be very impressive indeed.

I found both of these pics on the web. I don't know if they're correct to scale. But you get the idea......(22DDH is suppose to be 37% larger than the Hyuga Class DDH's)

spazsinbad wrote:

Corsair1963, heheh. Maybe a dyslexic journo at the UK Tele 'got the 248m transposed to 284m' and 'lost in translation'. Smile

Well, after doing some checking. I found at least two other sites that list the 22DDH at 284m long! So, who knows maybe its 284m after all instead of 248m???

Personally, I think the 248 number is much more realistic. Yet, to be honest I don't know which number is correct??? Confused

But, if it would turn out that 284m? MY GOD WHAT A MONSTER!

What exactly are "peacekeeping missiles"? I think an editor was sleeping when he read this. Laughing

Japanese have to speak in a non-warlike manner most likely (with UK journo just copying text). Why call an 'aircraft carrier' a 'destroyer'? I guess UK journos are used to this with the 'through deck cruiser' nonsense of old. Yeah -but it is a mystery eh. Smile

Well, it will be interesting to hear the details of the design as they come out. Of course the Japanese can be very tight lipped about such things. I remember little information was provided during the development and construction of the Hyuga Class. Sad

Here's a drawing of what I believe the ship will look like.

Put a ski jump on that (and suitable bunkerage and all the rest of it) and it'll be good to go - JSF-B. Smile

On second thought, the JMOD and JASDF seem to have overruled their old dislike for single-engine fighters?
After the single-engine F-104 Eikou, they chose the double-engine F-4 and F-15, and the domestic FS-X was IIRC conceptually double-engine.
The original rationale was: Japan was (well, is) an island country, and limping back to dry land with one of two engines was better than losing one of one engine, and forced to bail out while feet wet.

] Forwards basing is a myth.
] There are also major resupply issues.

Decades ago, I read a book, maybe published in the '70s or '80s, about the advantages of Harriers operating within a city.
Parking in bus terminals as shelters, taking off with the off or on ramps of elevated highways as ski jumps, landing at sports grounds to refuel and reload, &c... which would work wonderfully in war games for computers. 8D
In comparison, in the '82 Falklands, 1.5 bombs that hit the runway at Stanley AP convinced jet fighters to not use that runway.
I thought CTOL air bases in Israel, South Korea, Taiwan, and West Germany would have the same vulnerability, with thousands of hostile missiles and rockets programmed to hit those air bases on day one of a hot war.

spazsinbad wrote:

Put a ski jump on that (and suitable bunkerage and all the rest of it) and it'll be good to go - JSF-B. Smile

Funny, I recently had a debate (more like a argument) with a member of another forum. That stated a whole list of reasons why the 16DDH or 22DDH would be ill suited for STOVL Operations.

Yet, its funny the same guy is a big supporter of the ex-Gorshkov for Indian???

Typical..... Confused

Forum: F-35 Lightning II

Japan gearing up to acquire F-35 fighters