Japanese Aircraft Carrier?

More then easily the main barrier is political!

Carriers that have fixed wing aircraft on them are for power projection and Japan is rather sensitive about the idea. Japan has refuelling tankers and the F-15 has plenty of range in its own right so more then capable of ranging over various disputed Islands. Greater question is does Japan have any interest over the Spratleys? If they do then a carrier becomes a more justifiable asset, considering they are buying F-35A a later purchase of the B or even the C if they so fancy.

The Japanese understands that they must take rearmament very slowing. As a matter of fact the current fleet of Air Capable Ships is a good example. First, they started with Helicopter Equipped Amphibious Ships. Then a slightly larger Helicopter Destroyers. Which, is being followed by an even larger Helicopter Destroyer. Which, is a Light Carrier in everything but name.

My guess is Japan will purchase a small number of F-35B’s to be operated from the latter. Then maybe a true Carrier after that. Clearly, Japan has a plan……

More then easily the main barrier is political!

Carriers that have fixed wing aircraft on them are for power projection and Japan is rather sensitive about the idea. Japan has refuelling tankers and the F-15 has plenty of range in its own right so more then capable of ranging over various disputed Islands. Greater question is does Japan have any interest over the Spratleys? If they do then a carrier becomes a more justifiable asset, considering they are buying F-35A a later purchase of the B or even the C if they so fancy.

Scooter

Look at what they are building and deploy already…2 ships comparable to the Giuseppe Garibaldi and another 2 comparable to the Cavour!. Supporting capital ships is not an issue for them!.

Twice the population & GDP of the UK. Much bigger & more efficient shipbuilding industry.

So, she could support two Carriers of similar size to the CVF’s?

Could Japan support such a Large Warship?

Twice the population & GDP of the UK. Much bigger & more efficient shipbuilding industry.

Would love to see a new Shokaku and Zuikaku, but actual aircraft carriers seem to be something of a sensitive issue with the Japanese.

Really, Japan sensitivity to Aircraft Carriers and Arms in General is changing fast…..I doubt it would be an issue at this stage.

Would love to see a new Shokaku and Zuikaku, but actual aircraft carriers seem to be something of a sensitive issue with the Japanese.

Could Japan support such a Large Warship?

The 19500t class destroyer (DDH) is a new helicopter carrier class being constructed for the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force (JMSDF). The ships of this class will be the largest surface combatants of the Japanese navy, taking over the mantle currently held by the Hyūga class helicopter destroyers.
Displacement: 19,500 tonnes empty, 27,000 tons full load

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/19000t_class_destroyer

If they can manage that, which is half the CVF, why not the whole thing?
Also considering that this is about equivalent of the displacement of Yamato class BB.

Could Japan support such a Large Warship?

Its a richer country than UK and have a large enough population pool. I dont see why not.

A rather offensive post by a Chinese fanboy.

Well, at least is “wasn’t an offensive post by a American fanboy” 😉

I know I have my moments. I may just apologize before I post from now on. Hard not to offend someone……..

A rather offensive post by a Chinese fanboy.

Thread cleaned up. Proceed ahead 😉

What did I miss???:confused:

Thread cleaned up. Proceed ahead 😉

I guess the quickest why for Japan to get into the Aircraft Carrier Business. Would to build an enlarged 22DDH. Something in the order of ~40,000 tons. Equipped with a Ski Jump to operate STOVL F-35B’s and maybe Seahawk Helicopters or even CV-22’s.

Yet, it could build something very similar to India’s forthcoming IAC-1?

Personally, I prefer a STOBAR vs STOVL Design. As the former allows you to operate more conventional types.(assuming no catapults)

I would like to see Japan come out with a new submarine carrying UCAVs.

Interesting concept back in the 1940’s. Yet, today it would have launch the UCAV’s beneath the surface or face certain attack.

I would like to see Japan come out with a new submarine carrying UCAVs.

Scooter, how about CVF for Japan?

Could Japan support such a Large Warship?

Sintra was missing the complexities involved in assembling, coordinating and sustaining a land-based strike package, against a mobile target, a long way out overwater.

Long range coordinated attacks over sea is JASDF doctrine, they train it regularly with the US States Navy, exercises and deployments to places like Guam happens on a regular bases, on the other hand i am more than willing to bet that we are not going to see a Chinese Carrier capable of actual combat operations with a trained crew and strike capable airwing navigating near Honolulu for the next decade.

My point was to illustrate where the carrier comes in to that picture. Yes reflagging and foreign merchies can complicate the picture, but, the underlying point is that a Chinese carrier group, without US interference, could sit 500 miles west of Honolulu, sink everything heading for a Japanese port, and theres very little effectively Japan could do about it.
.

Thats the point, if we dont take into acount reality, this entire topic is moot.
If we take out the US States and other countries of this scenario, then the JASDF (and PLA) capabilities and hardware would be diferent…

Sintra,

Thats AAR for a fully weighted strike package to loiter indefinitely halfway to Hawaii is it?. The carrier puts the airpower where it needs to be simple as.

Yes, thats about it. Look at the choke points in wich Japanese commercial shipping passes, then look at a map and notice where Japanese, US, Australian and Singapour airbases are, even if by some miracle a Chinese Carrier could pass the island chains without being tagged by a horde of sensors, even if it picked a fight only after being in the “midle of the pacific”, up north there´s Elmendorf, on the east there´s Hickam, southeast there´s Guam and South there´s an helluva lot of airbases in wich American and/or Japanese aircrafts would be welcomed in case a Chinese fleet went beserk nearby.
To have any serious effect a Chinese fleet would always be in range of land based airpower,

Whether it is implausible or not is irrelevant. The question was asked as a hypothetical what kind of carrier would the Japanese need.

If the scenario is “The Chinese are coming” the answer is, well, none.
ISTAR, Submarines and land based air power and the entire Chinese surface fleet is botled in their coastal waters (protected by their own land based air power. The Chinese surface fleet is not survivable (and wont be for foreseable future) in open waters versus the kind of adversaries that it would face in a “Sino-Japanese” face down.

As for a carrier being a poor choice to oppose US sea power I think its quite the reverse – if you limit your definition as to what you want the carrier to deliver. If you look at a Midway carrier-on-carrier scenario then you are probably correct that trying to fight that battle with a design like the Chinese flat top is a losing proposition. That is not the way that the Chinese will use the ship though. She’s a surviveable surveillance and cueing asset used to support their entry denial strategy…and in that role she’s very dangerous and entirely a wise addition. Could use a Sea Avenger type UAV to offload the Flanker clones though.

On that i have to disagree, there´s absolutely nothing “survivable” in a 60,000 ton Chinese aircraft carrier in blue water when facing the likes of the US Navy and/or the Japanese Self Defense Forces, its a coffin.

I would buy F-35B and disperse them.