Seems correct. I didn't find something with a quick search for the 1900 tons class patrol ships, but I recall reading about that in the past
For 14,500 tons supply ship
For the frigates:
For 2 big AEGIS Destroyers
Seems correct. I didn't find something with a quick search for the 1900 tons class patrol ships, but I recall reading about that in the past
For 14,500 tons supply ship
For 2 big AEGIS Destroyers
About Japan: media outlets report the usual but my tables indicate that numbers will stay the same, only older units are being replaced with newer units to preserve current fleet structure only with lower manning.
JMSDF has five naval districts: Ominato (north), Yokosuka, Kure (southeast/Pacific), Sasebo (southwest), Maizuru (Sea of Japan).
Those districts are very extensive - just the main four islands cover length of almost the entire Chinese coast, not counting the southern islands.
Each naval district has an escort squadron with three oldest DD or DE ships and all except Ominato have a fleet escort force has two squadrons with four destroyers (incl DDH). Eight ships per fleet task force and three for coastal patrol for a total of 32 fleet assets and 15 coastal assets of which 8 AAW and 34 ASW/patrol units. That's 1/4 to 1/3 of PLAN for one coast while Japan has two coasts.
All FEF squadrons except one (ES7) have an AEGIS destroyer. FEF facing the Pacific have Izumos i.e. light carriers after refits while the other two have Hyugas.
This is how the task forces are arranged with ship classes listed - the image is from 2021. Currently Hatsuyuki DD are replaced by Mogami FFM.
The structure of squadrons indicates a focus on ASW that made sense during cold war when the primary opponent was Soviet Pacific Fleet with 52 nuclear and 31 conventional subs (4x November SSN, 23x Victor I-III SSN, 1x Oscar SSGN, 11x Charlie SSGN, 13x Echo SSGN, 13x Foxtrot SSK, 18x Kilo SSK) but presently seems out of place as Russia has only 10 nuclear (excluding SSBNs) and 6 conventional subs.
While all FEF DDs carry ESSM in 32-cell Mk41 allowing quad-packing and higher missile numbers they have very limited range. Only DDG - one per squadron, two per FEF - have AA missiles with greater range.
The split between west and east coasts is particularly problematic as Japan's geography doesn't allow forces on one side of the island to augment AAW of task force on another side.
The structure of the fleet suggest also that these are not fully independent forces but are intended to operate almost exclusively in conjunction with USN task forces.
Also considering normal peacetime and surge operations the actual number of ships that JMSDF can put to sea is between 50% and 75% during surge which further limits combat capabilities.
As for replacement timeline - here's an updated 2021 table of historical JMSDF fleet composition I made some time ago:
This is a table of individual ship service times for the current fleet - DDH, DDG, DD, DE, FFM and SSK, in that order.
click to zoom:
(question: how do I upload large images without loss o resolution? this should be 1200x1600 but is 810x1080)
Asagiri will likely be first for replacement as it is the older than Abukuma with 165 crew vs 120 on Abukuma. Mogami have 90 crew and the first batch has 10 ordered - matching 2 retired Hatsuyuki and 8 Asagiri. First batch Mogami has no Mk.41 - however SeaRam should be sufficient vs SeaSparrow. Mk.41 is only added in the next batch. Abukuma should be next, although retirements may be selected based on ship condition.
The two new DDG will likely replace rather than augment the first two Kongo-class DDGs which are nearing 35 years of service (2028 and 2030 respectively). The average build time of a DDG is 3 years with commissioning in the 4th so if construction starts in 2024 and 2025-26 they will match the above retirement dates.
Crew size and ship numbers:
Submarines are more interesting as it is uncommon for SSK to be retired after 25 years but considering advances in propulsion and battery technology and the cost of MLU it may be practical to replace oldest Oyashio with Taigei. I don't see how JMSDF can expand submarine fleet if they struggle with crewing of surface force.
All this changes nothing substantial. The fleet doesn't gain new capabilities. Ships are better, VLO and better passive sensors will help against AShM and saturation attacks but that isn't enough to maintain the same position. I was surprised to learn that first batch Mogami has no VLS. I really would like to see the cost/benefit analysis on that.
Japan seems to be stuck like Russia, only with ships coming out on time. At the same time Korea is expanding with 17 (of 24 total) frigates, 12 destroyers (3 AEGIS + 3 under construction) and 22 submarines. Having industry with ~1.5-2x the share and capacity helps but I wonder how Korea is going to solve their manning problem with 40% of Japan's population and a frozen land war.
JMSDF has five naval districts: Ominato (north), Yokosuka, Kure (southeast/Pacific), Sasebo (southwest), Maizuru (Sea of Japan).
Those districts are very extensive - just the main four islands cover length of almost the entire Chinese coast, not counting the southern islands.
Each naval district has an escort squadron with three oldest DD or DE ships and all except Ominato have a fleet escort force has two squadrons with four destroyers (incl DDH). Eight ships per fleet task force and three for coastal patrol for a total of 32 fleet assets and 15 coastal assets of which 8 AAW and 34 ASW/patrol units. That's 1/4 to 1/3 of PLAN for one coast while Japan has two coasts.
All FEF squadrons except one (ES7) have an AEGIS destroyer. FEF facing the Pacific have Izumos i.e. light carriers after refits while the other two have Hyugas.
This is how the task forces are arranged with ship classes listed - the image is from 2021. Currently Hatsuyuki DD are replaced by Mogami FFM.
- DDH despite their construction fulfill the same ASW role as the more traditional DDH of the past.
- DDG are AAW and ABM ships.
- DD are ASW ships. Murasame and Takanami are 90s design with ESSM. Akizuki and Asahi are newer design with AESA radars.
The structure of squadrons indicates a focus on ASW that made sense during cold war when the primary opponent was Soviet Pacific Fleet with 52 nuclear and 31 conventional subs (4x November SSN, 23x Victor I-III SSN, 1x Oscar SSGN, 11x Charlie SSGN, 13x Echo SSGN, 13x Foxtrot SSK, 18x Kilo SSK) but presently seems out of place as Russia has only 10 nuclear (excluding SSBNs) and 6 conventional subs.
While all FEF DDs carry ESSM in 32-cell Mk41 allowing quad-packing and higher missile numbers they have very limited range. Only DDG - one per squadron, two per FEF - have AA missiles with greater range.
The split between west and east coasts is particularly problematic as Japan's geography doesn't allow forces on one side of the island to augment AAW of task force on another side.
The structure of the fleet suggest also that these are not fully independent forces but are intended to operate almost exclusively in conjunction with USN task forces.
Also considering normal peacetime and surge operations the actual number of ships that JMSDF can put to sea is between 50% and 75% during surge which further limits combat capabilities.
As for replacement timeline - here's an updated 2021 table of historical JMSDF fleet composition I made some time ago:
This is a table of individual ship service times for the current fleet - DDH, DDG, DD, DE, FFM and SSK, in that order.
click to zoom:
(question: how do I upload large images without loss o resolution? this should be 1200x1600 but is 810x1080)
Asagiri will likely be first for replacement as it is the older than Abukuma with 165 crew vs 120 on Abukuma. Mogami have 90 crew and the first batch has 10 ordered - matching 2 retired Hatsuyuki and 8 Asagiri. First batch Mogami has no Mk.41 - however SeaRam should be sufficient vs SeaSparrow. Mk.41 is only added in the next batch. Abukuma should be next, although retirements may be selected based on ship condition.
The two new DDG will likely replace rather than augment the first two Kongo-class DDGs which are nearing 35 years of service (2028 and 2030 respectively). The average build time of a DDG is 3 years with commissioning in the 4th so if construction starts in 2024 and 2025-26 they will match the above retirement dates.
Crew size and ship numbers:
- Mogami - 90 / 5 + 19
- Abukuma - 120 / 6
- Asagiri - 220 / 8
- Murasame -165 / 9
- Takanami - 175 / 5
- Akizuki - 200 / 2
- Asahi - 230 / 2
- Kongo/Atago/Maya - 300 / 8
- Hyuga - 360 / 2
- Izumo - 520+/ 2
- minesweepers - 48-60 / 20
- Uraga minelayers - 170 / 2
Submarines are more interesting as it is uncommon for SSK to be retired after 25 years but considering advances in propulsion and battery technology and the cost of MLU it may be practical to replace oldest Oyashio with Taigei. I don't see how JMSDF can expand submarine fleet if they struggle with crewing of surface force.
All this changes nothing substantial. The fleet doesn't gain new capabilities. Ships are better, VLO and better passive sensors will help against AShM and saturation attacks but that isn't enough to maintain the same position. I was surprised to learn that first batch Mogami has no VLS. I really would like to see the cost/benefit analysis on that.
Japan seems to be stuck like Russia, only with ships coming out on time. At the same time Korea is expanding with 17 (of 24 total) frigates, 12 destroyers (3 AEGIS + 3 under construction) and 22 submarines. Having industry with ~1.5-2x the share and capacity helps but I wonder how Korea is going to solve their manning problem with 40% of Japan's population and a frozen land war.
Not true next year.
Not true.
Not true. Japan doesn't have two coasts.
Not true.
Not true.
Not true.
That's truth for every navy.
Not true. From this line alone I know that a person doesn't know too much about navy and it's operations.
Not true.
Not true.
Not true.
No comment.
Not true.
It's called conscription.
Then may you please bother to explain why he is wrong and correct him?
What you do on this forum besides making one liner statements and being passive aggressive to people?
For example Ships of the World 4/2023
Attachments
-
20231118_193728.jpg
Blueprint for the reply that I'll post. I'll prepare that but it will take time - as you can see there's a lot of issues with this post which states a lot of not well-educated opinions on a subject that I know a lot about. And I don't think it's aggressive towards anyone or anything.
I think given the effort @MarKoz81 has put in his post. When you are this dismissive of what he wrote, please provide a long post in response. It's only fair that way
Question to everyone, and especially Japanese/Japan-focused members.
Am I right, that:
(1)~half of F-15 fleet - around 100, - didn't receive any serious upgrades since induction? Only second half of the fleet ever did.
(2)F-2 fleet didn't get significant upgrades beyond immediate weapon upgrades(newer missiles).
Or I miss something?
Am I right, that:
(1)~half of F-15 fleet - around 100, - didn't receive any serious upgrades since induction? Only second half of the fleet ever did.
(2)F-2 fleet didn't get significant upgrades beyond immediate weapon upgrades(newer missiles).
Or I miss something?
You just need a picture just that !!!