# New Japanese Carrier



## tomahawk6

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/japan/ddh-x.htm

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htnavai/articles/20070825.aspx

Japan's Secret Aircraft Carriers
August 25, 2007: Japan launched the first of its new helicopter-carrying destroyers, the Hyuga, amid great fanfare. This vessel, officially 13,500 tons, will be able to carry helicopters. Plans are for them to mostly carry SH-60 helicopters, but the Hyuga will give Japan its first real power projection capability since 1945.

Japan plans to build at least two Hyuga-class vessels, which can carry up to 11 helicopters, displace 13,500 tons, and are equipped with a Mk41 VLS, giving them the ability for fire air-defense missiles like the Standard and the ESSM, and a vertically-launched ASROC, but also the Tomahawk cruise missile, if Japan wished to do so. It also has two triple 12.75-inch torpedo mounts. 

The name of the lead ship is probably the first clue that this ship is more than meets the eye. The HIJMS Hyuga was a battleship commissioned in 1918, and which served in World War II. After the battle of Midway in 1942, the Hyuga was converted into a hybrid battleship/aircraft carrier. The new Hyuga looks like a carrier, and her mission sounds like that of a carrier.

This ship in the same weight range of the European "Harrier carriers" (the British Invincibles, the Italian Garibaldi, the Spanish Principe de Asturias, and the Thai Chakri Narubet-classes). While this ship is currently planned to carry helicopters only, European experience (particularly from the British) has shown that this can be an effective platform for fixed-wing aircraft, like the F-35B. That makes the designation of "helicopter carrying destroyer" technically true, but in reality a useful fiction. In essence, they could act as small aircraft carriers or as a landing platform helicopter like HMS Ocean if transport helicopters are used. 

Such looseness with designations is nothing new for Japan. In its older incarnation as the Imperial Japanese Navy, there were numerous instances of these involving surface units. The most glaring were the heavy cruisers of the Mogami-class. Supposedly light cruisers displacing 8,500 tons (and fifteen 155-millieter guns), these were really heavy cruisers of over 13,000 tons (with ten eight-inch guns). The claims that those ships were compliant with naval arms limitation treaties were on the disingenuous side.

Another instance involved the super-battleships Yamato and Musashi. The guns had been called "special 40-centimeter", leading many Allied intelligence officers to believe the vessels used sixteen-inch guns. As it is known now, the main battery consisted of nine eighteen-inch (40-centimeter) guns.

In essence, Japan will have a ship about the size of the vessels that were the centerpiece of the British response to a crisis halfway around the world 25 years ago, with a flight deck and an offset island. They performed well, too – just ask Argentina. The Hyuga means that Japan is back in the power projection business. – Harold C. Hutchison (haroldc.hutchison@gmail.com)


----------



## Haletown

That's some "destroyer"

Some pix here:  http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/world-armed-forces/aircraft-carriers-ii-17-3125.html#post69657


----------



## tomahawk6

Great link Haletown. I had a hard time finding pic's.


----------



## aesop081

did i just hear everyone in Hawaii hold their breath for a second ?

 ;D


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt

Nice looking ship....


Matthew.


----------



## Haletown

anyone know the Japanese for "Big Honkin Ship"  ? ? ? ?


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO

Haletown said:
			
		

> anyone know the Japanese for "Big Honkin Ship"  ? ? ? ?



Maybe we could buy a couple of these off the shelf eh??


----------



## CougarKing

The _Hyugas_ are a surprise to me, though Japan already had "carriers" earlier in this decade if you count the _Osumi_ class assault ships which have long decks that seem capable of landing any VTOL aircraft; IIRC, their capabilities are similar to a US LHD of the US _Wasp_ or _Tarawa_ class though the Japanese ships don't have Harriers.

It is fitting that the Japanese named the new ship _Hyuga_, which was also the name of a WW2-era battleship which was converted into a Hybrid Battleship carrier as a response to the heavy carrier fleet losses in the Battle of Midway in June 1942. The _Hyuga_ and her sister ship _Ise_ never saw combat in their new role, and they were finally pummeled into useless hulks when the USN carrier fleets of TF58/38 began bombarding Japan mercilessly in mid-1945.

As for the _Osumi_ class assault ships/LHDs, they are old news. The South Koreans have also completed their own (possibly Harrier or even JSF capable for the future, since they also have a long flat deck like the _Osumi_ class) helicopter-carrying _Dokdo_-class assault ship. The ROK's new ship could be a response to the Japanese "carriers", though this buildup of the arsenals of East Asian and Southeast Asian navies has been going on for decades; the Thais also made their own Harrier-capable carrier, named the HTMS _Chakri Naruebet_, in the late 1990s, if I can recall correctly.

A Source confirming the ROKS _Dokdo_'s existence:

http://www.defencetalk.com/pictures/showphoto.php?photo=23695


----------



## ModlrMike

Just to add some perspective, our DDH are 4750 tonnes, which makes these ships almost three times the displacement. Just the same, a couple of these in our Navy would be just the ticket.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

*sigh* Back to the carrier argument again I see.....fine, where are we going to get the crews to man these without raping the fleet anymore then it already is.....where are we going to find the ships to escort them once the fleet is raped?

build up on our escort capabilities and our manpower then work on something else.....


----------



## Cardstonkid

Japan is feeling threatened by its increasingly troublesome neightbors. Russia is flexing  its nationalist ambitions, China is growing a big military and N. Korea is crazy and they have the bomb. 

Japan better build a few more of those things.


----------



## medaid

Just a question for some of the more learned members on the board.

Isn't one of the conditions of the surrender that Japan was never again to have a military capability of more then what is necessary for self-defence? 

That being said, more and more recently I am seeing updated weaponry that could be projected and telescoped outward into other nearby countries. Have we really learned nothing at all from the WWII? There was a reason why the imposed condition was the way it was, allowing heavier arms build up is just asking for trouble in my perspective. 

One may argue political reasons for the US allowing such a build up to continue... and I think I would like some speculative answers from our learned members here.


----------



## Chilly

You are correct, if memory serves me correct. It is written right in to the constitution of Japan, and would require constitutional change. I remember that a few years ago the Japanese wanted to move towards a blue water Navy and away from just a littoral one.

I believe it has to do with Article Nine of the Constitution. 

Sorry I am being lazy and not doing the research, but i think that you will find it very fast by looking up said Article.

Chilly

Edited to add some back gorund links which discuss Article Nine.

http://www.solon.org/Constitutions/Japan/English/english-Constitution.html

http://worldnews.about.com/od/japan/a/article_nine.htm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/3561378.stm


----------



## time expired

There has been an effort to change the Japanese constitution
to get ride of this clause.I do not know if this is coming from
the government or the military,but it seems to me to be a 
smart move considering the arms race that is going on in that
area.Oz,pay attention.
                     Regards


----------



## Spencer100

time expired said:
			
		

> There has been an effort to change the Japanese constitution
> to get ride of this clause.I do not know if this is coming from
> the government or the military,but it seems to me to be a
> smart move considering the arms race that is going on in that
> area.Oz,pay attention.
> Regards



I think Oz is paying attention.  They have ordered their own "flat tops" , mini carriers or BHS (what ever you call them) and air defence destroyers from a Spanish company. Plus I think they are increasing their defence budget.  New F-18D's, C-17, tanks, Bushmasters and other things. 

It will be very interesting watch this part of the world in the next few years.  I think Japan rearming somewhat is a good thing.  The neighborhood is getting a little rough with the bully (China) getting rich and flexing muscles and others acting "crazy" (NK)  Plus the policeman (USA) is a little distracted somewhere else.   China is building a blue water navy.  Japan is taking note of this.   Japan can act as a postive force in the area.


----------



## geo

Based on the Self-Defense Forces Law of 1954, the nation's defense establishment is organized to ensure civilian control of the armed forces. The result has been a unique military system. All SDF personnel are technically civilians: those in uniform are classified as special civil servants and are subordinate to the ordinary civil servants who run the Ministry of Defense. There are no military secrets, military laws, or offenses committed by military personnel; whether on-base or off-base, on-duty or off-duty, of a military or non-military nature, are all adjudicated under normal procedures by civil courts in appropriate jurisdictions.

In November 2005, constitutional revisions were proposed which would create a cabinet level Defense Ministry while keeping the old clauses mandating official pacifism. Under the proposed revisions, the JSDF would also be formally referred to as a military force for the first time since its establishment. The new wording proposed is "In order to secure peace and the independence of our country as well as the security of the state and the people, military forces for self-defense shall be maintained with the prime minister of the cabinet as the supreme commander." The amendment is gaining more and more public support in recent years.  On June 8 2006, the Japanese cabinet endorsed a bill elevating the Defense Agency to Defense Ministry. This was passed by the Diet in December 2006.

Japan has also deepened its security and military ties with Australia and its leaders are talking about the formation of a military pact in Asia similar to NATO.


----------



## Retired AF Guy

Happened to pick-up Radio Japan on my shortwave a couple of days ago and they were talking about Afghanistan. The announcer mentioned that the Japanese Maritime forces have oilers off Pakistan that are refueling NATO vessels which was news to me. The Japanese have been steadily moving from their previous isolationist policies and trying to take a more active part in world affairs. Heck, they even had a force in Iraq for a while doing engineer work. Expect more activity like this from Japan.


----------



## larry Strong

Retired AF Guy said:
			
		

> Happened to pick-up Radio Japan on my shortwave a couple of days ago and they were talking about Afghanistan. The announcer mentioned that the Japanese Maritime forces have oilers off Pakistan that are refueling NATO vessels which was news to me. The Japanese have been steadily moving from their previous isolationist policies and trying to take a more active part in world affairs. Heck, they even had a force in Iraq for a while doing engineer work. Expect more activity like this from Japan.



And getting them there required a little bit of side stepping by Koizumi.  The pacifist Article 9 of Japan’s constitution forbids the country’s government from “settling international disputes” by the “threat or use of force”. Koizumi sought to sidestep the issue with the claim that Japan was “not going to war” but sending troops to a “non-combat area” of Iraq to provide “humanitarian assistance”. Twas a bit of a transparent ruse.


----------



## GAP

Larry Strong said:
			
		

> Twas a bit of a transparent ruse.



But hugely precedent setting....


----------



## ModlrMike

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> *sigh* Back to the carrier argument again I see.....fine, where are we going to get the crews to man these without raping the fleet anymore then it already is.....where are we going to find the ships to escort them once the fleet is raped?
> 
> build up on our escort capabilities and our manpower then work on something else.....



Yes, I know, and manning is a valid point. However, we can covet them none the less.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

Retired AF Guy said:
			
		

> Happened to pick-up Radio Japan on my shortwave a couple of days ago and they were talking about Afghanistan. The announcer mentioned that the Japanese Maritime forces have oilers off Pakistan that are refueling NATO vessels which was news to me. The Japanese have been steadily moving from their previous isolationist policies and trying to take a more active part in world affairs. Heck, they even had a force in Iraq for a while doing engineer work. Expect more activity like this from Japan.


The Japanese have had a naval presence in the Gulf and Indian Ocean since '01. Not a new mission for them at all.



			
				ModlrMike said:
			
		

> Yes, I know, and manning is a valid point. However, we can covet them none the less.


Coveting things that you know you will never get does nothing for morale. Wish for the more attainable and practical things.


----------



## NL_engineer

IMHO Japan will not try to become an imperialist nation (again), after what happened last time; also as an island state they need a navy to defend themselves.


As for threats,

China is in more of a transmission state, that could lead to anything over the next number years.  By saying that it will be hard to predict how communism will fall, if it will be peaceful or violent.  (It is coming; The party knows that it will be loosing out to capitalism, and are just trying to keep control.  This can be seen with the elections in towns, wealth, the formation of a middle class, etc.)

North Korea is the major player, as they *may* have nuclear weapons.  IMO North Korea will go south (meaning invade South Korea)  before it tries to invade any other country.

Russia is still an unknown, some recent speculation in the media says that the bear may be wakening up, so we will have to wait and see. 


That's just my 2 cents worth


----------



## Bane

"Japan's Secret Aircraft Carriers:
August 25, 2007: Japan launched the first of its new helicopter-carrying destroyers, the Hyuga, amid great fanfare. "

Oh Strategy Page....


----------



## tomahawk6

This design would be great for convoy escort or as a floating base for special ops and might be able to support Harrier or follow on VTOL aircraft.







13,950-ton JDS Hyuga (16DDH) is handed over to Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force from its builder IHI Marine United Inc. in Yokohama, southwest of Tokyo, Wednesday, March 18, 2009. The newly-built helicopter-carrying destroyer, similar in design to a small aircraft carrier, is the the largest Japanese warship since World War II, deploying three helicopters on the flight deck while carrying up to 11 others on the hangar deck inside, Kyodo News said. (AP / Kyodo News / Yohei Kanasashi)


----------



## tango22a

I would like to see THIS DDH in Canadian service!

tango22a

P.S. BEFORE the slagging starts....I AM out of my very limited area of knowledge.


----------



## aesop081

tango22a said:
			
		

> I would like THIS DDH in Canadian use!



The Japanese calling it a destroyer is like the Brits calling theirs a "through-deck cruiser". The words "aicraft carrier" is not politicaly acceptable in some circles.


----------



## a_majoor

Interesting video of the JMSDF's newest destroyer DDH 181 Hyūga, although it reminds me or something else:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJXhm421tqI


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

Nations redesignate warships all the time to suit their own purposes and with a public that is rabidly anti military as Japan's, one can see the reasoning behind the new type of flattop destroyer....


----------



## tomahawk6

I like the design and feel it should be copied by the USN. It would enhance ASW capabilities when a carrier wasnt present. Although I would like to see a larger design to better accommodate the JSF.


----------



## CougarKing

Edited: Thanks to the Mods for the thread merge


----------



## a_majoor

Manning issues aside, ships of that design could fulfill several roles for us, including ASW, amphibious assault and flagship (with a command and control suite installed).

Just as "Frigates" are now almost the size of WWI era light cruisers, a pocket aircraft carrier may be the best means to fulfill the role of a "Torpedo Boat Destroyer" in this era.


----------



## a_majoor

It seems the design is very versatile, and the Japanese Navy wants an even larger one:

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



> *New helicopter destroyer to widen MSDF range
> *
> BY TAKATERU DOI
> 
> THE ASAHI SHIMBUN
> 
> 2009/11/23
> 
> The Maritime Self-Defense Force plans to build a helicopter destroyer--the largest ship in the fleet--to counter China's naval buildup and improve responses for contingencies.
> 
> The planned helicopter destroyer will have a length of 248 meters, a displacement of 19,500 tons and a capability to transport up to 14 helicopters, 4,000 people and 50 trucks. It would also be able to refuel other ships.
> 
> To the untrained eye, the helicopter destroyer looks like an aircraft carrier, which has raised questions that it could violate Japan's pacifist Constitution.
> 
> The Defense Ministry has scoffed at such suggestions, saying the ship is necessary for Japan's defense.
> 
> "Helicopters are needed to seek out and keep an eye on submarines as well as to patrol surface ships from as far away as possible outside the range of enemy missiles," a ministry official said. "For those reasons, a large destroyer that can carry many helicopters is necessary."
> 
> A request for the helicopter destroyer was first made for the fiscal 2010 budget when the Liberal Democratic Party was in control of government.
> 
> After Yukio Hatoyama became prime minister in September, new budget requests were submitted in October--including 118.1 billion yen for the construction of a helicopter destroyer.
> 
> The ship would eventually replace the destroyer Shirane, which is scheduled to be decommissioned in fiscal 2014.
> 
> To allow up to five surveillance helicopters to land and take off simultaneously, the bridge of the new helicopter destroyer will be shifted to the starboard side to make room for an uninterrupted flight deck.
> 
> The Hyuga, the MSDF's latest helicopter destroyer, was commissioned last March. The ship has a length of 197 meters and a width of 33 meters.
> 
> The Hyuga is now the largest ship in the MSDF fleet, but the planned helicopter destroyer would have that title once it is completed.
> 
> The main component of the MSDF fleet is its four destroyer flotillas, each with eight destroyers and eight helicopters.
> 
> Those numbers were arrived at during the Cold War to counter Soviet submarines plying the waters around Japan.
> 
> However, in more recent years, the Chinese navy has been strengthening its sea-to-sea attack capabilities. Advanced Chinese destroyers carrying cruise missiles have been spotted near gas fields in the East China Sea.
> 
> Another reason for building the large helicopter destroyer is to respond to the expected increase in emergency assistance missions. Participation in international peacekeeping activities was upgraded to a primary task of the SDF, opening the path for more dispatches both in Japan and abroad.
> 
> Officers of the MSDF, which currently possesses 52 destroyers, said dispatches would become much more efficient because the new helicopter destroyer will be capable of performing as a transport and supply ship.
> 
> Not only will the helicopter destroyer be able to transport a large number of Ground SDF members and vehicles, but it could also provide fuel to other MSDF ships in its flotilla. That would eliminate the need for ships to drop anchor to refuel.
> 
> "Rather than constructing destroyers as destroyers and supply ships as supply ships, building ships that have multiple functions would lead to more efficient use of the budget," a high-ranking officer explained. "One reason the ship is so large is because we have included a number of functions in it."
> 
> When Defense Ministry officials were explaining the budget request for the helicopter destroyer to reporters, a question was raised about its similarity to aircraft carriers.
> 
> As in the Vietnam War and the war in Iraq, aircraft carriers have been a main maritime base of attack for the U.S. military.
> 
> One reporter asked if ministry officials were considering having the helicopter destroyer travel beyond Japanese waters, which might contradict the exclusively defensive nature of the SDF.
> 
> A Defense Ministry official explained: "The ship would be a destroyer to transport personnel and supplies in response to major natural disasters in Japan and abroad as well as to carry aircraft necessary for continuous surveillance of waters around Japan.
> 
> "The ship will be incapable of having fighter jets land on and take-off from the deck, and we have no such intentions. It is not an offensive aircraft carrier."
> 
> Because of the constitutional ban in Article 9 on possessing "land, sea and air forces, as well as other war potential," the government in 1988 issued a statement that said, "Because offensive aircraft carriers exceed the war potential needed for a minimum level of self-defense, possession of such ships is prohibited by the Constitution."
> 
> MSDF officials said that in line with the budget request for the helicopter destroyer, the decommissioning of four other destroyers in addition to the Shirane would be moved up and no replacement ships constructed.
> 
> The total number of destroyers possessed by the MSDF would decrease, but one high-ranking officer said, "We hope to gain the understanding of the public by not only constructing the necessary ships, but also showing that we are ready to decrease equipment that can be eliminated."(IHT/Asahi: November 23,2009)



Of course there is a danger that they are trying to wedge too many capabilities into one ship, building another Hyuga class hull with bunk spaces for embarked troops and using it as a dedicated assault carrier would make more sense to me (in Japanese service it would not be called an amphibious assault carrier, of course).  A hull that size without the large hanger spaces would make a good supply ship as well.

Costs and a declining cadre of military aged men and women are forces working against many dedicated hulls, so we shall see how this new ship works out.


----------



## CougarKing

The next member of the _Izumo_ class carriers has just been launched! And it's named after one of the six Imperial Japanese Navy aircraft carriers that attacked Pearl Harbour in World War II- the _Kaga_!

US Naval Institute



> *Japan Launches Latest Helicopter Carrier*
> 
> By: Sam LaGrone
> August 27, 2015 12:11 PM • Updated: August 27, 2015 1:32 PM
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Helicopter carrier Kaga (DDH-184) on Aug. 27, 2015. Japan Marine United Photo
> 
> Japan has launched the second in its new class of helicopter carrier — the largest Japanese ships since World War II — in a Thursday ceremony in Yokohama.
> 
> *The 24,000-ton Kaga (DDH-184) — built by ship builder Japan Marine United — bears the same name as the World War II Imperial Japanese Navy carrier Kaga that was part of Pearl Harbor attack and was sunk in the Battle Midway.*
> 
> The ship follows JS Izumo (DDH-183) which entered service in the Japanese Maritime Self Defense Force (JMSDF) in March.
> 
> (...SNIPPED)


----------

