2020: JMSDF & PLAN Surface Combatant strength

Jeff Head said:

We are aware that two new Atago AEGIS DDGs are proposed, and that the 26DD project is coming on behind the Akizuki.

We just haven't gotten into a lot of detail on it yet.

Click to expand...

I believe it is the 25DD AKA next generation 5,000tonnes DD you are talking about not 26DD.
JMSDF plans on constructing 6 ships of this class to replace the remaining Hatsuyuki class. There are 8 hulls still in commission including 3 training vessels which will be replaced within the next 5~6 years starting with 2 hulls next year in exchange for the remaining two Akizuki class which will come into commission in March 2014.

Soon after I believe the Asagiri class DD will be decommissioned to be replaced with an advanced version of the Akizuki class. There are 8 ships of this class including two training vessels.
The reason for the rush is to unify equipment incorporating VLS onto all hulls to maintain combat readiness, no requirement for retraining of sailors during transition from one ship to the other and streamline procurement requirements as much as possible.
This is probably one of the biggest single lesson Japan learned from our own mistakes from the last war that Japan does not care to make again.

SamuraiBlue said:

I believe it is the 25DD AKA next generation 5,000tonnes DD you are talking about not 26DD.
JMSDF plans on constructing 6 ships of this class to replace the remaining Hatsuyuki class. There are 8 hulls still in commission including 3 training vessels which will be replaced within the next 5~6 years starting with 2 hulls next year in exchange for the remaining two Akizuki class which will come into commission in March 2014.

Soon after I believe the Asagiri class DD will be decommissioned to be replaced with an advanced version of the Akizuki class. There are 8 ships of this class including two training vessels.
The reason for the rush is to unify equipment incorporating VLS onto all hulls to maintain combat readiness, no requirement for retraining of sailors during transition from one ship to the other and streamline procurement requirements as much as possible.
This is probably one of the biggest single lesson Japan learned from our own mistakes from the last war that Japan does not care to make again.

Click to expand...

You are correct. my bad, it is the 25DD. The 26 I was thinking of is the 26DDH we have heard about.

Thanks for the correction.

A cross post regarding overall PLAN and JMSDF strength/displacement I did in the 054 thread, posting here for the lulz:

Projecting out to late 2015:



JMSDF:

DDH/LHA:
Hyuga class, 20,000 tons: 2
Shirane class, 7,500 tons: 2
Izumo class, 27,000 tons: (1 just launched, service entry projected 2015, + 1 planned for service ~2018. Will only include the first boat for this comparison, as I'm forecasting out only to 2015)

Landing ships:
Osumi class, 14,000 tons(?): 3

Large PAR equipped DDGs:
Atago class, 9,500 tons: 2 (possibly + 2 more planned, but wont' be included in this comparison as the first of the new batch are only scheduled to enter service by 2018)
Kongo class, 9,000 tons: 4
Akizuki class, 6,800 tons: 2 (+ 2 more, possibly the basis of a new class post 2014)

Other DDGs:
Takanami class, 6,300 tons: 5
Murasame class, 6,100 tons: 9
Asagiri class, 4,900 tons: 8
Hatsayuki class, 4,000 tons: 5

Abukuma class, 2,500 tons: 6

That's 376,000 tons worth of surface combatant
(Declining to include AORs, smaller patrol boats, and not including the potential for two more atagos, not including the second izumo class, but do include the 3rd and 4th akizuki boats. Basically I'm only counting boats that are in service, launched, or soon to be launched)


Comparing it with PLAN:

Aircraft carrier:
Liaoning, 65,000 tons: 1 (be a few years until it's got a full complement, but this comparison stretches to 2015, which I think is a fair forecast date)

LPDs:
071 class, ~25,000 tons (or 20k tons?): 3 (there is some dispute as to just how much 071 displaces, as the 25k ton number was taken from a PLAN sailor, posted over on CDF. Considering 071's dimensions and how much we know it can carry, I think that displacement isn't unreasonable. Also a caveat, that 071 units two and three may be heavier than 071 unit one, as the PLAN's sailor's anecdote was stationed aboard 999. But for the purposes of this comparison I'll be using 25,000)

"Large" LSTs:
072A/III/II class, 4,800 tons: 24
072 class, 4,200 tons: 3


"Large"/blue water capable DDGs:
052C class, ~7,000 tons: 3 (+3 more, launched/sea trials)
052D class, ~7,500 tons: (1 sea trial, 2 launched, 1 soon to be launched)
052B class, ~6,500 tons: 2
Sovremenny class, ~8,000 tons: 4
051C class, ~7,000 tons: 2
051B class, 6,100 tons: 1
052 class, 4,800 tons: 2

"B team"/coastal DDGs:
051 class, 3,700 tons: 7-8 (due to be retired, probably replaced with 054As and 052Ds in their flotillas in coming years)


Blue water capable FFGs:
054A class, 4000+ tons: 15 (+5 in various stages of sea trials, fitting out, or launch. Not a stretch to think that 20 will be in service by 2015)
054 class, ~4000 tons: 2

"B team"/coastal FFGs:
053H2/H3 class, 2,300-2,500 tons: ~14?
053 class, 2,000 tons: ~14? (being phased out)

Corvettes:
056 class, 1,400 tons: 8 (+ who knows how many more. Let's say 20 by 2015? Fair? Yes/no?)

Modern missile boats:
022 class, 220 tons: ~80 (should they be included in such a comparison? JMSDF obviously have no such comparable boats in inventory, and 022s have relatively short range, but are not a threat to be dismissed)

Not included are minesweepers, older missile boats and AORs.


Not including 056 class, 051 class, 053 class, and 022 class I come up with a total displacement of about 503,000 tons (assuming 4 052Ds, 20 054As in service by 2015, and that 071 class is 25,000 tons rather than 20,000).

Including 056, 051, 053 and 022, add on another 133,000 tons (however that number is likely to be lower as some 054As, 052Ds will be replacing older ships too).

Of course, total displacement doesn't compare the qualitative performance of the ships on each side, and JMSDF do not have as many older, shorter range frigates and destroyers as PLAN. But in terms of total tonnage of surface combatants and landing ships of both sides, by 2015ish, I think PLAN will be convincingly greater, but its power projection capability in terms of the number of medium/long endurance blue water capable ships will be about JMSDF's total

I.e.:
JMSDF: combining their "PAR equipped DDG" with "large DDG" sections: ~222,000 tons
PLAN: combining the "large DDG" and "blue water capable FFG" sections: ~223,000 tons

In terms of carrier + amphibious/power projection assets, the two are on somewhat equal footing displacement wise, although PLAN will be more oriented for amphibious assault and CAP/strike due to the combination of 071 (and 072), and liaoning, while JMSDF is also oriented for ASW and amphibious assault via helicopters (possibly CAP and strike if they ever decide to board F-35Bs, but this looks unlikely circa 2015):

JMSDF: combining hyuga, shirane, osumi, and 1 izumo: 124,000 tons
PLAN: combining 071 and liaoning: 140,000 tons (if we include the various 072 derivatives, we get ~268,000 tons)


So I'm actually quite surprised that PLAN's overall displacement, "blue water" capable displacement, and power projection displacement, are all either convincingly larger than JMSDF, or similarly sized to it, if we look forward to 2015.
Clearly the biggest contributors for PLAN are the liaoning, the 3 071s, and also the massive surge in 054As we've seen, and the forthcoming entry of 052C/Ds into service.

--

Edit:
It was probably a mistake not to include AORs considering how important they are to blue water power projection, so here they are:

JMSDF:
Mashu class, 25,000 tons: 2
Towada class, 15,000 tons: 2

Total: 80,000 tons

PLAN:

903/A class, 23,000 tons: 4
Fuqing class, 21,000 tons: 2
953 class, 37,000 tons: 1

Total: 171,000 tons

You missed the two Hatakaze class for JMSDF.

One of the nagging problem I see in the PLAN plans is the vast expansion of her fleet in a very short period. You may build ships that quickly but training personnel is another problem entirely and I believe it's going to take at least 5 years to make fresh recruits into sea able sailors and longer for able officers to command those ships.

Ah thanks, well, add two 4,600 ton destroyers to the JMSDF side.
Overall the balance doesn't change too much, however.

I think the PLAN will be able to train crews enough for the ships — they've already operated advanced destroyers for over a decade, and they can shift old crews from retiring older frigates to existing 054As, while the 054As crew can transition to an 052D that is new to the flotilla, depending on whether the jump from an older ship to a modern surface combatant is that great to warrant a staggered crewing approach.

But it'll definitely take a few years for all the ships and their crews to become fully proficient, of course, and I make no claim regarding the seamanship of both navies, only the quantity and tonnage of their relevant ships.



What I'm interested in now, is how PLAN and JMSDF will continue their fleet modernizations going to 2020.
JMSDF have plans for one more izumo, 2-4 more atago ships to enter service beginning 2018, and the 25DD based on akizuki in the near future too.
Naturally we have no official details regarding PLANs fleet plans: will 052D construction continue so as to replace all the obsolete 051s? Will 055 cruiser manifest in coming years as predicted,and will it supplement or replace 052D, and how will it fit into the existing destroyer flotilla structure? How long will 054A production last, will they seek to replace all older 053s wi 054A, or rest the frigate production line for a while before switching to 054B? Where does the first indigenous carrier come into play and when can we expect its service entry? What other amphibious assault ships will PLAN pursue, if any? Will the PLAN pursue new and larger AORs as many suspect?

As the past decade has shown, China's shipbuilding industry is capable of designing and more importantly, serially producing relatively advanced surface combatants and putting them into service at respectable speeds (although the current JNCX backlog of 052C/D waiting at dock does show some delay), the question is whether they can sustain such production rates going into 2020 with steadily more advanced ships. Because if PLAN replaces all their 051s and older destroyers with 052D and/or 055 in coming years, and their older frigates with 054A/B, it will quite convincingly have the second largest surface combatant force behind the USN.

Bltizo said:

Akizuki class, 6,800 tons: 2 (+ 2 more, possibly the basis of a new class post 2014)

Click to expand...

The second pair of Akizuki are outfitted and working up now and will both be commissioned in 2014, so they are definitely a part of the 2015 total.

Your look very good Bltizo, in fact now the Chinese and Japanese Navy are the most powerful outside USN ofc.

Russian Navy have a largest tonnage but less operationnal.

The only missing for JMGSDF are CV and SSN but it is a historical and political issue.


For IZUMO and F-35B

View attachment 8478

FORBIN said:

For IZUMO and F-35B

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

View attachment 8478

Click to expand...

As has been discussed, the major issue for the Izumo and any strike aircraft is the lack of planning or funding on the JMSDF's part for any F-35B aircraft. Until that happens and we see talk about it, there will be no strike aircraft operating off of the Izumo because the F-35B is the aircraft that will be available in the long term to do so, and I cannot see the JMSDF buying old AV-8B Harriers IIs that the US Marines later discard. They would have as hard a time selling that as the F-35B and so if they were going to do it, they would go for the JSF.

As to this paragraph in the article:

Article said:

Even if Japan was to acquire the F-35B, a second problem arises in that while the F-35B wouldn’t necessarily “need” a ski-jump to operate off the Izumo, a ski-jump not being attached does limit the F-35B somewhat in terms of the fuel and armaments that can be carried by any given fighter (particularly important for offensive “strike” missions). A ski-jump would also allow less precious fuel to be expended in the take-off phase. Another problem arises in that the Izumo does not have the specialized Thermion-coated landing pads that the US Marines’ Wasp amphibious ships have/will have to accommodate the F-35B, given the immense thrust and heat generated by the F-35B when coming in for a vertical landing.

Click to expand...

1) The F-35B can be refueled in the air, and there is definitely going to be a fueling version of the V-22 Osprey which we already know can operate off of the the Izumo. One recently cross decked onto the Hyuga and was taken below to its hanger deck on its elevator. This means, like with the Wasp which also has no cat or ski-jump, the Izumo could launch the aircraft with offensive stores, fuel them up (top them off) and then send them on those longer ranged strike missions.

2) The issue of heat treating the decks is a real issue, but it is also addressed straight forwardly. They could be added at any regular maintenace yard time, and would be included as a part of any plans to purchase the aircraft.

Which brings up back to the JMSDF funding the F-35B. If we see that budgetary request come up, then we know the JMSDF is moving that way. Until we do...no way.

I know Izumo class are build by IHI Corporation but where is the shipyard ?

Other things, 2 shiyards build SS Soryu in Kobe, Kawasaki and Mitsubishi, i have here 34°39'11.94"N 135°11'15.63"E
correct ?
and one beside the other ?

Thank you

Here is the location.



It's in Yokohama