Japan Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

Jeff Head said:

The Wasp Class beam is just under 108 feet. Same with the America LHAs. The Hyuga beam is 108 ft and the Izumo beam is 110 feet. Is it "that" close? I would have thought that they both could get through the canal.

Even if they cannot do it now, there is a significant, serveral billion dollar renovation going on to the canal right now to increase the beam to like 160 feet, and increase the length to like 1,400 feet capability.

Also, here's another comparison on how big the new Japanese DDH-183 Izumo is, this time compared to the Hyuga Class and the Nimitz Class.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

​

Again, as you can see, the JS Izumo is a big ship.

Click to expand...

Locks on the Panama Canal are just shy of 107 ft, Wasp and America can transit but as Panamax, with literally inches to spare, anything more and no so yeah I guess JMSDF has a problem if they want to visit the East Coast! Well until 2016 that is when the new locks open

US Carriers use the Cape Horn. If the JSDF were to wish to visit a American port on the east coast they would probably do so as well.

Re: JMSDF Akizuki Class DDG (19DD AEGIS-like)

This is the most senseless warship design I've seen in a long time. Basically the combat capability of a 4000 tonnes frigate in a 7000 tonnes hull.
Why would you put the area search radar on the same level as the weapon control radar? Area search radar doesn't need to be high in the superstructure since most targets are going to be near the horizon anyway. Weapon control radar should be higher to get maximum radar horizon against sea skimming missiles.
For less displacement, most European designs have managed SM-2 capability.
Piss poor design, another example of Japanese pork barrel politics.

Re: JMSDF Akizuki Class DDG (19DD AEGIS-like)

shen said:

This is the most senseless warship design I've seen in a long time. Basically the combat capability of a 4000 tonnes frigate in a 7000 tonnes hull.

Why would you put the area search radar on the same level as the weapon control radar? Area search radar doesn't need to be high in the superstructure since most targets are going to be near the horizon anyway. Weapon control radar should be higher to get maximum radar horizon against sea skimming missiles.

For less displacement, most European designs have managed SM-2 capability.

Piss poor design, another example of Japanese pork barrel politics.

Click to expand...

Sorry, you are far mistaken.

It is not senseless, and it is not under-armed.

It is carrying a very sophisticated (and probably very heavy) multi-function, two band advanced radar, similar to the new radar that will be on the Zumwalt. It also has a very hefty sonar suite, also similar to the Zumwalt. It then has a 127mm gun, 32 Mk-41 VLS cells which will carry 128 ESSM missiles and 16 Japanese VL-ASROC ASW Missiles. It carries eight Japanese ASMs with similar characteristics to the Harpoon, only newer, 2x3 torpedo launchers, and then has a hanger for its own SH-60K ASW helo, as well as ultimately an V-UAV.

The Type 45 DDGs are similarly armed but only carry 48 missiles, do not have any SSMs, and do not have near the ASW fit out these vessels have and they are 7,900 tons. The FREMM FFGs, which are in the 6,000+ ton category only have 32 missiles, a smaller gun, and again do not have as heavy an ASW load out.

So, the negative comparison does not hold in the least, and the modern systems these vessels carry will make them in the same class in terms of both radar and sonar as those vessels. To try and say that the Japanese naval defense planners are putting out "piss-poor" designs is just a ludicrous statement. They know very well what they are about, and anyone who has ever dealt with their naval personnel or vessels knows better. They are very capable, very effective, and very squared away.

As to this design, it is designed specifically to be strong multi-role escorts for their new carriers, and to provide cover escort duty for BMD AEGIS vessels the JMSDF deploys...and they will perform both roles very well.

Re: JMSDF Akizuki Class DDG (19DD AEGIS-like)

Zumwalt doesn't have dual band radar. The S-band radar has been cut, and with the cost saving switch to steel instead composite superstructure, will probably never be retrofitted. Which part of that don't you understand?

The Japanese "DDG" does have a dual band radar. But it is a pisspoor implementation. Dutch Thales places the dual band radar on different levels in the integrated mast, but the Japanese place the antennas on the same level.

Dutch De Zeven Provinciën manages SM-2 capability in a 6,000 tonnes hull, as does the Sachsen-class for the German Navy. Which part of that don't you understand?

The Japanese design can only take shots at the bullets, but no the shooters. That equals pisspoor design.

Re: JMSDF Akizuki Class DDG (19DD AEGIS-like)

shen said:

Zumwalt doesn't have dual band radar. The S-band radar has been cut, and with the cost saving switch to steel instead composite superstructure, will probably never be retrofitted. Which part of that don't you understand?

Click to expand...

This part.

The 2010 decision to cut the Lockheed S-band SPY-4 Volume Search Radar (VSR) was augmented by software changes to the Raytheon X-band SPY-3 multifunction radar (MFR) so that a volume search functionality could be maintained. So, the operator can select a volume search option at any time and still get some of the functionality of the second band. This is a stop gap, and the space has been reserved within the vessels to integrate the volume search band at a later date. The July 1, 2013 Briefing to Congress about the Zumwalt, by Ronald O'Rourke, a very credible, knowledgeable, and well respected specialist on naval technology makes all of this clear.

As to the deck house, what you state may only apply to the 3rd deck house. The 1st was already delivered and installed as a composite, and the 2nd is being built that way. Here is what that same July 1, 2013 Briefing to Congress about DDG-1000 program had to say about it:

March 2013 Briefing to Congress said:

Contracts for the third ship deckhouse, hangar, aft peripheral vertical launching system, and mission systems equipment are not yet finalized. Program officials note the Navy continues to leverage actual cost data from the first two ships and other similar programs to inform contract pricing and is considering cost efficient alternatives. The Navy is assessing alternative deckhouse materials, such as steel, which both shipyards report is a feasible alternative to composite.

Click to expand...

So, if they decide to institute cost savings through changing to steel for the 3rd vessel, they may do so. I know of no specific decision to definitely do that at this point.

But the first two vessels are not impacted...and my guess is, particularly because of the space being reserved in the other two for the S-Band, they will fabricate it the same way as the other two.

shen said:

The Japanese "DDG" does have a dual band radar. But it is a pisspoor implementation]

Click to expand...

Says who? You? Please.

shen said:

Dutch Thales places the dual band radar on different levels in the integrated mast, but the Japanese place the antennas on the same level.

Dutch De Zeven Provinciën manages SM-2 capability in a 6,000 tonnes hull, as does the Sachsen-class for the German Navy. Which part of that don't you understand?

Click to expand...

This part.

The Japanese have their designers and have designed a state of the art system that is newer by many years than what Thales put on the Sachsen or the De Zeven.

The Sachsens were launched from 2001-2003, meaning their Thales Smart-L and APAR systems were designed before that and have been upgraded since.

The De Zeven were launched between 2000 and 2003.

Both of those are 8-9 years older than the newer Japanese System, and I promise you, the Japanese, who exercise with and collaborate with other allied nations, have not set on their laurels.

But, you seem to have a clear negative bias towards the Japanese. Too bad. They are very knowledgeable about what they do, and their system will work very well. Anyone who has worked with naval technology has great respect for the Japanese.

Their implementation will not be anything like "piss-poor." You continued use of that term, as if though by saying it somehow makes it so, is indicative of a weak and immature assessment of the systems.

Thales has a great system. The new system of the Japanese is also a great system...and it will perform.

I have personally dealt in my previous defense work history with naval design, and rubbed shoulders with a number of people in both Germany and Japan. They both have nothing but the highest respect for one another, and any of them would take immediate issue, as do I, with your attempt to broad brush what the Japanese are implementing with these vessels and their systems with such terms. But, hey, knock yourself out. It simply does not reflect well on you.

I know for a fact that the planners who have to assess these things in terms of potentially preparing to confront them also take a far different view than your own.

Anyhow, we have both made our points. Others can read and decide for themselves.

Re: JMSDF Akizuki Class DDG (19DD AEGIS-like)

Let's stick to the facts. 6,000 tonnes Sachsen and De Zeven Provinciën can shoot SM-2, the 7,000 tonnes Akizuki can't, despite been much younger.
By placing the S-band radar on the same level as the X band radar, Akizuki has less long range radar range compare to European frigates with less displacement, and less radar horizon as well.
the X band radar on Zumwalt is going to have the same long range search capability as equivalent tech S band radar? you must know a different set of laws of physics the rest of world is not aware of.

Re: JMSDF Akizuki Class DDG (19DD AEGIS-like)

what is strange is that fcs-3 system uses a C band and X band combo. Most volume search/targeting combos use bands that are 2 band apart. Here they're just one band apart. Granted, S band arrays would be bigger and heavier...

While X band certainly can be used for volume search, it's a different capability class than using a bigger band. Plus, if one uses the same array for missile guidance and volume search they're bound to lose some of the volume search capability in the moments missile guidance role is performed.

Re: JMSDF Akizuki Class DDG (19DD AEGIS-like)

shen said:

...the X band radar on Zumwalt is going to have the same long range search capability as equivalent tech S band radar? you must know a different set of laws of physics the rest of world is not aware of.

Click to expand...

You just can't help yourself and seemingly must always give into the urge to put some anal-retentive comment into your reply, don't you? That never helps with dialog or reasoned discussion.

I never said the X-band would be as good as the S-Band,. Neither has the US Navy. Go back and read what I did say instead of responding to something I did not say.

What has been said is that as a stop gap they have modified the MFR to allow for volume search functionality.

There are clearly trade-offs for such a stop-gap in range, and, equally importantly, in impacting the MFR's other functions while performing any volume search.

But, it is a stop gap, and those will be trade offs they live with unless and until the S-and is completed and put into the vessels, or until such time as the adopt the AMDR later..

Re: JMSDF Akizuki Class DDG (19DD AEGIS-like)

Jeff Head said:

...
Anyhow, we have both made our points. Others can read and decide for themselves.

Click to expand...

I'm with Jeff. From what I've read about the FCS-3A radar, the C-band antennas search and track targets, while the X-band antennas enable to use the ICWI principle (for shen: originally developed by Thales ;-) ) in the final stage of an attack of the ESSM missiles!